Quicken for Mac 2016 Release 3.5.2 Discussion

Robert B

Paul Newcomb said:

I have been using Quicken for nearly 20 years on Windows.  I just bought Quicken for Mac 2016 and cannot even get my check register to agree with my online balance.  Where can I re-learn Quicken so I don't waste $75.

Don't know any thing about this possible replacement, http://www.moneyspire.com .  I'll keep it in the back of my mind.  But, I do have hopes for QM2016 for it is getting better with each upgrade.

smayer97

Paul Newcomb said:

I have been using Quicken for nearly 20 years on Windows.  I just bought Quicken for Mac 2016 and cannot even get my check register to agree with my online balance.  Where can I re-learn Quicken so I don't waste $75.

@102_dar_70 I share your overall sentiment but keep in mind that Quicken for Mac was not stripped down but rather they started over with the initial release of Quicken Essentials in 2010. They have many failures in getting Quicken for Mac going. Now they finally have a very dedicated team, with the commitment to grow the team. It takes time to re-implement the many features that people want. I too wish it was sooner than later (I am still on QM2007 as a result). Let's hope they can execute in a timely fashion.

It is important to keep voicing your requests. Make sure to vote up posts in the IDEAS section, or add your own if you see something missing. The development team is looking at these to help prioritize which features to focus on next.

(If you find this reply helpful, please be sure to click "Like", so others will know, thanks.)

Unknown

Paul Newcomb said:

I have been using Quicken for nearly 20 years on Windows.  I just bought Quicken for Mac 2016 and cannot even get my check register to agree with my online balance.  Where can I re-learn Quicken so I don't waste $75.

I'm sorry but I respectfully disagree.  I was informed when they decided to rewrite the Quicken program after the 2007 version from the ground up,  it was designed with the "Bare" hence "Essentials".  It's been years since the development of the "New" version of Quicken and still missing a lot of the functionality it had before.  I couldn't believe when I recently learned QM2016 and several upgrades thereafter still is absent a "void transaction"  in the edit function to name one very small programming item. I too hope there is a change in the programming Ideology with the reorganization but then it's still the same people in charge as before.  How can you fix a zero balance issue and not factor in a negative logic too.....come on! Sorry, but It's hard to stay optimistic things are going to change.   And see you are still using
QM 2007 so what does that say. Until you ware our shoes, I'd forget the pep talks.

Unknown

Paul Newcomb said:

I have been using Quicken for nearly 20 years on Windows.  I just bought Quicken for Mac 2016 and cannot even get my check register to agree with my online balance.  Where can I re-learn Quicken so I don't waste $75.

P.S. The idea that we have to ask for improvements (things that previously existed in prior versions of Quicken) and vote on them is ridiculous.  

Unknown

Paul Newcomb said:

I have been using Quicken for nearly 20 years on Windows.  I just bought Quicken for Mac 2016 and cannot even get my check register to agree with my online balance.  Where can I re-learn Quicken so I don't waste $75.

On one hand I agree, but on the other hand I think the idea is they do the most requested improvements first - which makes sense.

smayer97

Paul Newcomb said:

I have been using Quicken for nearly 20 years on Windows.  I just bought Quicken for Mac 2016 and cannot even get my check register to agree with my online balance.  Where can I re-learn Quicken so I don't waste $75.

I understand your pessimism...believe me I am chomping at the bit...Quicken has dropped the ball several times over the years since QM2007 (and even before almost abandoning Quicken for Mac altogether)...Quicken Financial Life for Mac (never saw the light of day), Quicken Essentials (second attempt to restart...stalled after a promising beginning)...I would say QM2015 was the first good restart in many years, with the first complete consistently dedicated team, followed by a somewhat decent follow-up with QM2016.

I am not advocating for them per se, but I see the best promise of hope in years, though progress is much slower than I need it. 

I'm just pointing out how best to try to influence the outcome. Another is to get involved in Beta testing.

