I hope I'm wrong but it doesn't appear that QM2019 has any meaningful report upgrades.

QuickenSince92QuickenSince92 Member ✭✭
edited December 2018 in Reports (Mac)
If others have found that any of our requests have been put into QM2019, please let us know.

Comments

  • QPWQPW Member ✭✭✭✭
    edited October 2018
  • QuickenSince92QuickenSince92 Member ✭✭
    edited October 2018
    Yes, already saw that. My original question stands as asked.
  • smayer97smayer97 SuperUser ✭✭✭✭✭
    edited October 2018

    Yes, already saw that. My original question stands as asked.

    Your "question" has been answered by the Release Notes. ;-)

    And your initial assessment is correct. There is nothing new for reports.

    Keep in mind that yearly big bang features are no longer timed with "annual" releases. New features are released throughout the year. QM2019 DOES have significantly more than when QM2018 was first released but QM2019 is not much different than the last release in QM2018 v5.8 that was released Sep 9, 2018.

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

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

    (Canadian  user since '92, STILL using QM2007)

    Have Questions? Check out these FAQs:
  • Frank MooreFrank Moore Member
    edited October 2018
    This reply was created from a merged topic originally titled Moving to merge.


    What a bummer! I really would like to upgrade, but I have to stick with Quicken 2007 until they give me the reports in Quicken that I need. I don't understand why they can't provide the same reports as in the past.

    Note: This conversation was created from a reply on: List of Requests for Report Types in Quicken for Mac.
  • smayer97smayer97 SuperUser ✭✭✭✭✭
    edited October 2018
    This reply was created from a merged topic originally titled Moving to merge.


    They are working on them. BUT there are significant changes needed and that takes time. And they will be released whenever they are ready. They do not have to time the release to the "annual" release, as that is no longer meaningful under the new Subscription model. 

    Take a look at this thread:
    https://getsatisfaction.com/quickencommunity/topics/i-hope-im-wrong-but-it-doesnt-appear-that-qm2019...

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

    Note: This conversation was created from a reply on: List of Requests for Report Types in Quicken for Mac.

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

    (Canadian  user since '92, STILL using QM2007)

    Have Questions? Check out these FAQs:
  • QuickenSince92QuickenSince92 Member ✭✭
    edited October 2018
    This reply was created from a merged topic originally titled Moving to merge.


    I see you've edited your original response in the referenced thread that you shut down. Your prerogative of course. I can only speak for myself but I'm very disappointed in the lack of report enhancement we've seen after numerous requests over the last couple of years. Quicken doesn't let us know what is/may be coming in future releases. We get told to vote on issues that are important to us, so we do that. Then we wait patiently for the next major release to come. And here it is - Quicken Mac 2019 without the reporting features we've been asking for. Now you are saying, "Don't get hung up on features only happening with major releases. With the new subscription model they can be slip-streamed in at any time." That is certainly true, but it doesn't provide any clarity as to when or if we'll see it any time soon. Reporting from a database has been a commodity style feature for many years with platform-independent reporting available at free to cheap prices. So, if I (or anyone else) sounds a little upset about not getting and not knowing when or if we'll ever get a highly-requested feature set, I believe it's justified.

    Note: This conversation was created from a reply on: List of Requests for Report Types in Quicken for Mac.
  • jacobsjacobs SuperUser ✭✭✭✭✭
    edited October 2018
    This reply was created from a merged topic originally titled Moving to merge.


    Steve, there were some very significant report upgrades in the 5.8 release just last month. The change from Quicken 2018 to 2019 is now just a marketing label -- the technology changes and improvements come as they are ready, not geared around the change of date on the label. 

    From the release notes for Quicken 5.8:
    • NEW - In 5.8, you'll now be able to customize a report with No Tag and No Payee as options.
    • NEW - Reports now have a Scale to Fit printing option so that wide reports can be shrunk to fit on a single page, saving paper.
    • IMPROVED - Comparison reports now print in color.
    • NEW - Full budgets can be printed based on the number of months you want to see on a page. You have the option of having 12, 6, 4, or 3 months per page.
    • NEW - Added an option to print a summary budget.
    • NEW - In 5.8, we added the ability to print, export, and copy the portfolio view without lots.
    • IMPROVED - The Price and Holdings As Of date is now added to both exported and printed versions of the portfolio view.
    • NEW - Added the Scale to Fit printing feature to the portfolio view so that everything fits on a single page.
    For me, the scale to fit changes are game-changers. I found the printed reports previously almost unusable, and although they still lack some functionality I'd like to see, they are considerably more usable. Same for being able to print my investment portfolio: it was hopeless (without exporting and cleaning up) when it printed every lot before, but it's now quite usable.

