edit email form

Look at the screen the next time you e-mail a form.

"Allan Martin" wrote in news:d9v1f.35658$ snipped-for-privacy@fe12.lga:

I know I can edit the field in the opened message, but editing 120 emails can get tedious. Can I edit the salutation field so that it always inserts a differnt salutation?

Second verse same as the first, look at the screen. There is no trick. Your choices for changing the salutation are limited to those that you see.

What version of QB do you have? I have QB Pro 2003 UK and I can browse to the emailtemplates file, open it in WordPad and edit the templates to my heart's content, although there are limits on what one can do with fields. For example, apart from changing the text of the e-mail message, I changed the subject field so that it automatically produces the details of the Job instead of the rather inane "Invoice from ...".

I explained how to do this on another user group and Intuit promptly removed this useful flexibility. Perhaps such user-friendliness offended their sensibilities.

So now I can't upgrade without forgoing this useful feature. Perhaps the next upgrade will be to the Microsoft Small Business Accounting Package.

Ken

Gustav Johansen wrote:

What makes you think SBA has this feature? Let me clue you in, it does not.

He didn't say he thought SBA had the feature.

I read his statement as: "As long as I have to use software without this feature, the software might as well be from Microsoft."

A wholly (or holy) sensible idea, you ask me.

Then you get a D in reading comprehension. If you said the OP was just blowing steam out of his ass then you would have gotten an A.

Thank you for telling us that SBA does not have this feature either. I have not had access to SBA yet as it is only available in a US version which does not have the VAT module needed in this country (South Africa). We use the UK version.

I have also read your previous comments on SBA with interest, and I've also tried to keep up with what is being said on the SBA users group: nowhere nearly all favourable, I may add.

But you did miss the thrust of what I was saying: Intuit is maddening in the way it does not seem to listen much to users. It wasn't fair of me to imply that Intuit reads these user groups and maliciously took away a useful feature once I mentioned it. In a sense, that was giving then more credit than they may be due: they either don't read them at all or, more likely, don't take them as seriously as they would be well-advised to do.

I say this because many weaknesses that have been the subject of numerous postings over the years have apparently still not been attended to. For example: The general inability to set default options, the weak journal entry function, the opaque retained earnings account (although I understand that in the latest top version/s this has been addressed) and the problems users experience with entering business expenses paid with private funds and vice versa.

This is a great pity because Intuit could learn so much by doing so. I suggest that much of MS' success is due to its policy of pro-active soliciting of user input and then implementing good suggestions.

For example, when MS wanted to make Word as attractive to the legal profession as possible, it set up a hgh-powered working group with experts from the legal profession and top MS people to ascertain what the legal profession wanted and needed.

Intuit is, I suggest, going to have to pull up its socks in this area or suffer at the hands of this redoubtable new competitor. This is the best possible thing for us users as Intuit is sure to endeavour to meet the challenge headon. But what Intuit seem to need is to be prodded in the right direction so that they make the changes users actually want and need: less emphasis on bells and whistles and more on basic ease of use and functioning. And if I have got the correct impression from early comments on the 2006 version, Intuit may be fiddling with pretty new icons and screens instead of making much needed basic changes while Rome burns.

Ken

Many posters on the SBA users group appear to be using QB as the defacto standard small business accounting software model and using it for comparision. When SBA is found to lack many of QB's features they form unfavorable opinions.

I can't disagee with you more. QB did not become the leading small business accounting software product in the world by not listening to and meeting the needs of the majority of their users. There are many other excellent products on the market today for users to choose from. Most choose QB.

Once I understood how QB handles the end of year, I never had or expect to have a problem with retained earnings.

I suspect the same is true for Intuit.

Their pretty new screens makes their product look like Microsoft's Small Business Accounting 2006. In my opinion a welcome improvement and well worth the upgrade investment. Never underestimate the power of a great user interface.

I'll be picking up my new Accountants edition at a Intuit sponsored seminar on November 11, 2005. I can't wait to see it in action.

"Ken" wrote in news: snipped-for-privacy@g49g2000cwa.googlegroups.com:

Thanks for the feedback. I did see some comments on a user group that said the same...the template has been moved into the body on the software and inaccesable to users.

I also agree that Intuit is unresponsive to user needs. I've been getting alot of emails from MS about the SBA version and their interst in making it a better platform. It would be great to have better portability between Outlook, Acess, Word, and Excel. MS is probably the only one who will(can) do it.

Guatav

It is accessible to users when they send an e-mail as well as though "Send Forms Preferences". For the majority of QB users, this approach made it more accessible than having to edit a template.

I didn't realize grades were being given! I must have missed the announcement.

Nevertheless, a "D," while not perfect, is good enough, especially with pop quizzes and software !

And I would never accuse someone of "blowing steam out of his ass." Not only is that denigrating, I have no first-hand knowledge the OP even HAS an ass (unlike others of which I'm pretty sure (though, admittedly, not positive) ) !