Tim
Sat Feb 21 01:36:31 CST 2004
Those of you looking for news on the Money 2002 problem, move along,
this is just a long-winded response to a MVP.
Ahhh, Dick. You should wait awhile before hitting that send button.
Your reaction to my post is rather inflammatory. And you're too much
the literalist. No, you didn't specifically apologize for microsoft,
nor did you write the phrase "stupid user". But you all but did both -
"With proper file management practices that have nothing to do with
Money and everything to do with *knowing how to use your computer*".
Yes, its a given that there is a backup file, money does this
automatically. By default, users are absolved of this responsibility,
as the program does it for them. But more importantly, can't you sense
the uncertainty we have with the proposed "solution"? What does money
do when I reinstall? Can you guarantee me all my financial data will be
intact? No, I didn't think so. Hence the frustration with Microsoft
not even publicly acknowledging the problem.
Major error #1 (perception): You didn't say anything about the
"reasonableness to be able to use a $20 program". That was me. In fact
I said there was an expectation to be able to use the program. At
least, I don't recall the EULA stating that I should expect to be
treated like a red-headed stepchild after 2 years. I mean, at least
send out an end-of-life notice to users. That would seem easy enough
with the way they killed all our money 2002 programs remotely...
Major error #2 (assumption): I spent significantly more than $20. Boy,
do I feel like a dope.
Major error #3 (fails reasonable test): "your explicit election to
update the program from the internet". That rather goes against all
advice I've ever seen or heard about updating. I mean, doesn't
microsoft strongly urge us to update for security and reliability?
Major error #4 (assumption): "venting in this newsgroup is NO WAY to
reach redmond". Cal Learner wrote on 2/19/2004 "No, but I sometimes
talk to some people who work at Microsoft" in response to the question
"Cal do you work for MS?". Seems there is at least a slim hope of our
frustration getting back to microsoft without all of us coughing up $35.
Since you seemed to miss them in my previous post, here is a summary of
my major points:
1. Owing to the sensitive nature of the data, the proposed work around,
i.e. uninstall/reinstall is unacceptable.
2. License holders have a reasonable expectation for support from
microsoft, regardless of the cost of the license. Again, my assertion,
not yours.
Lastly, how does my allowing them to steal $35 hurt them?
Tim
> Where did I apologize for Microsoft? Where did I say anything about stupid
> users? Whatever does Money's marketing as "easy to use" have to do with
> absolving users of responsibility for things like having backups and knowing
> what files their data is stored in? Where did I say anything about the
> reasonableness of your expectation to be able to use a $20 (or significantly
> less) program forevermore with "the most important data on your computer"
> without any possibility of outage caused by Microsoft-induced problems
> showing up owing to your explicit election to update the program from the
> Internet?
>
> My only point was and is that "venting" in this newsgroup is NO WAY to
> "reach Redmond." You want to reach Redmond? Open a $upport Ca$e directly
> with them. Hit them where it hurt$ them.
>
> "Tim Simonds" <nomail@invalid.invalid> wrote in message
> news:5fCZb.57806$1S1.33762@nwrddc01.gnilink.net...
>
>>So, one of the major selling points of this program is its ease of use.
>> And now you want to badger people for being "stupid users"? What
>>about the expectation that, having purchased a license to use this
>>program, that I should be able to do so indefinitely?
>>
>>Maybe what my fellow suffering users are trying to say about the
>>uninstall/reinstall suggestion is - UNACCEPTABLE! This could be the
>>most important data I have on my computer, and I don't feel comfortable
>>playing with a work-around. I *need* a real solution. Until microsoft
>>comes up with one, or at least admits to the problem, your damn right
>>I'm going to vent, to any and all places I can. Seems the only shot I
>>have at reaching redmond, short of donating $35 to bill.
>>
>>Don't be a microsoft apologist.
>>
>>Tim
>>
>>Dick Watson wrote:
>>
>>>If people need to vent, let them go to the bathroom to do so. We are
>
> just
>
>>>fellow users who really don't need to hear it.
>>>
>>>Your Money data is in a data file. With proper file management practices
>>>that have nothing to do with Money and everything to do with knowing how
>
> to
>
>>>use your computer, there is no more risk to this file from doing
>
> anything
>
>>>than there is to your Word or Notepad files. Coming here to ask this is
>
> like
>
>>>showing up on rec.aviation.piloting and asking how to fly. While it's
>>>relevant to the subject of the newsgroup, it's also probably beyond the
>>>scope of the newsgroup. Expecting another news poster to replay to
>
> private
>
>>>email or being miffed that they don't is just bad etiquette.
>>>
>>>Microsoft acknowledges very few problems. It's their nature (an the
>
> nature
>
>>>of most other entities that sell things in the marketplace). Rest
>
> assured
>
>>>that if you keep reading the newsgroup this will get discussed.
>>>
>>>"Chris Peele" <anonymous@discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
>>>news:13c9e01c3f7e0$51be5930$a001280a@phx.gbl...
>>>
>>>
>>>>Lay off. The original post was right, even is MS isn't
>>>>here. People getting screwed need to vent. Cal Learner's
>>>>suggestion, as I understand it, was to simply reinstall
>>>>thw whole program and wait for a good update from MS.
>>>>Even though I have posted and even emailed Cal Learner, no
>>>>one on this board has confirmed/explained to me whether
>>>>this "solution" will cause a MOney 2002 user to lose all
>>>>data. I suspect it will, but will gladly try it if
>>>>someone can explain to me how the data will remain.
>>>>
>>>>Second, Cal Learner's response includes the caveat
>>>>of "don't update" until MS fixes the problem with a new
>>>>update. It is going to be kinda tough to know when the
>>>>update is out that fixes the problem is available without
>>>>MS acknowledging the problem.
>
>
>