    Of course, there's still a long list of features, enhancements and usability tweaks users have asked for in reports, but I think it's incorrect to say there aren't any meaningful report upgrades.

    The next big move forward would be if they retire and replace the old reports (which came over from the old Quicken Essentials), and had all the reports use the "New Report" engine they've been incrementally enhancing over the past year. that would also signal that they have the core functionality in place, and should be able to more quickly add more report types that users have asked for.

    Frank, there's no great mystery here, although the situation is frustrating. They've been building the modern Quicken for Mac over the past 5 years. None of the code or core technologies in the old Quicken 2007 can be used in a modern Mac application, so they're needing to build things from scratch. In the first few years, they just used the limited reports from the older Quicken Essentials program from 2010. Last year, they began releasing in stages their work to create an all-new user interface and printing architecture for reports. It's advanced a lot, but still has a ways to go to match the functionality of Quicken 2007. Unfortunately, with a small development team, progress has been slower than either users or Quicken management had expected. For some of us longtime Quicken Mac users, this has been an annoyance, while for others, it has been a showstopper blocking a move off Quicken 2007. The good news, though, is that we can see by what they've released over the past year that they understand the shortcomings and are working to build out better reports.

    Note: This conversation was created from a reply on: List of Requests for Report Types in Quicken for Mac.
    QMac 2007 & QMac Subscription • Quicken user since 1993
  • QuickenSince92QuickenSince92 Member ✭✭
    edited October 2018
    This reply was created from a merged topic originally titled Moving to merge.


    Jacobs, no snark intended, but if those are what you consider to be "significant report upgrades", I just don't know. Also you and I have had the discussion about what a commodity report writers are. It's not "rocket surgery". So here we are once again, still disappointed at the lack of meaningful progress.

    Note: This conversation was created from a reply on: List of Requests for Report Types in Quicken for Mac.
  • jacobsjacobs SuperUser ✭✭✭✭✭
    edited October 2018
    This reply was created from a merged topic originally titled Moving to merge.


    Steve/QuickenSince92, I agree it is frustrating not knowing what new features are coming when. But there are two factors working against them doing that:

    (1) They do have competitors, and they don't want to tell the competition what they're working on months in advance. (I was just looking at the website of one of those competitors today, in response to a different post on this forum, and I thought it was interesting that a number of features in the brand new release of the competing product are things which quicken Mac has added over the last 12-18 months.) As users, we'd love to know what they're working on, but being in a competitive environment, they simply can't signal what's coming and allow the competition to match them or beat them to market.

     (2) They often don't know when particular features will come out, because the amount of work needed to implement some features often can't be projected accurately until the project is well along. Sometimes there are inter-dependencies which turn out to make development more complex than originally expected. Additionally, even once new features are completed, internal testing and beta testing may turn up bugs which can be easy or complex to track down and fix. Or beta testing may send certain work back into the lab to make changes base don tester feedback. If they announced a certain feature was planned for December, and it turned out to take longer to finish, or clear testing, then users would get mad at Quicken for failing to deliver what they said was coming.

    Note: This conversation was created from a reply on: List of Requests for Report Types in Quicken for Mac.
    QMac 2007 & QMac Subscription • Quicken user since 1993
  • QuickenSince92QuickenSince92 Member ✭✭
    edited October 2018
    This reply was created from a merged topic originally titled Moving to merge.


    Jacobs. A lot of software development these days uses a methodology called Agile or a related style of approach that has "sprints" of short coding - unit testing so that new features can be evaluating and adjusted in short order. This approach also allows for better estimates on when (and if) features can be delivered. When you couple this with feature requests driven by market and user feedback any good development group can make fairly accurate estimates. The old style of writing a spec and then coding every last detail before beta and GA is long gone. I'm not saying Quicken uses an Agile style approach, but I'd be surprised if they don't use it or something similar. It also helps greatly reduce required timeframes and surprises that send development into overtime.

