QB2007 - Wait until upgrade?

I have it but haven't installed it yet. Why not just install it (not upgrade 2006) so you can play with it for a while before switching from

2006?

-- Tara

I was hoping somebody else in the ng had had time to beta test ;0

I'll be testing it when QB2008 is released! :¬)

I haven't worked any files in it yet but did install and upgrade a few file copies.

The first thing I found out is that a file can only be hosted on a computer that has a copy of Quickbooks 2007 with the Database Server installed. I had to pull up the DB Server, select the folder my company files reside in then tell it to scan for all the company files in that folder so that I could access them from other machines.

If you use more than one computer, even if you just store files on one but don't actually work on it, install QB 2007 with Quickbooks Database Server on each machine (its one of three options in the installation menu).

For some reason my installations wouldn't work if I selected to have the installer check for updates prior to completing the install. I had disabled my firewall and AV so there was no reason for the connection to fail. I ended up just selecting "no" to that question and the install went well.

QB' Database Server wants to always listen for connections so make sure you have a good firewall/security system setup if you're going to use the DB Server.

Adding the Google Search Bar to QB is an option in the installation but I didn't want it. Regardless of QB's declaration that they've customized it to where your data is secure I just don't feel the need to put it to the test. I'll stick to the good old Find tool.

The interface appears to be the same. I don't use the "Home" or iconish centers as I'm a text-list junkie.

The menus are in the same places.

Payroll has changed. There's a new feature (and I don't know if it can be turned off at the moment) called scheduled payroll where QB wants you to setup a schedule so it can remind you that you have to run your payroll (as if most of us would forget that).

There are more screens which means more clicking...which I don't like...but there's a feature that allows you to just input hours in the window that lists the employees to be paid. This keeps you from having to go into separate windows per employee to input hours. I see room for errors with the new & easier way but that's just my initial impression.

-- Tara

Oops, forgot to say that the version I installed was Premier Accountant. The file size jumped 5mb.

-- Tara

What, no mention of the all new accountants' copy feature? This one breakthrough advance for many is worth the upgrade. How about the new way the program automacally fills in general ledger accounts. This feature also makes the upgrade worth while. Why wouldn't you expect the file size to increase. Added functionality often requires a little more wiggle room.

As I said, I haven't had an opportunity to actually work with the version yet, just peek around inside a few test-upgraded company files.

Which breakthrough advances in the Acct's copy are you speaking of? The importation of accountant's changes with notes, better detail in audit trail?

As for the autofill of GL accounts with vendor's I haven't used it. How is this different from auto-recalling the last transaction for that vendor? I selected to keep that preference since most of the vendors in the company file I upgraded have Items assigned to their bills.

Since you've used the features enough to say they're worth the upgrade then why not elaborate on them?

-- Tara

The new features are so well documented that it seems a waste of my time but here goes.

The accountant's copy feature is now on steriods. Prior to 2007 the accountant was quite limited in what he/she could actually do with the file. Now major modifications can be made (not just journal entries) and have it all sync back to the client all the while notifiying the client exactly what changes were made and asking for their approval to make the changes.

Auto-recalling the last transaction sometimes leads to posting to the wrong account over and over again. There are situations where an odd transaction requires a change in the account that usually gets posted to. Prior versions remembered this odd coding and recalled it for the next transaction. Many end users just except this new coding and contiue to use it. Version 2007 is intelligent enough to avoid this common error.

Don't get me started on the upgraded financial statement designer. I love it. My biggest complait about the module has been answered. Now when the chart of accounts has been modified the financial statement designer tells the user that the statement you want to print does not refect the change and can help you rectify the problem.

Let me correct myself. I just noticed that it is not working the way I thought it would work. If you consistently code a vendor to rent and then happen to code it to repairs and maintenance for one transaction the program stops entering a general ledger code. Not very intelligent.

L,

We have been using Quicken & later Quickbooks for about 15 years.

In that time, I have learned to NOT upgrade until around February, when they have all the bugs worked out.

Generally several facts are true year to year:

1) QB upgrades are incremental and not really that necessary. 2) QB versions are rushed out incomplete and buggy. 3) The bugs don't get fixed until the R3 or R4 patches come out, usually in the February time frame. 4) Upgrading early is more pain than it is worth. Let someone else be the pioneer. 5) Upgrades are disruptive. Changing how you perform a process, not necessarily for the better, costs you money.

We upgraded from QB 2003 to QB 2006 earlier this year. It was an improvement, but not a BIG improvement. I'm glad I didn't spend money on QB

2004 and QB 2005.

The odds on us upgrading from QB2006 to QB 2007 are really slim. Upgrading today would really be pretty stupid.

*Watt