(BTW, for those interested, see a compiled history of how we got here.)

(If you find this reply helpful, please be sure to click "Like", so others will know, thanks.)

Unknown

Paul Newcomb said:

I have been using Quicken for nearly 20 years on Windows.  I just bought Quicken for Mac 2016 and cannot even get my check register to agree with my online balance.  Where can I re-learn Quicken so I don't waste $75.

I understand your logic John, but really.....what are we talking about but re-inventing the wheel here ! A full functioning stable product existed already that everybody was happy with and we're reduced to having to ask for the same functions back. How does one expect to successfully market a product like that?  

jacobs

Paul Newcomb said:

I have been using Quicken for nearly 20 years on Windows.  I just bought Quicken for Mac 2016 and cannot even get my check register to agree with my online balance.  Where can I re-learn Quicken so I don't waste $75.

The problem is that the "full functioning stable product [which] existed already that everybody was happy with" was good in its day -- but it was a dead end. It was written with programming tools in the Mac OS in the 1980s and 90s, many of which Apple said would be removed in the future versions of the OS. (For example, the entire register user interface is tightly tied to QuickDraw, the graphics library and programming interface of the classic Mac operating system. Quickdraw was replaced by the Quartz imaging model in Mac OS X, and Apple told developers QuickDraw support would eventually be removed.)

So the developers could keep it alive for awhile, but they concluded it wasn't possible to maintain it indefinitely. So they did, indeed, start over from scratch using the tools of the modern Mac OS. The management team changed twice, the development team was disbanded and then reformed... years were lost with little forward progress. In late 2012, the current team was formed, and started building on the initial work that had been done to create Essentials. A lot of under-the-hood architecture needed to be rewritten due to more changes in the evolving Mac OS X (such as ARC memory management, which took months to re-code Quicken to use). Finally, in late summer 2014, Quicken 2015 was released. It was pretty bare bones, but it was a major step towards a modern Quicken replacement. But the development team was quite small, and there were lots of bugs to fix, and progress on additional features proceeded rather slowly. It has slowly picked up steam over the past two years -- but it's impossible to re-create 20+ years of programming in a couple years.

You can wish and wish, or rant and rant, but nothing is going to change the fact that re-creating Quicken in modern form is a multi-year project that we're still in the middle of. The reason for asking for or voting for features is to guide the developers on the missing features the most users are eager to get. They can't do 'em all at one time. And some of the old features may not be useful or desirable to many users now, so they don't want to waste time on features that turn out no one wants. So, yes, users telling the developers what is most important to them is helpful and important.

I'm not an apologist for Quicken. There were lots of mistakes in the past, but they're in the past. And there are mistakes in the present, like the poor response to user issues with current release. All I can do now is hope for Quicken to develop into a worthy successor to Quicken 2007 (which I still use as my live system), because I hope to use it for many years to come. Either they get it right, and we all get the Quicken we want, or they don't and we'll all drift off to some alternatives. I've decided I'm onboard for the next year to see what kind of progress they make.

Unknown

Paul Newcomb said:

I have been using Quicken for nearly 20 years on Windows.  I just bought Quicken for Mac 2016 and cannot even get my check register to agree with my online balance.  Where can I re-learn Quicken so I don't waste $75.

Blah Blah Blah,  please do not respond again.  Accounting principals have been in existenance and concrete for ever and taught through colleges to this day. Just let Quicken programmers take responsibility because they do not understand those principles and are trying to program something they don't understand the principles of but just trying to do a job they were hired to do which suck because they.are just programmers that don't under stand the whole accounting process.  There is a complete break down at this point.  Quicken needs to bring accounting consultants if there to cheap to do that then they get what they get and so do we. 

Unknown

Paul Newcomb said:

I have been using Quicken for nearly 20 years on Windows.  I just bought Quicken for Mac 2016 and cannot even get my check register to agree with my online balance.  Where can I re-learn Quicken so I don't waste $75.