    Let's not go down this road anymore. No one knows what they're going to do or when (other than Quicken). I'm just one very disappointed Quicken user whose been waiting over a year for better reports and not happy with the progress.

    Note: This conversation was created from a reply on: List of Requests for Report Types in Quicken for Mac.
  • smayer97smayer97 SuperUser ✭✭✭✭✭
    edited October 2018
    This reply was created from a merged topic originally titled Moving to merge.


    Agreed that many are frustrated with the slower than expected progress. There is no arguing that. 

    [removed]  Note: This conversation was created from a reply on: List of Requests for Report Types in Quicken for Mac.

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

    (Canadian  user since '92, STILL using QM2007)

    Have Questions? Check out these FAQs:
  • QuickenSince92QuickenSince92 Member ✭✭
    edited October 2018
    This reply was created from a merged topic originally titled Moving to merge.


    Well it looks like all of our voting has gone for naught. I don't see any meaningful report upgrades in QM 2019.

    Note: This conversation was created from a reply on: List of Requests for Report Types in Quicken for Mac.
  • jacobsjacobs SuperUser ✭✭✭✭✭
    edited October 2018

    This reply was created from a merged topic originally titled Moving to merge.


    Jacobs, no snark intended, but if those are what you consider to be "significant report upgrades", I just don't know. Also you and I have had the discussion about what a commodity report writers are. It's not "rocket surgery". So here we are once again, still disappointed at the lack of meaningful progress.

    Note: This conversation was created from a reply on: List of Requests for Report Types in Quicken for Mac.

    Yeah, actually, I do consider them significant, for a couple reasons. First, I found the printed reports all but unusable before, and now I find them pretty functional. I couldn't print a usable, concise report of my investments before, but I can now. Reports showing memo fields were virtually unreadable before, but the new column controls and shrink to fit options make them usable. Now, there are additional things I would dearly like to see in reports, such as subtotals and totals on the bottom instead of atop of data, like any other accounting software I've ever used. And a few other reports. And I don't need the type of columnar reports like @smayer97 is always pushing for, which haven't been implemented yet. So I'm not crying "success!" I'm merely saying "progress". 

    The second part is the bigger picture. Marcus has indicated that the course they've taken with the report is to build out the functionality of the core reports first, and once they have all that code done, it will be easy to add additional reports. (If they added a bunch of reports earlier, and then had to change every report every time they added functionality to the user interface or printing output, they would have wasted more time re-doing work repeatedly.) So I see the refinement of the user interface for selecting data to include in reports and for controlling column placement as some of the key building blocks for all reports. And because they're getting that closer to where it needs to be, it should mean they're closer to re-doing all the old Essentials-era reports and adding some of the requested additional reports -- because the infrastructure now exists. If they want to add, say, Income Statement and Balance Sheet reports now, my guess is those could be implemented fairly quickly. The hard part was building the code to select data, to control the display of data on-screen, and to translate the on-screen reports to printed reports. I have no insight into what is coming when, but it seems to me they are getting significantly closer to being able to cross off a lot of additional requests on the wishlist. Maybe I'm wrong, and it will still be a trickle that takes years; I'm thinking some of the most-requested reports features are now much closer to becoming reality.
    QMac 2007 & QMac Subscription • Quicken user since 1993
  • jacobsjacobs SuperUser ✭✭✭✭✭
    edited October 2018

    This reply was created from a merged topic originally titled Moving to merge.


    Jacobs. A lot of software development these days uses a methodology called Agile or a related style of approach that has "sprints" of short coding - unit testing so that new features can be evaluating and adjusted in short order. This approach also allows for better estimates on when (and if) features can be delivered. When you couple this with feature requests driven by market and user feedback any good development group can make fairly accurate estimates. The old style of writing a spec and then coding every last detail before beta and GA is long gone. I'm not saying Quicken uses an Agile style approach, but I'd be surprised if they don't use it or something similar. It also helps greatly reduce required timeframes and surprises that send development into overtime.

    Let's not go down this road anymore. No one knows what they're going to do or when (other than Quicken). I'm just one very disappointed Quicken user whose been waiting over a year for better reports and not happy with the progress.

    Note: This conversation was created from a reply on: List of Requests for Report Types in Quicken for Mac.

