Add "Save a Copy" feature (similar to "Year End Copy") (21 Legacy Votes)

itchyfish

Development Management of MAC for Quicken, please [Removed - Disruptive] put missing functionality into the MAC version of Quicken that the Windows version has.  [Removed - Rant]

Blastphemy

The good news is that this request is "Under Consideration." But everyone who wants this feature, please make sure to vote this up on the first page!

Quicken Anja

Hello @itchyfish,

Thank you for reaching out to the Community with your request.

Your idea has been merged into this already active Idea thread regarding the same request.

Thank you!

FirebirdEC

Yes, please add the 'Year End Copy' feature. When I used Quicken on Windows, I always considered this a feature, not a fix.

itchyfish

Quicken Anja said:

Hello @itchyfish,

Thank you for reaching out to the Community with your request.

Your idea has been merged into this already active Idea thread regarding the same request.

Thank you!

Thank you - we as a Community shouldn't have had to ask for this feature to be added when it's already part of the product for Windows users.  It should already be a part of the product for MAC users.

jacobs

itchyfish said:

We as a Community shouldn't have had to ask for this feature to be added when it's already part of the product for Windows users.  It should already be a part of the product for MAC users.

@itchyfish While I agree they should implement this feature, you seem to want them to wave a magic wand and deliver all the features users have requested to match Quicken Windows. And that's just not possible! Programming for Quicken Windows dates back some three decades, and Quicken Mac was re-written from scratch over the past 10-14 years (depending how you count some of the early work on Quicken Essentials now folded into Quicken Mac).

The developers have more than 500 feature requests from users on this site. Month by month, year by year, they are adding to Quicken Mac and making it a more robust program — but the small programming team can't build all the features from Quicken Windows over even a few years. Do I wish they could move faster? Yes! Do I wish they would implement the features at the top of my personal wishlist first? Yes! But I constantly remind myself to be realistic that this is a long-term process because they can't deliver everything we all want today or tomorrow or next month or even next year.

So yes, we members of the Quicken Mac community actually do need to ask for the features we want, because the developers can't do them all; it's absolutely fair to advocate for the features you think are most important for your use of Quicken. But expecting them just because they exist today in Quicken Windows isn't realistic or possible. 

Meanwhile, for you and others who want this feature, make sure you have added your vote for it on the first page of this thread. And rather than just asking/demanding this feature be added, it may be helpful to add your comment about why you feel this a needed feature. What are you having trouble with, or what can't you accomplish, without it? When the developers do look at these threads, the posts which say "do it because it's in Quicken Windows (or the legacy Quicken Mac 2007)" aren't convincing to them; the comments which explain how the absence of this feature is impeding your use of Quicken Mac can help them understand why, and can help them refine their thoughts about what functionality to build.

Blastphemy

We can always rely on a 300-word essay from @jacobs when someone complains a little too forcefully It’s a rite of passage on the Quicken forums at this point! lol. He just can’t help himself.

jacobs

@Blastphemy Actually, word counter shows it was 367 words, so I over-achieved! 🤣

When I write long posts like this, it's my attempt to get fellow Quicken users to understand why an issue isn't as simple or black-and-white as it might seem, and also to encourage the (limited) actions we users can take to help advance an idea. How much the votes and comments really help might be questionable, but I know that hurling insults or demands at the moderators, developers or management accomplishes nothing. I feel we live in a world where there's too much anger and lack of respect for each other; if I can do just a little to help understanding and promote civil discussions of issues, I guess that keeps my fingers moving.  

KingChuck

Please give us the year-end rollover tool. We need to be able to keep our books clean! If we DON'T keep our records clean (as recommended by most financial advisors), an IRS auditor would have access to potentially tons of records that are outside of the scope of the audit. Could you imagine the IRS would play fair when they can see all the cards in your hand?

hbanks

Great point!

jacobs

KingChuck said:

Please give us the year-end rollover tool. We need to be able to keep our books clean! If we DON'T keep our records clean (as recommended by most financial advisors), an IRS auditor would have access to potentially tons of records that are outside of the scope of the audit. Could you imagine the IRS would play fair when they can see all the cards in your hand?

@KingChuck I do believe Quicken should add a year-end feature, but with respect, I think your reasoning here is off the mark. In the highly unlikely event you face an IRS audit, you would simply print a report for the time period being audited, or do a search for the time period and print that. An IRS audit does not mean they can search your computer and prowl through your Quicken database; it only means you may need to provide proof of your reported income and deductions for the year being audited. Quicken Mac makes it easy to limit both reports and search-generated transaction reports to a calendar year. 

kbajura

I also miss the save a copy feature that I used to have on the PC version. In addition to all of the reasons others have stated, I also wish not to see some of the accounts that I have had and closed over the years. You can't just delete these accounts because they will throw your other accounts out of balance if they contain transfers.

hbanks

Thanks for that. Agree.

rrtorrenti

Despite the numerous requests to add the ability to close out a year in Quicken for a Mac, Quicken refuses. Why?

Blastphemy

@rrtorrenti – it's likely on the programmers' list, but is either difficult to implement quickly or hasn't been given as high a priority as other improvements. The past three years, Quicken has done a good job addressing deficiencies and bugs in the program to the point where I finally consider it a reasonable replacement for QMac2007. This “Year End Copy” request has 75 votes and is officially “under consideration,” so with patience we will likely get the functionality someday.

jacobs

@rrtorrenti You won't get answers from Quicken about why certain features have not been built, so your question is only directed at fellow users who can't fully answer the question. I encourage you to take a second to read what I wrote earlier in this thread, with my understanding of why this hadn't been built in the past.