I am going to post this on Facebook.

jacobs

Paul Newcomb said:

I have been using Quicken for nearly 20 years on Windows.  I just bought Quicken for Mac 2016 and cannot even get my check register to agree with my online balance.  Where can I re-learn Quicken so I don't waste $75.

Well, I will reply once more, and then I'll be happy to save my time and disengage if you're not interested in dialog...

Earlier today, you wrote above: "It's been years since the development of the 'New' version of Quicken and still missing a lot of the functionality it had before." I tried to provide a synopsis of *why* there is still missing functionality at this point, just as earlier I noted that they were expanding the programming team to try to narrow the gap. To which you replied "blah, blah, blah." (Gee, thanks! I was only trying to help.)

Look, if you're unhappy with the current product, you can choose to move on to something else; that's certainly your -- and everyone's -- prerogative. But no amount of complaining about the current state of the program can get *all* the issues addressed immediately. I and others here have tried to explain this is why requesting and voting on functionality to influence what they work on sooner rather than later can be helpful -- but you deride this as "ridiculous."

You wrote above: "I hope there is a change in the programming Ideology with the reorganization but then it's still the same people in charge as before." Actually, there *is* a new boss, Eric Dunn, who rejoined the company last fall and is now CEO. And I think there is also a very different ideology at play now than when Quicken 2015 came out. Back then, the stated approach was to release a minimally viable product, without re-inventing everything in legacy versions of Quicken, and to iterate the program repeatedly to add the features people were most asking for. (If you're interested, go back in time by searching on this site for "update #xx from quicken marcus", where "xx" is between 1 and 19, to see the evolution of this version of Quicken and the development philosophy back in 2013 and 2014.)  But now, the stated approach seems very different to me: Eric Dunn makes clear that they are on a drive to make Quicken Mac's capabilities rival Quicken for Windows and legacy Quicken 2007 for Mac. So I actually think they've heard users calling out for it, and they've changed their approach. Which is great -- except progress is unfolding at a slower pace than anyone (users or the development team) would prefer.

You also made a big deal in two posts above about the absence of a Void Transaction function. You said it's a small programming item, and I think it illustrates the problem, and the approach they're taking. I agree; it *is* a small programming project, because the Void command in Quicken 2007 only made three simple cosmetic changes: added "VOID" in front of the Payee name, changed the amount to zero, and marked the transaction reconciled. (I think I've read that the Windows version also puts the original amount in the memo field, which is a useful addition.) So surely they could have a programmer write the code to do those things and add the menu item, and code for various  scenarios -- what should happen if you try to void a voided transaction? if you void a reconciled transaction? etc. -- without a ton of time. On the other hand, one could argue that this is something that most users don't do frequently (less than once a month, on average, I'd say), and that users can do manually in under 30 seconds. So instead of having a programmer take time to make this minor change, they keep a programmer working on what they think are more critical features users can't work around: missing reports, loan amortization, missing investments functionality, etc. It's not that they don't understand the accounting of voiding a transaction, or that they don't see a need for it, but that they've deemed this a lower priority than other features.

Of course, every Quicken user has certain features they want or need, and others they don't use (and therefore often consider worthless). Many people wanted 12-month budgeting, but when the feature was released, some users posted here and said "I don't use budgets, so this is a waste." Others decried the still-missing loan amortization. But more users asked for budgets than loans, so they tackled budgets before loans. That makes some people happy, and leaves the people wanting loans unhappy. But the reality is that they don't have a huge programming staff, and they can only work on a few issues at a time. (And progress on those features can be slowed when they need to stop unexpectedly to hunt for and fix bugs, and when they need to work on behind-the-scenes infrastructure changes to ween the program off the back-end services currently provided by Intuit.) We all wish it would go faster, and hopefully as they continue to add programmers, some of it will, but there's no magic solution to make Quicken for Mac have all the features people want overnight, or in a month.