    I believe the Quicken Mac team does, in fact, use something along the lines of Agile development. Heck, they released Quicken for Mac in August 2014 when it was seriously immature -- to lots of cries from users about missing features -- with the stated goal of doing lots of quick iterations to add functionality. Many beta testers like me said it needed more work before they released it, but they wanted to put it out for users who needed an immediate solution and then to build as rapidly as possible with the benefit of user feedback. (I'm guessing they also hoped not to have to re-invent every small feature in past generations of Quicken, but heard from users that those were all desired features -- so the development plan likely blossomed beyond their original roadmap.) They do do sprints; I know I've seen Quicken staff refer to them as such from time to time. And they result in a new release about every 6-7 weeks on average. So I think they do practice what you're advocating.

    And I'm basically on the same page as you. Although I use the new Quicken a bit, I still use Quicken 2007 as my live, bedrock personal data file, because I've been waiting for improvements. And I've been frustrated with the often-slow pace of change. I think our main difference is that I'm now feeling considerably more hopeful than you are. Although there are a few key features missing for me, I'm considering making the final move from 2007 to 2019 this winter when I have some extra time over the holidays. (And I do understand that people use Quicken differently, so that what's "good enough" for me may not yet be for you.)
    QMac 2007 & QMac Subscription • Quicken user since 1993
  • jacobsjacobs SuperUser ✭✭✭✭✭
    edited October 2018

    This reply was created from a merged topic originally titled Moving to merge.


    Well it looks like all of our voting has gone for naught. I don't see any meaningful report upgrades in QM 2019.

    Note: This conversation was created from a reply on: List of Requests for Report Types in Quicken for Mac.

    The moderators have merged all the previous posts out of order into this thread, so I'm just pasting in part of my response to this comment which somehow ended up out of order above -- for readability of the thread, not to continually repeat the same points. ;)

    There were no report upgrade in 5.8.1, which was a small-ish bug fix release that acquired the Quicken 2019 name. But there were some very significant report upgrades in the 5.8 release just last month. The change from Quicken 2018 to 2019 is now just a marketing label -- the technology changes and improvements come as they are ready, not geared around the change of date on the label. 

    From the release notes for Quicken 5.8:
    • NEW - In 5.8, you'll now be able to customize a report with No Tag and No Payee as options.
    • NEW - Reports now have a Scale to Fit printing option so that wide reports can be shrunk to fit on a single page, saving paper.
    • IMPROVED - Comparison reports now print in color.
    • NEW - Full budgets can be printed based on the number of months you want to see on a page. You have the option of having 12, 6, 4, or 3 months per page.
    • NEW - Added an option to print a summary budget.
    • NEW - In 5.8, we added the ability to print, export, and copy the portfolio view without lots.
    • IMPROVED - The Price and Holdings As Of date is now added to both exported and printed versions of the portfolio view.
    • NEW - Added the Scale to Fit printing feature to the portfolio view so that everything fits on a single page.
    For me, the scale to fit changes are game-changers. I found the printed reports previously almost unusable, and although they still lack some functionality I'd like to see, they are considerably more usable. Same for being able to print my investment portfolio: it was hopeless (without exporting and cleaning up) when it printed every lot before, but it's now quite usable.

    Of course, there's still a long list of features, enhancements and usability tweaks users have asked for in reports which have not yet been addressed, but I think it's incorrect to say there haven't been any meaningful report upgrades.
    QMac 2007 & QMac Subscription • Quicken user since 1993
  • John KeatingJohn Keating Member ✭✭
    edited October 2018

    This reply was created from a merged topic originally titled Moving to merge.


    Jacobs. A lot of software development these days uses a methodology called Agile or a related style of approach that has "sprints" of short coding - unit testing so that new features can be evaluating and adjusted in short order. This approach also allows for better estimates on when (and if) features can be delivered. When you couple this with feature requests driven by market and user feedback any good development group can make fairly accurate estimates. The old style of writing a spec and then coding every last detail before beta and GA is long gone. I'm not saying Quicken uses an Agile style approach, but I'd be surprised if they don't use it or something similar. It also helps greatly reduce required timeframes and surprises that send development into overtime.

    Let's not go down this road anymore. No one knows what they're going to do or when (other than Quicken). I'm just one very disappointed Quicken user whose been waiting over a year for better reports and not happy with the progress.

