New Laptop - which flavour of Windows? (and other issues)
in [Laptops]
|
From: tony sayer on 13 Mar 2010 18:10 >for example Word 2003 will install and run ok on Win7, but will pop up >the license acceptance agreement for the user to OK every time it runs. >This seems to be a failure to record the users acceptance, due to write >permissions. However it does not generate a UAC popup when it attempts >to save the users answer. Or use the latest version of Open Office;))... -- Tony Sayer
From: John Doue on 13 Mar 2010 18:22 On 3/13/2010 5:59 PM, Roger Mills wrote: snip > >> As long as you are happy with Quicken 98, keep it. Still, I suggest >> you *try*, preferably on a different machine, a more recent version to >> explore its features. You might find some of them interesting. >> Personally, I am using the 2007 version. I tried all the more recent >> versions but sticked with 2007 which I find to be more balanced in >> terms of features and clarity. >> > > Can you get 'evaluation' copies without having to part with hard cash? Not that I know ... > >> Remember, once your data has been converted to a more recent version >> format, there is no going back. If you decide to go back, you have to >> use a backup of the data files, all operations entered with the more >> recent version will be lost. >> > If I *did* change, I'd do it at year-end and start afresh for the new year > rather than importing all the old data. Your decision. But the day you need some information about past years, you will have to do this import. > >> And before you adopt a newer version, make sure you can print checks >> the way you use too. That can be tricky. > > I don't do that, anyway. With on-line banking and credit card purchases, I > only write a handful of cheques each year, and am quite happy to continue to > do that manually. Sure, check writing is fast becoming a thing of the past. In some European countries (Finland for instance), checks simply are not used at all, all transactions being made online, with instant transfers between banks. People who do not have a computer, or feel uncomfortable using them, can use terminals installed in shops and banks. It is even possible - I frequently do it - to almost instantly tranfer funds from one EU country to another EU country, at no cost. In Florida, I still occasionally print checks for creditors who, for one reason or another, do not accept bank transfers. And I find that printing them comes in handy, although it probably is now more trouble than anything else for the solitary check! -- John Doue
From: Barry Watzman on 14 Mar 2010 11:09 What you guys are missing about using Quicken 98 is that at some point you may want to, or may NEED to, upgrade to a later version (for example if Quicken 98 does not work (at all) on a computer running some much later operating system (including, possibly, a future OS). The problem is that you CAN NOT upgrade from Quicken 98 to Quicken 2010 (or even, I think, to many earlier versions of Quicken). The upgrade/import functions of Quicken don't recognize VERY old Quicken file formats. They usually only go back about 2 previous versions. In my case, I ended up upgrading from Quicken 98 to Quicken 2000 to Quicken 2003 to Quicken 2006 to Quicken 2010. (It might have been possible to have done it in fewer steps, but at least two steps would be the minimum required). The point is, you probably don't have all those intermediate versions, and finding them becomes increasingly difficult as time passes. Which means that you are creating a situation in which, someday, you may find that you have screwed yourself. John Doue wrote: > On 3/13/2010 11:15 AM, Roger Mills wrote: >> In an earlier contribution to this discussion, Barry Watzman >> <WatzmanNOSPAM(a)neo.rr.com> wrote: >>> Re: "But why? My attitude is "if it ain't broke, don't fix it"!" >>> >>> Because it is broken, only the cracks are not on the surface. >>> >>> There is NO support by Intuit for anything over about 3 years old. >>> There are security issues. And once you get more than about 6 years >>> old, you may not be ABLE to migrate from the old version to a current >>> version. >> >> Sorry, you've lost me! >> >> I've used Quicken 98 for 12 years or so to do the accounts for my own >> family >> and for two voluntary organisations with which I am associated without >> requiring any support from Intuit. So why should I need any *now*? >> >> *What* security issues? My use of it never goes anywhere near the >> internet! > > I assume Barry refers to downloading data from banks over the Internet > through Intuit services. Which does not affect you (nor me, I never use > this service eventhough my version is recent). > > As long as you are happy with Quicken 98, keep it. Still, I suggest you > *try*, preferably on a different machine, a more recent version to > explore its features. You might find some of them interesting. > Personally, I am using the 2007 version. I tried all the more recent > versions but sticked with 2007 which I find to be more balanced in terms > of features and clarity. > > Remember, once your data has been converted to a more recent version > format, there is no going back. If you decide to go back, you have to > use a backup of the data files, all operations entered with the more > recent version will be lost. > > And before you adopt a newer version, make sure you can print checks the > way you use too. That can be tricky. >
From: Roger Mills on 14 Mar 2010 13:07 In an earlier contribution to this discussion, Barry Watzman <WatzmanNOSPAM(a)neo.rr.com> wrote: > What you guys are missing about using Quicken 98 is that at some point > you may want to, or may NEED to, upgrade to a later version (for > example if Quicken 98 does not work (at all) on a computer running > some much later operating system (including, possibly, a future OS). > > The problem is that you CAN NOT upgrade from Quicken 98 to Quicken > 2010 (or even, I think, to many earlier versions of Quicken). The > upgrade/import functions of Quicken don't recognize VERY old Quicken > file formats. They usually only go back about 2 previous versions. > [I wish you wouldn't top-post!] To answer your point, it depends on what you mean by "upgrade". If you mean making your historic data available in the new version, I'm sure you're right. However, if this is not an issue, you can switch to whatever version you like - or to a different product - in one go. In my case, access to historic data is a 'nice to have' - and I occasionally look back at the odd figure from a past year - but if I had to start from scratch at the beginning of a new year, it would not be a disaster. Meanwhile, I want to keep the version that I know and love going as long as I possibly can. -- Cheers, Roger _______ Please reply to Newsgroup. Whilst email address is valid, it is seldom checked.