I hope that makes sense; I hope it helps a little in understanding what's going on. And if not, just ignore and don't reply, and we can let the conversation drift elsewhere.

Unknown

Paul Newcomb said:

I have been using Quicken for nearly 20 years on Windows.  I just bought Quicken for Mac 2016 and cannot even get my check register to agree with my online balance.  Where can I re-learn Quicken so I don't waste $75.

Well, if we're voting, I vote for ensuring basic, bare-bones functionality.

As in, the ability to enter debits and credits, and have those inputs reflected in the new balance.

Then, when it's time to reconcile, the ability to enter the beginning and end dates from a statement, the beginning and end balances on that statement, and then go through the debits and credits, checking them off one at a time until achieving a zero balance.  You know, the kind of thing a simple spreadsheet can do.

Right now, my version of Quicken can no longer do that.  For the last two cycles since this "update," I cannot reconcile my account without doing some crazy "balance adjustments" -- the only two times I have EVER had to do that since 1/1/1997.

Something is wrong on Saturn III.

I'm thinking maybe they can hold off on "loan amortization" and "12 month budgeting" until the application can handle simple arithmetic.

Unknown

Intuit had no business eliminating Quicken 2007 and forcing everyone to Quicken Essentials 2010 when there was a decrease in functionality and it was going back in time.  That being said, we are where we are but this past release has shown how poorly Intuit's Quality Assurance has been on new releases.  I understand every time a new module is opened for changes you are destabilizing that module and how it interacts with all other modules but there always should be a Quality Assurance base line to ensure that old features still work.  In any accounting system the basics need to work, i.e. debits, credits, journal entries, accounts payable, accounts receivable, 1 + 1 = 2, etc.  Change is an option but you cannot just make a change quickly.  I am so discussed with losing transactions, once reconciled items becoming un-reconciled, that I am planning on a change but it involves so much more than just this one piece of software.  But, change I will. 

smayer97

Linda said:

Intuit had no business eliminating Quicken 2007 and forcing everyone to Quicken Essentials 2010 when there was a decrease in functionality and it was going back in time.  That being said, we are where we are but this past release has shown how poorly Intuit's Quality Assurance has been on new releases.  I understand every time a new module is opened for changes you are destabilizing that module and how it interacts with all other modules but there always should be a Quality Assurance base line to ensure that old features still work.  In any accounting system the basics need to work, i.e. debits, credits, journal entries, accounts payable, accounts receivable, 1 + 1 = 2, etc.  Change is an option but you cannot just make a change quickly.  I am so discussed with losing transactions, once reconciled items becoming un-reconciled, that I am planning on a change but it involves so much more than just this one piece of software.  But, change I will. 

You have some valid issues but Intuit was FORCED to move on from QM2007 because Apple will soon be abandoning old technology on which QM2007 is built. QEM was eventual born out of the effort to move up to current Apple technologies, though not a great result when it first came out with lots of bugs. QM2015 and QM2016 are building on that, still needing to fix some core bugs. 

BTW, again I point out that Quicken is no longer part of Intuit, as of April 2016.

Unknown

Linda said:

Intuit had no business eliminating Quicken 2007 and forcing everyone to Quicken Essentials 2010 when there was a decrease in functionality and it was going back in time.  That being said, we are where we are but this past release has shown how poorly Intuit's Quality Assurance has been on new releases.  I understand every time a new module is opened for changes you are destabilizing that module and how it interacts with all other modules but there always should be a Quality Assurance base line to ensure that old features still work.  In any accounting system the basics need to work, i.e. debits, credits, journal entries, accounts payable, accounts receivable, 1 + 1 = 2, etc.  Change is an option but you cannot just make a change quickly.  I am so discussed with losing transactions, once reconciled items becoming un-reconciled, that I am planning on a change but it involves so much more than just this one piece of software.  But, change I will. 