    Note: This conversation was created from a reply on: List of Requests for Report Types in Quicken for Mac.

    Actually, Agile can be a reason companies don't pre-announce releases since it entails an ever-changing feature/fix list that evolves over time to accommodate team velocity, unexpected roadblocks and shifting priorities. Agile teams are notorious for avoiding commitments to specific release dates or feature lists.

    But they most certainly have an internal feature/fix roadmap that they could disclose if they chose to, and it's common for companies to discuss at least the general focus areas of future releases (and maybe they do but I haven't seen it, aside from fattening-out the reporting). I think the desired feature sets are pretty well known for this type of software so it seems unlikely such a high level overview of future plans would be proprietary for competitive reasons.

    From what I can see, the fundamental problem is the company's lack of commitment to a Mac version, which has always plagued the Quicken product. But I expect it'll all move to the web as they're beginning to do now where Quicken will just become a SAS using the current subscription model and the native platform apps will go the way of the dinosaur. 
  • QPWQPW Member ✭✭✭✭
    edited October 2018

    This reply was created from a merged topic originally titled Moving to merge.


    Jacobs. A lot of software development these days uses a methodology called Agile or a related style of approach that has "sprints" of short coding - unit testing so that new features can be evaluating and adjusted in short order. This approach also allows for better estimates on when (and if) features can be delivered. When you couple this with feature requests driven by market and user feedback any good development group can make fairly accurate estimates. The old style of writing a spec and then coding every last detail before beta and GA is long gone. I'm not saying Quicken uses an Agile style approach, but I'd be surprised if they don't use it or something similar. It also helps greatly reduce required timeframes and surprises that send development into overtime.

    Let's not go down this road anymore. No one knows what they're going to do or when (other than Quicken). I'm just one very disappointed Quicken user whose been waiting over a year for better reports and not happy with the progress.

    Note: This conversation was created from a reply on: List of Requests for Report Types in Quicken for Mac.

    For what it is worth.  First off Quicken Katheryn long ago announced "we are agile" about a year or so before Intuit sold Quicken, I doubt that has changed.

    Next Marcus has been a whole lot more transparent than you will see on the Windows side.  And even on the Windows side they have been giving more "hints" on what is in the pipeline than they use to do while Intuit owned it.

    But there is definitely a compromise between telling the customer what you are working on, and not doing it.

    No matter how many times you tell a customer "subject to changes/problems" if a date posted is missed or features/bugs are changed they will always come back and complain about it.

    So you are always weighing which one gives you a bigger black eye.

    Over on the Windows side they introduced some really nasty crashes, and it took a couple of months to find and fix them, in the meantime they has already announced some changes for the "September" patch release.  And true to form people were complaining when these didn't come out because they delayed working on them to get the crashes fixed.
  • jacobsjacobs SuperUser ✭✭✭✭✭
    edited October 2018

    This reply was created from a merged topic originally titled Moving to merge.


    Jacobs. A lot of software development these days uses a methodology called Agile or a related style of approach that has "sprints" of short coding - unit testing so that new features can be evaluating and adjusted in short order. This approach also allows for better estimates on when (and if) features can be delivered. When you couple this with feature requests driven by market and user feedback any good development group can make fairly accurate estimates. The old style of writing a spec and then coding every last detail before beta and GA is long gone. I'm not saying Quicken uses an Agile style approach, but I'd be surprised if they don't use it or something similar. It also helps greatly reduce required timeframes and surprises that send development into overtime.

    Let's not go down this road anymore. No one knows what they're going to do or when (other than Quicken). I'm just one very disappointed Quicken user whose been waiting over a year for better reports and not happy with the progress.

    Note: This conversation was created from a reply on: List of Requests for Report Types in Quicken for Mac.

    When Marcus assembled the current Mac development team and they put out Quicken 2015 as their first release, he described a philosophy of putting out a minimum viable product and doing rapid iterations in an agile-like manner. I'm not sure if much changed through the time he left and came back, but I'd guess it's pretty well baked into their operating philosophy.

    John, I think Chris has it right by saying there's more downside than upside to putting out more of their development roadmap. As users, we'd certainly love to have more insight into what's planned, but that would mean the customers whose issues aren't near the top of the list would be screaming that Quicken doesn't care. Add to that the customers screaming if the developers miss releasing something they've promised. And they're also in a somewhat competitive environment where they feel they can't telegraph their plans to the competition.