From: John Doue on 14 Mar 2010 18:25
On 3/14/2010 11:09 AM, Barry Watzman wrote: > What you guys are missing about using Quicken 98 is that at some point > you may want to, or may NEED to, upgrade to a later version (for example > if Quicken 98 does not work (at all) on a computer running some much > later operating system (including, possibly, a future OS). > > The problem is that you CAN NOT upgrade from Quicken 98 to Quicken 2010 > (or even, I think, to many earlier versions of Quicken). The > upgrade/import functions of Quicken don't recognize VERY old Quicken > file formats. They usually only go back about 2 previous versions. > > In my case, I ended up upgrading from Quicken 98 to Quicken 2000 to > Quicken 2003 to Quicken 2006 to Quicken 2010. (It might have been > possible to have done it in fewer steps, but at least two steps would be > the minimum required). > > The point is, you probably don't have all those intermediate versions, > and finding them becomes increasingly difficult as time passes. Which > means that you are creating a situation in which, someday, you may find > that you have screwed yourself. > > > John Doue wrote: >> On 3/13/2010 11:15 AM, Roger Mills wrote: >>> In an earlier contribution to this discussion, Barry Watzman >>> <WatzmanNOSPAM(a)neo.rr.com> wrote: >>>> Re: "But why? My attitude is "if it ain't broke, don't fix it"!" >>>> >>>> Because it is broken, only the cracks are not on the surface. >>>> >>>> There is NO support by Intuit for anything over about 3 years old. >>>> There are security issues. And once you get more than about 6 years >>>> old, you may not be ABLE to migrate from the old version to a current >>>> version. >>> >>> Sorry, you've lost me! >>> >>> I've used Quicken 98 for 12 years or so to do the accounts for my own >>> family >>> and for two voluntary organisations with which I am associated without >>> requiring any support from Intuit. So why should I need any *now*? >>> >>> *What* security issues? My use of it never goes anywhere near the >>> internet! >> >> I assume Barry refers to downloading data from banks over the Internet >> through Intuit services. Which does not affect you (nor me, I never >> use this service eventhough my version is recent). >> >> As long as you are happy with Quicken 98, keep it. Still, I suggest >> you *try*, preferably on a different machine, a more recent version to >> explore its features. You might find some of them interesting. >> Personally, I am using the 2007 version. I tried all the more recent >> versions but sticked with 2007 which I find to be more balanced in >> terms of features and clarity. >> >> Remember, once your data has been converted to a more recent version >> format, there is no going back. If you decide to go back, you have to >> use a backup of the data files, all operations entered with the more >> recent version will be lost. >> >> And before you adopt a newer version, make sure you can print checks >> the way you use too. That can be tricky. >> Barry, I am not missing anything. I exactly know what you mean. But this is *not* a security issue, and the OP raised the question of what security issue you were referring to. Still waiting for your answer on this one. Of course, if you were implying it might become difficult to locate an older version able to upgrade the data to an intermediate level, then you might have a point, but you did not make this clear. Personally, the oldest version I have kept in 2006. I use 2007. If you carefully read the thread, the OP answered this concern by saying he would move to a newer version by creating a new set of data at the beginning of a given year (the way I understand him). I am not saying I would proceed this way (since accessing the older data would require keeping version 98 available, which might not run on a newer system), but it is his privilege. May be the OP has no real need to keep the old data accessible ... or may be, he does not consider ever needing to move to a machine with, say, W7 ... Bottom line, I do think you are right to advise him to move to a newer version (not necessarily the newest) but he is in a better position to appreciate his needs. -- John Doue |