Meanwhile, if/when the developers do review this thread, if they are evaluating implementation, it's useful for users to post a note explaining why you are asking for it and what you expect to be abkle to do. Saying “We just want it” or “we want it because it was in Quicken Mac 2007/Quicken Windows" doesn't really help, because those programs had limitations with their databases which the current Quicken Mac does not. So addressing how it would help you using Quicken is what can influence the developers.

rrtorrenti

I’ve done that repeatedly, thus my last comment. Why?????

rrtorrenti

Thanks

Scott8

I have been following this discussion for years, but what seems interesting is why wouldn’t Quicken Developer's to add this feature if even 10 people want it? Quicken users do their own financials as they want to. Super Users are no better at deciding how other people want to do their finances as the owners themselves. The “technical arguments” are just lots of words on nothing. It’s a functionality issue, and one version of Quicken has it yet the company will not add it to the other version. I have seen no argument on why the company will not do it. Will it take thousands of programming hours? Is it impossible to accomplish in the computer codes? Is it too hard to do? Maybe if Quicken said they would do it if people paid for it, maybe people would?

It’s not an unreasonable ask, and I am very surprised that a supposedly forward thinking company and a progressive and customer oriented CEO won’t directly answer this? It reminds me of people who advocate one thing, but their actions say otherwise.

Blastphemy

Make sure to vote for this feature on the first page to move it up higher on the priority list. Your vote is probably the most powerful means of telling Quicken you want this.

All of us here are users (aside from a few forum admins). None of us know the inner workings of Quicken or how much programming time is required for any given request. I don't think the CEO reads these forums.

jacobs

@Scott8 I have been following this discussion for years, but what seems interesting is why wouldn’t Quicken Developer's to add this feature if even 10 people want it?

@Scott8 I have seen no argument on why the company will not do it. Will it take thousands of programming hours? Is it impossible to accomplish in the computer codes? Is it too hard to do?

I have tried to answer your similar statements/questions in the past higher up in this thread, but I'll summarize the answer here. In the early days of modern Quicken Mac, the product manager said they didn't build this feature — and didn't plan to — because they felt users were asking for it simply because they were used to an old workflow which was no longer needed. The older Mac and Windows programs needed the ability to split/archive data because the databases of that generation bogged down, became prone to corruption problems over time, or simply reached their maximum capacity. The developers felt the modern, robust SQL database in Quicken Mac obviated the need to create separate year-end data files. They didn't want to build features in the next-generation Quicken Mac just to copy functionality in Quicken Mac 2007 or Quicken Windows. (If they built "every feature 10 people want" — without critically thinking about "is this the best way to address this need?" or "is there a better way we can build this with today's technology?" — Quicken Mac would become a bloated mess of code. See: Quicken Windows. 🤣)

So that's why they originally rejected building this functionality.

And while I think some users still ask for this just because "that's the way I used to do it", I think other users in this thread have made some strong and cogent arguments for why this would be a useful feature. (I briefly summarized some of those reasons in this post last year.) Hopefully, as the developers periodically review user-requested features, they have or will come to understand why users are asking for this functionality.

But that's only the first hurdle. Even if/when the developers agree this would be useful functionality to create, they run into the fact that they have a daunting list of hundreds of feature requests, and they need to chose judiciously which ones to devote time to and which ones to reject or leave on the back burner. For every possibly feature, they ask questions like "How many people will use this feature?", "How big an impact would this feature make?", "Are there acceptable workarounds for the time being?", "How long will it take to design, code and test?", "Does this feature need to tie in with other projects also on our development schedule?", and so on. Their answers to those questions determine where specific features sit on their development roadmap. We users unfortunately don't get to see how they have things ranked, or learn why, so sometimes thier lack of action on a particular issue seems perplexing. (One of my favorites: why does Quicken Mac have a budget feature in which users can't generate a simple actual-versus-budget year-to-date report? But I digress… 😉) The absence of a particular feature like this doesn't mean they refuse to do it, or that they don't listen to users; it only means that for any number of reasons, it hasn't risen to the top of their list yet.

I'd note that at the time of writing this post, this request has 96 total votes on this forum. That's substantial, but there are plenty of other requests with more votes. As @Blastphemy wrote above: more votes for this feature (at the top of the first page of this thread) can help propel a feature request up the development priority list.

@Scott8 I am very surprised that a supposedly forward thinking company and a progressive and customer oriented CEO won’t directly answer this?

Hmmm, is Quicken a "forward thinking company"? Is the CEO "progressive and customer oriented"? 😂

Seriously, though, I imagine the CEO is involved in some feature/development decisions, but certainly not most of them. But even if he was, would you really expect him to go down a list of hundreds of feature requests to explain why each one hasn't yet been implemented? 😉 Quicken has a company DNA which unfortunately isn't strong on communication with users, whether it's about problems with a buggy software release or what they're working on or plan to release in the future. This isn't unique among software companies, but some certainly do a better job of engaging with their customers. As for the CEO, other than occasional "state of Quicken" messages or videos, which have been very broad and more promotional than insightful, we almost never hear from him.