Typical of Apple to put vendors in this position.  My strategy will be to abandon Apple, not Quicken.  I know the Windows version is much further along and actually look forward to using it again. 

smayer97

Linda said:

Intuit had no business eliminating Quicken 2007 and forcing everyone to Quicken Essentials 2010 when there was a decrease in functionality and it was going back in time.  That being said, we are where we are but this past release has shown how poorly Intuit's Quality Assurance has been on new releases.  I understand every time a new module is opened for changes you are destabilizing that module and how it interacts with all other modules but there always should be a Quality Assurance base line to ensure that old features still work.  In any accounting system the basics need to work, i.e. debits, credits, journal entries, accounts payable, accounts receivable, 1 + 1 = 2, etc.  Change is an option but you cannot just make a change quickly.  I am so discussed with losing transactions, once reconciled items becoming un-reconciled, that I am planning on a change but it involves so much more than just this one piece of software.  But, change I will. 

There is nothing typical here...Mac OS X came out in late 1999 and has supported legacy technology since then that ran on the old PowerPC chips to new technology that runs on Intel chips. Intuit simply dragged their feet on this and have been trying to play catch-up since then. But true, the Windows version is more mature, with all its bumps and warts too. Yet Quicken has committed to bring the two versions closer together over time. We are all free to choose based on what meets our needs the best.

Quicken Marcus

The following article explains in detail how reconciliation works in 3.4 and also in 3.5 to help those of you running into issues figure out where the problem may be occurring.  In speaking with customers we still have not found a bug in the software.  For the most part the issue is that the new reconcile is working as expected and is finding issues in people's Quicken data.  The old reconcile didn't validate that the Quicken balance was the same as the bank's balance.  It only served to validate transactions.  In any case, take a read.

https://getsatisfaction.com/quickencommunity/topics/quicken-mac-v3-5-reconcile-troubleshooting

Thanks,
Quicken Marcus

JOHN M MALONEY

Good job.  Many thanks for your effort on our behalf.  John

Unknown

Bob Harris said:

When will it be out? Will it let us set the prior balance in the window to agree with our calculated balance for Reconciling? That's the dilemma for me. My balance was always perfect til 3.51 which created a balance I couldn't change

I just got off 30 minutes with a customer service rep that I couldn't understand well and all she could suggest was to have Quicken enter an adjustment.  I don't understand why previous errors (and I'm not sure there are any) would make a mistake on one month's reconciliation when I enter the beginning and ending balance and all the transactions in my statement are entered (and entered correctly) in Quicken.  At the end of my reconcilation efforts Quicken says a have a, apparently, $203 dollars less than my bank statement says I have!

Unknown

Bob Harris said:

When will it be out? Will it let us set the prior balance in the window to agree with our calculated balance for Reconciling? That's the dilemma for me. My balance was always perfect til 3.51 which created a balance I couldn't change

I just got off 30 minutes with a customer service rep that I couldn't understand well and all she could suggest was to have Quicken enter an adjustment.  I don't understand why previous errors (and I'm not sure there are any) would make a mistake on one month's reconciliation when I enter the beginning and ending balance and all the transactions in my statement are entered (and entered correctly) in Quicken.  At the end of my reconcilation efforts Quicken says a have a, apparently, $203 dollars less than my bank statement says I have!

Unknown

After stewing about the "broken" status of Q 3.5.2, I accepted the notion that it is indeed an improvement. I reconciled the first available month and accepted the suggested adjustment. I then went through the other accounts and repeated that process. Each of the accounts is now reconciled, my stress level is down, and Quicken is back on track. After reading the discussion above, I came to the conclusion that over the past 20 or so years with Quicken and the Mac, it's probable that Intuit wasn't as conscientious with Quicken as it was with Turbotax. At least I hope that my Quicken experience doesn't follow over into Turbotax. With new ownership I'm hoping Quicken is now back on track. My advice is to reconcile your accounts, accept the adjustments (I now believe they're inherited from previous versions), and get on with on it.

