My accountant informed me that we need to upgrade before the year end so he can work with our info (he isn't using 2003 any longer?). We decided on
2006, but after reading this NG it seems that there are some reservations about 2006. Other than backing up the company data, is there any other issues we should be aware of before installing 2006? Or should we shelve 2006 for awhile? All comments are greatly appreciated.
As most know I follow this newsgroup closely. The only posts I have seen here concerning problems with 2006 refer to what others are saying on other newsgroups. I do not recall any first hand accounts on this newsgroup of any major difficulty.
I have gone on record as saying that due to the large number of QB users in the world it is safe to say that more QB users died last week than had problems converting to version 2006.
Also before anyone flames your accountant, I will also go on record in saying that I support your accountant's decision in requesting that you move up to version 2006.
The accountant can keep his 2003 on his machine for as long as he wants and still move up for his own use. We keep several versions on the machines here to offer clients service on their versions. You might ask him what's up his request for you to update because he wants to!
With any new software release and especially a major rewrite there may be the possibility of problems at launch and seems like this may be the case. So why not just use what you have until things get straightened out?
Scott@DRS wrote:
If an accountant has to service clients using different versions of QB the end result is always a loss in productivity. It is very common that staff will work on several cleint files during the day. If each client uses a different version then it becomes quite disorintating flipping from one version to the next. There has to be some point in time where a particular version is no longer supported by the accounting firm.
Can you imagine how difficult it would be for larger firms to maintain versions 1999, 2000, 2001, 2002, 2003, 2004, 2005 and 2006 on hundreds of workstations? Who do you think pays for this?
To Allen "I never met a QB I didn't like" Martin,
Let's do the math here.
The US Mortality rate accourding to the CDC
I has been a month since QB's launch.
In one month's time, that would be 70.60 per 100,000.
Let's make the overly generous assumption that 500,000 people tried to upgrade this month.
That would predict that 353 of them would have died, or roughly 11 per day.
In that month, the number of users calling and jamming the Indian tech support lines has lead to 3+ hour wait times.
Would 11 people per day jam the support lines?
Why would Intuit be giving refunds for failed conversions if there were only
11 a day ?Why are you failing to reassure anyone with your unwavering (undying ?) support of QB2006 ?
;)
*Watt
Redo the math. I said more QB users died ..... not QB users that also upgraded.
Because they are a great company. They stand by their promise of full refunds. Their refund policy is not based on any particular reason. A user can get a full refund if they don't like how the inside of the retail box smells.
Failure to read the manuals to discover the required changes for setting up multi-user for version 2006 does not constitute a problem with QB.
"Allan Martin" Intuit must pay you to promote Quickbooks and their policies. There's nothing wrong with that, (you should just admit it)
I don't think they're paying for this kind of nonsensical drivel by an admitted cheerleader. He just came in close contact with a couple of managerial drones who gave him an impression of imaginary self-importance and he's trying to return the favor with moronic propaganda on Usenet.
///
If you have any employees and use the QB payroll program (whatever it's called these days), you must upgrade from QB2003 to a newer version before your current payroll subscription runs out.
If that's the case in your situation, your accountant may be thinking you have to upgrade before the end of this year because that's what Intuit used to say. Now apparently the way it works is that your QB2003 with a payroll subscription must be upgraded to QB2006 before the end-date on your current payroll subscription.
That's what we have to do because we are now using QB2003 with payroll.
I am usually no fan of Intuit/QuickBooks because I've seen them do all kinds of slippery sneaky tricks in the past. But I think they found God or something this year. They put out QB2006 and everyone can just plain flat out buy it -- no nonsense about upgrade rebates, etc. As far as I can tell, for what used to be the "upgrade" price, you get the full version of QB2006 (there is only one version -- the full version). To me, that means you can still use QB2003 (without the payroll subscription), and you can put the QB2006 on whichever computer you choose without having to have a prior QB version already on that computer.
I used to whine (and rightfully so, I might add) about QB putting out their next year's version so close to the end of the year, and then beating everyone into switching over right away or before February 15 at the latest. Now you can buy the full version of QB2006 right off the shelf of any store for about $179 or less with no rebate nonsense. And, since our payroll subscription doesn't run out until some time in March, we have plenty of time before we have to buy QB2006. By then, any big glitches will already be worked out, I'm sure.