    As for moving to being a web-based SAAS service, that currently seems unlikely. Quicken is deeply rooted as a desktop-based database program. And a significant percentage of users are dead-set against having their financial data and account credentials in the cloud. Of course, there are some users who would be happy if Quicken were entirely cloud-based. Quicken is trying to bridge those opposing points of view by remaining desktop-based with more robust -- but optional -- cloud-based web and mobile functionality. It will be some time until we can see how this approach plays out.
    QMac 2007 & QMac Subscription • Quicken user since 1993
  • QPWQPW Member ✭✭✭✭
    edited October 2018

    This reply was created from a merged topic originally titled Moving to merge.


    Jacobs. A lot of software development these days uses a methodology called Agile or a related style of approach that has "sprints" of short coding - unit testing so that new features can be evaluating and adjusted in short order. This approach also allows for better estimates on when (and if) features can be delivered. When you couple this with feature requests driven by market and user feedback any good development group can make fairly accurate estimates. The old style of writing a spec and then coding every last detail before beta and GA is long gone. I'm not saying Quicken uses an Agile style approach, but I'd be surprised if they don't use it or something similar. It also helps greatly reduce required timeframes and surprises that send development into overtime.

    Let's not go down this road anymore. No one knows what they're going to do or when (other than Quicken). I'm just one very disappointed Quicken user whose been waiting over a year for better reports and not happy with the progress.

    Note: This conversation was created from a reply on: List of Requests for Report Types in Quicken for Mac.

    From what I can see, the fundamental problem is the company's lack of commitment to a Mac version, which has always plagued the Quicken product. But I expect it'll all move to the web as they're beginning to do now where Quicken will just become a SAS using the current subscription model and the native platform apps will go the way of the dinosaur. 
    .
    I didn't really look at this paragraph closely before posting my last comment, so I hope people don't mind, but here is what I believe, based on the history have I have seen and such.

    I think Quicken Inc is VERY committed to the Mac version.  They have mentioned increasing the development staffing a few times.

    And for a bit of a history lesson.  The Mac customer were always talking about the fact that the Mac version wasn't getting "support like the WIndows version" at a time when Mac's made up less than 5% of the market let alone of Intuit's Quicken market.

    But eventually they did see that Macs were getting more market share (because of the iPhone) and that is when they started the development of Quicken Essentials (probably "understaffed").  Then they put that out and basically couldn't sell it.  And sure enough after a year or two it was pretty obvious that the Intuit upper management was not in the mood to put more into it, and it stalled for a few years.

    Then again they decided they would make more effort on it.  That is when Marcus first came into the picture (I guess in 2013/2014) and the result being Quicken 2015 for Mac.   But I'm guessing the "politics" were still bad, and Marcus left at one point.
    I have been in big companies and if your department isn't the money maker, you really have a hard time with upper management.  Imagine a project that has been losing money for years.

    But I think from the time Eric Dunn took over that has all changed.  But that isn't to say that progress has "zoomed along".

    I think that the real cornerstone problem is that people have no real idea of how much work something like this is.  If you look at smayer97's list of feature requests you get some idea.

    And that is the very reason that why I don't think you have to worry about Quicken Inc going to a "cloud only" solution any time soon.

    When you get right down to it there isn't anything in Quicken that a competitor would have a hard time figuring out.  But the competitors haven't just popped in and blown Quicken out of the water.  I believe that is because it so difficult to get all the features in and such.

    So I look on the idea of them going to a cloud only solution with the same "eyes".  As in it is a project they are probably "striving" to, but it is years into the future, if it ever happens.

    Since it takes so long to build up these feature sets, it is in fact the Desktop code that is Quicken Inc's bread and butter.  There is very little code they can use from the Desktop versions in the Quicken Mobile app/Web.

    I do think they are in a better position than Intuit was with Quicken Essentials.
    They can leverage the Desktop versions to keep supplying the features they have not yet put into Mobile/Web, and as such not have the big money drain like Intuit got themselves into.

    But make no mistake, in this area they are behind.  Intuit with Mint is farther along for the general user, and others like Personal Finance are farther along with the investment side.
This discussion has been closed.