Concordman

Did the same thing with last months bank statement; Will see how it all works out with next months bank statement.

Unknown

I just want to post a comment for the team regarding how they believe the new reconciliation update is suppose to make sure to expose past balancing issues missed by the past functionality.  It does BUT a user just posted they circumvented the imbalance the update in 3.5.2 exposed in the reconciliation screen "Statement Balance" by deleting the "Starting/Prior Bal" amount calculated by Quicken and manually entered the Beginning Balance from their bank statement whereby ignoring they have a register vs bank discrepancy.  They then balanced those transactions in relationship to their current statement not even having to entered an adjustment either,,,, which logic I am against from an accounting integrity stand point anyway.  They believe they are balanced and just left the mess behind.  The thing I don't understand is why Quicken is allowing the user to enter their own statement balance where they can by pass the whole point of the update.  Then when things go a rye and come back to haunt them, they are upset with the application and want everyone to fix their mess. I would think it would be better to stop this kind of work arounds regarding balancing problems and maintain Quicken's integrity in it's accounting functionality.  If people aren't going to use the program correctly, then it should not be Quicken's burden to bare or waste the time of other users and the support staff period.  

jacobs

102_dar_70 said:

I just want to post a comment for the team regarding how they believe the new reconciliation update is suppose to make sure to expose past balancing issues missed by the past functionality.  It does BUT a user just posted they circumvented the imbalance the update in 3.5.2 exposed in the reconciliation screen "Statement Balance" by deleting the "Starting/Prior Bal" amount calculated by Quicken and manually entered the Beginning Balance from their bank statement whereby ignoring they have a register vs bank discrepancy.  They then balanced those transactions in relationship to their current statement not even having to entered an adjustment either,,,, which logic I am against from an accounting integrity stand point anyway.  They believe they are balanced and just left the mess behind.  The thing I don't understand is why Quicken is allowing the user to enter their own statement balance where they can by pass the whole point of the update.  Then when things go a rye and come back to haunt them, they are upset with the application and want everyone to fix their mess. I would think it would be better to stop this kind of work arounds regarding balancing problems and maintain Quicken's integrity in it's accounting functionality.  If people aren't going to use the program correctly, then it should not be Quicken's burden to bare or waste the time of other users and the support staff period.  

I think the software HAS to allow for a manual override, because not everyone knows their exact starting balance as of the date their account data in Quicken begins. You, like me, would want to work to "get it right," but some users don't want to or can't or won't go back through history to do so. (And for most people, passing a magic wand over things with an adjustment to make current data and balances work will not cause future problems.)

smayer97

102_dar_70 said:

I just want to post a comment for the team regarding how they believe the new reconciliation update is suppose to make sure to expose past balancing issues missed by the past functionality.  It does BUT a user just posted they circumvented the imbalance the update in 3.5.2 exposed in the reconciliation screen "Statement Balance" by deleting the "Starting/Prior Bal" amount calculated by Quicken and manually entered the Beginning Balance from their bank statement whereby ignoring they have a register vs bank discrepancy.  They then balanced those transactions in relationship to their current statement not even having to entered an adjustment either,,,, which logic I am against from an accounting integrity stand point anyway.  They believe they are balanced and just left the mess behind.  The thing I don't understand is why Quicken is allowing the user to enter their own statement balance where they can by pass the whole point of the update.  Then when things go a rye and come back to haunt them, they are upset with the application and want everyone to fix their mess. I would think it would be better to stop this kind of work arounds regarding balancing problems and maintain Quicken's integrity in it's accounting functionality.  If people aren't going to use the program correctly, then it should not be Quicken's burden to bare or waste the time of other users and the support staff period.  

I agree there just are situations that warrant manual override...

As an example, remember that Quicken is not perfect (ahem...). Note that there are still reports of past transactions getting unreconciled by updates, or other bugs. Even QM2007 does this once in a while.