I would say, buy QB2006 now, install it and see if it works okay (which it probably will), then wait a while before actually switching over to QB2006 so any problems and kinks can get worked out.
The OP's accountant probably receives their QB file makes adjustments and then returns the file. The accountant , and I can't blame him/her does not want to work with an outdated version of QB. Maybe suporting 2004, 2005 and
2006 is their limit. Out with the old in with the new.
You are speading untrue rumors once again. I never met anyone from Intuit management. I did meet Mr. T and he says "I pity the fool that does not upgrade to version 2006".
I would tend to disagree Allen, it's not really a big deal to use the appropriate version of QB to work on a client file. Doesn't confuse my staff.
Allan Mart>
So having versions 1999, 2000, 2001, 2002, 2003, 2004, 2005, and 2006 on each workstation is not a problem? What about interim patches that the client or you may not have installed that make the files incompatible even though they are running on the same yearly version? What if you are young and find yourself having to supply the following versions on each workstation some day:
1999, 2000, 2001, 2002, 2003, 2004, 2005, 2006, 2007, 2008, 2009, 2010, 2011, 2011, 2012, 2013, 2014, 2015, 2016, 2017, 2018, 2019, 2020, 2019, 2020, 2021, 2022, 2023, 2024, 2024, 2025, 2026, 2027, 2028, 2029, 2030, 2031, 2032, 2033, 2034, 2035, 2036, 2037, 2038, 2039, 2040, 2041, 2042, 2043, 2044,2045, 2046, 2047, 2048 .........What will happen when the current operating system no longer supports older versions. Will you maintain dedicated workstations just for theses older versions?
It is no big deal? How the hell can anyone remember which version has a particular feature and how to get at it.
My point is an accounting firm just like Intuit must set reasonable limits. There must come a time where a particular version is sunset.
Still disagree with your thinking, client service is first and if they have 2002 and want to use it I don't believe it's up to me to demand he buy 2006 or I'll not serve him!
We have at this time 2002 - 2005 on the system. Since anything beyond that is not relavent at this time your point is not logical.
Who cares what the features are if you doing client accounting?
You certainly can mandate to you clients, but here they'll just go elsewhere.
Allan Mart>>I would tend to disagree Allen, it's not really a big deal to use the
What about versions prior to 2002? What about 2006? Your point that it is no big deal. My point is that it is a big deal especially if you need all prior versions installed on hundreds of workstations. It is when your installs are not patched the same as your clients.
Post back here in 5 years from now and tell me how you are still swaping version 2002 files around.
Agreed, but these clients must realize that they have to pay extra for the firm to maintain compatible systems.
We don't have hundreds of workstations and if we did we'd not be servicing Quickbooks users probably.
Allan Mart>>Still disagree with your thinking, client service is first and if they
Larger firms still service clients using QB.
As a bookkeeper whose clients use different versions I strongly disagree. Its more productive for me to be able to have several client files open at the same time, because they're in different versions, than to stop what I'm doing in one client file to open another client's file to check something or give the client some needed piece of info. I wish all my clients were on different versions.
I don't see this unless the staff aren't terribly familiar with QB to begin with. The changes from one version to the next, with the exclusion of 2006, are so minor that I can't seem them causing disorientation. Everything is still where it was before, the interface is the same, the mechanics are the same, there may just be some different keystrokes involved. Unless the staff is doing data entry on things like Bill Entry I can't even see the keystroke differences becoming an issue.
If you can't see any difference in QB versions 1999 through 2006 then you just ain't looking.
Allen,
Our accountants have never even hinted that they wanted an upgrade.
Many years ago we used Quicken, and they never asked us to upgrade that either.
We have used various packages since....Peachtree, and Cyma. The accountants liked Cyma best, since they were the ones selling it. It was also the single most crappy piece of software I have ever used. (They were new to Windows at the time....hopefully they have matured since then.)
We aren't afraid of changing software if it's in our best interest.
We are also not afraid of staying with the same software if it's in our best interest.
Our accountants respect that.
He who pays the piper calls the tune.
*Watt
BeanSmart website is not affiliated with any of the manufacturers or service providers discussed here. All logos and trade names are the property of their respective owners.