QIF fiasco

I wonder if there's anyone who would want to summarize and regurgitate the current state of knowledge regarding the Quicken QIF fiasco. I realize I probably could do a search through the archives and find a lot of discussion, but at the same time I imagine the information will be splayed across hundreds if not thousands of posts, a lot of them burning with the heat of the moment. I'm looking for a post that synthesizes what people know about this as of today (and anyone who is tired of this topic can just ignore this thread). I joined this group about three days ago and see little on that topic in the current list of posts that my newsreader shows. (I realize "current" is a relative term depending on how you're reading the posts and how you have your reader set up.) I've used Quicken since probably version 2 for Windows (when Quicken was still making separate Windows and DOS versions and numbering them separately). I switched to Money four or five years ago when it came loaded on a new computer. I never really liked the way Money did things and when I decided it was finally time to upgrade my software, I went back to Quicken, with version 2005. That was a couple weeks ago. I was aware of the QIF controversy just a few days before I bought Q2005, so it's not like I didn't know what I was getting into. But using Q2005, I'm amazed at how much functionality I've lost in terms of online import of account data as compared to a four-year-old version of Money. I can no longer download my banking information since checking/savings QIF files are no longer allowed. And some credit card accounts are kind of clunky in the way they download QIF information compared to the version of Money I was using.

I guess what I'm looking to find out is whether the original furor over the QIF changes has forced Intuit to rethink this situation at all. I know QIFs are supposed to lose even more functionality in Q2006, but has Intuit shown any intention of backing off their plans and perhaps going back to QIF in future versions of Quicken? And the other side of the coin: Are FIs slowly and reluctantly moving toward adoption of the new OFX standard? I know Intuit has said QIF is an outdated standard. But it seems to me the new standard is worthless unless enough FIs adopt it. Anyone know if we're moving in that direction?

And one more question that maybe can't be answered in this forum: Since the version of Money I had was several years old, I have no idea how Microsoft has reacted to all this. Does anyone know if Money is going through the same process of trying to phase out QIFs?

Reply to
D Persica
Loading thread data ...

I believe that Intuit is going full speed ahead with its plan to eliminate .qif file usage. I will install Q2006 this weekend. I will know more then. How much grief will the QIF fiasco cause you? It depends upon how you use QIF files. In my case, none of my banks or brokerages use QIF files any more. So I'm OK for now. Your story might be different.

I am using both Microsoft Money and Quicken. Eventually, I will eliminate one of them. Each program has its own anti-consumer problems. With Quicken, you have the QIF fiasco, as you call it. With Money, you have Microsoft pushing its Passport and Yodlee systems.

So far, I am leaning towards Money, because Microsoft isn't pushing Passport and Yodlee too hard: a careful user can avoid them. With Quicken, there is no avoiding the QIF fiasco.

As you might guess, my suggestion is to do what I'm doing: run both programs in parallel for awhile, and then decide which one is less anti-consumer.

Each of these two programs is capable of importing (imperfectly) data files from the other. The restriction is that the current version of each program can only handle the data files of the previous version of the other. For example, Money 2005 can import data files from Quicken

2004, but not from Quicken 2005.

So your first chore would be to buy Microsoft Money, and import your Quicken data into it. Then you can upgrade Quicken to its latest version. The "data import" step is actually a lot of work, because the import process is not perfect.

Anyway, now you can run both Money and Quicken for at least one year. You wll be able to compare the faults of these two programs. You should also be following news about future versions of both programs, because both are anti-consumer. This is why you have to run both programs for a long time: it's not enough to compare the current versions. You have to try to guess how they will evolve.

Reply to
David Arnstein

Not true. I can't speak for Money's conversion capabilities, but Quicken can convert Money versions with the same version year (back to Q2003, I think). There may be a slight delay before Q2006 can convert M2006 but Intuit says it will, and Q2005 can convert M2005.

Reply to
John Pollard

My Fidelity investment info downloads fine using the Update feature in Quicken. My Chase banking account and two Chase credit cards work fine using the update feature as well. (None of these accounts were Chase originally, but after a series of mergers they all wound up as such.) My Chase checking was formerly Bank One, so I'm able to access all three Chase accounts via what used to be the Bank One website. I'd have to go back and check for sure, but I think that if I tried to access these Chase CC accounts using the original Chase website, I might run into some problems downloading stuff into Quicken. Anybody with Chase accounts able to back that up? I'm hoping that as Bank One's integration into Chase continues this does not become a problem for me.

For a Providian CC account, I have to download the QIF from the Providian account and then import it into Quicken. I cannot download it directly via Quicken. I think with Money, I could download the QIF from the website and Money would automatically open and ask me which account the QIF was for. That was a lot easier than how I have to do it with Quicken now.

I have a Sears MasterCard account which I think is handled through Citi. Under Money, I could access the QIF file the same way I did in the account above (the Providian one). Now it IS possible for me to get the info into Quicken, but it's such a complicated process, I won't try to describe it here.

I'm guessing that when (maybe years from now) I upgrade to whatever the current version of Quicken is then, the processes I described above will seem simple compared to whatever the then-current version will require.

I think I'll pass on that idea and live with an imperfect Quicken (and hope every FI in the whole world adopts OFX).

And, yes, I know I have too many credit cards.

Reply to
D Persica

So, the "QIF fiasco" doesn't affect you, but you plan to factor it into your choice of financial management software? That is not logical.

- Mike B

Reply to
Mike B

It is the trend that concerns me. Intuit is phasing out QIF files slowly, over a period of years. It is probable that in a year or two, it will be difficult to get data into our out of Quicken, except by means controlled by Intuit. Intuit has not provided a replacement for the .QIF files. .OFX files? As far as I can tell, Quicken does not accept or generate plain .OFX files. It deals in .QFX files, which are .OFX files with a specialization. This specialization requires a royalty payment to Intuit for use.

I believe that it is probable (though not certain) that Intuit will achieve "data lock" within a few years. And that is why I am running MS Money in parallel with Quicken.

Reply to
David Arnstein

formatting link

I'm a happy camper. The QIF fiasco was the straw that broke my back.

If I had stock in Intuit, I would sell it.

Stan

Reply to
Stan

I looked at moneydance (briefly) and it looked awfully rudimentary. is it not so? if it's medium sophisticated i could use it. what do you find are its advantages over M/Q?

Reply to
DietRite

The *only* advantages it has over MS Money and Quicken are

a) It runs on any platform that supports Java, Ie. it will run where neither Quicken nor Money will run,

b) it is not Quicken or Money, thus anyone who has a particular beef against both of those products (or their makers) ends up running Moneydance.

Reply to
Mike B

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.