There are enough situations to warrant manual override so the user can still carry on. It is up to them to decide when or if they need to correct their records, especially if those discrepancies are not their fault.

BTW, I do not believe in entering adjustments for reconciliation. There have been so many times over the years where a very small difference ended up being because of multiple transactions that needed to be corrected, adjusted, etc (transfers to wrong accounts are a common reason for me).

Unknown

102_dar_70 said:

I just want to post a comment for the team regarding how they believe the new reconciliation update is suppose to make sure to expose past balancing issues missed by the past functionality.  It does BUT a user just posted they circumvented the imbalance the update in 3.5.2 exposed in the reconciliation screen "Statement Balance" by deleting the "Starting/Prior Bal" amount calculated by Quicken and manually entered the Beginning Balance from their bank statement whereby ignoring they have a register vs bank discrepancy.  They then balanced those transactions in relationship to their current statement not even having to entered an adjustment either,,,, which logic I am against from an accounting integrity stand point anyway.  They believe they are balanced and just left the mess behind.  The thing I don't understand is why Quicken is allowing the user to enter their own statement balance where they can by pass the whole point of the update.  Then when things go a rye and come back to haunt them, they are upset with the application and want everyone to fix their mess. I would think it would be better to stop this kind of work arounds regarding balancing problems and maintain Quicken's integrity in it's accounting functionality.  If people aren't going to use the program correctly, then it should not be Quicken's burden to bare or waste the time of other users and the support staff period.  

I'm sorry but that makes no sense.  When my Windows PC  crashed and I lost everything in Quicken for Windows, I had to start all over again with Quicken for MAC this time;  I just started from my last completed reconciliation when I set up the account.  I did have to add some transactions to bring the register up to speed going forward.  You always have a starting point called your last bank statement balance.  If your going to invest in an accounting product like Quicken and expect it to provide you will real financial information than your financial data has to have integrity.  Ignoring imbalances and or entering in adjustments to create a false balance is not something Quicken should accommodate in it's programming if it intends to be a reputable accounting software.  If users are not serious about keeping their register data accurate than just do what the younger generation does, just call the bank or go online to find out how much money you have left to spend.  I totally disagree with your magic wand theory, entering adjustments does not "make things work or go away" it just masks the problem going forward and I believe it will come back to haunt you later.  I'm positive that has caused a lot of the issues people are going through currently and how can you even research these adjustments after the fact that might span more than one reconciliation is now garbage in/garbage out.  I don't think anyone should be giving users advice to do so either.

Unknown

102_dar_70 said:

I just want to post a comment for the team regarding how they believe the new reconciliation update is suppose to make sure to expose past balancing issues missed by the past functionality.  It does BUT a user just posted they circumvented the imbalance the update in 3.5.2 exposed in the reconciliation screen "Statement Balance" by deleting the "Starting/Prior Bal" amount calculated by Quicken and manually entered the Beginning Balance from their bank statement whereby ignoring they have a register vs bank discrepancy.  They then balanced those transactions in relationship to their current statement not even having to entered an adjustment either,,,, which logic I am against from an accounting integrity stand point anyway.  They believe they are balanced and just left the mess behind.  The thing I don't understand is why Quicken is allowing the user to enter their own statement balance where they can by pass the whole point of the update.  Then when things go a rye and come back to haunt them, they are upset with the application and want everyone to fix their mess. I would think it would be better to stop this kind of work arounds regarding balancing problems and maintain Quicken's integrity in it's accounting functionality.  If people aren't going to use the program correctly, then it should not be Quicken's burden to bare or waste the time of other users and the support staff period.  

 Smayer97 

There is no point in carrying on as you put it , if your just going to allow your information to become corrupted with manual overrides/adjustments which I firmly believe  will come back to bite you and then you have to do another adjustment and another.

The second half of your post expresses my sediments exactly; "BTW, I do not believe in entering adjustments for reconciliation. There have been so many times over the years where a very small difference ended up being because of multiple transactions that needed to be corrected, adjusted, etc (transfers to wrong accounts are a common reason for me)."......but you can't have it both ways!

Like

Unknown

102_dar_70 said:

I just want to post a comment for the team regarding how they believe the new reconciliation update is suppose to make sure to expose past balancing issues missed by the past functionality.  It does BUT a user just posted they circumvented the imbalance the update in 3.5.2 exposed in the reconciliation screen "Statement Balance" by deleting the "Starting/Prior Bal" amount calculated by Quicken and manually entered the Beginning Balance from their bank statement whereby ignoring they have a register vs bank discrepancy.  They then balanced those transactions in relationship to their current statement not even having to entered an adjustment either,,,, which logic I am against from an accounting integrity stand point anyway.  They believe they are balanced and just left the mess behind.  The thing I don't understand is why Quicken is allowing the user to enter their own statement balance where they can by pass the whole point of the update.  Then when things go a rye and come back to haunt them, they are upset with the application and want everyone to fix their mess. I would think it would be better to stop this kind of work arounds regarding balancing problems and maintain Quicken's integrity in it's accounting functionality.  If people aren't going to use the program correctly, then it should not be Quicken's burden to bare or waste the time of other users and the support staff period.  

I believe people who entered adjustments for what turned out to be for old outstanding transactions that didn't clear that month and then they reconciled the next month in the register, which you can do for some reason, came back to haunt them this Quicken update.

smayer97

102_dar_70 said:

I just want to post a comment for the team regarding how they believe the new reconciliation update is suppose to make sure to expose past balancing issues missed by the past functionality.  It does BUT a user just posted they circumvented the imbalance the update in 3.5.2 exposed in the reconciliation screen "Statement Balance" by deleting the "Starting/Prior Bal" amount calculated by Quicken and manually entered the Beginning Balance from their bank statement whereby ignoring they have a register vs bank discrepancy.  They then balanced those transactions in relationship to their current statement not even having to entered an adjustment either,,,, which logic I am against from an accounting integrity stand point anyway.  They believe they are balanced and just left the mess behind.  The thing I don't understand is why Quicken is allowing the user to enter their own statement balance where they can by pass the whole point of the update.  Then when things go a rye and come back to haunt them, they are upset with the application and want everyone to fix their mess. I would think it would be better to stop this kind of work arounds regarding balancing problems and maintain Quicken's integrity in it's accounting functionality.  If people aren't going to use the program correctly, then it should not be Quicken's burden to bare or waste the time of other users and the support staff period.  

BTW, Quicken is NOT accounting software...it is personal financial management software.

Unknown

102_dar_70 said:

I just want to post a comment for the team regarding how they believe the new reconciliation update is suppose to make sure to expose past balancing issues missed by the past functionality.  It does BUT a user just posted they circumvented the imbalance the update in 3.5.2 exposed in the reconciliation screen "Statement Balance" by deleting the "Starting/Prior Bal" amount calculated by Quicken and manually entered the Beginning Balance from their bank statement whereby ignoring they have a register vs bank discrepancy.  They then balanced those transactions in relationship to their current statement not even having to entered an adjustment either,,,, which logic I am against from an accounting integrity stand point anyway.  They believe they are balanced and just left the mess behind.  The thing I don't understand is why Quicken is allowing the user to enter their own statement balance where they can by pass the whole point of the update.  Then when things go a rye and come back to haunt them, they are upset with the application and want everyone to fix their mess. I would think it would be better to stop this kind of work arounds regarding balancing problems and maintain Quicken's integrity in it's accounting functionality.  If people aren't going to use the program correctly, then it should not be Quicken's burden to bare or waste the time of other users and the support staff period.  

Your splitting hairs here......the bottom line is finances is money and  management of money is accounting that involves Debits and Credits for which the data  can be used to generate reports of history of spending and or savings and create budgets and charts etc, etc.