Tell that to all the computer mfgrs that make Pro or Ultimate an upcharge add-on.
Got a tip for us?
Let us know
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
Intuit Releases Lion-Compatible Quicken 2007 for Mac
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
When I bought my iMac in 2010. I heard all the bad about Quicken for Mac and decided to do some digging. Tried Mint... not really a fan.
I ended up going with YNAB (You Need A Budget). It's awesome and getting better. The app works great and syncs not problem.
If your frustrated you can check it out, they offer a free trial.
I ended up going with YNAB (You Need A Budget). It's awesome and getting better. The app works great and syncs not problem.
If your frustrated you can check it out, they offer a free trial.
Can't tell from Intuit's pages whether this version runs on anything but Lion. My house has a mix of Snow Leopard and Lion, and Quicken 2006. Right now, the Lion Mac can't use Quicken, but I don't want to upgrade this and then have only that machine be able to run Quicken (or, worse, have to upgrade the other machines to Lion
bleh.)
I couldn't agree with this more. I wish I could say goodbye to Quicken... but much more so I wish I could say hello to a useful, fully functional version of Quicken for the Mac. I would pay the money for that. I'm probably in the minority here, but I keep very careful track of finances, and I need good software for this! I know there are alternatives, but in trials, none have correctly imported my >15 years of quicken data correctly. Also very few of them download directly from all my financial institutions which is a huge negative.
When Intuit dumped Quicken Essentials on us I wasn't thrilled (because of all the features it lacked), but I at least felt like this was a step in the right direction on a new, modern code base. And for the minimal features it did have, they seemed well implemented. I had hope that this was just the first release, and that many more features would come in annual updates. But here we are years later again and nothing new has even been announced, let alone shipped.
I just wish there was enough demand for financial management software that Apple would develop their own. It sure doesn't seem like Intuit wants to do it anymore.
And why would that be? Are you saying all Windows 7 PCs come with Ultimate?
Intuit is collecting crash data for people having problems with the new version:
Snow Leopard: http://quicken.intuit.com/support/help/SLN59486.html
Lion: http://quicken.intuit.com/support/help/SLN59495.html
Snow Leopard: http://quicken.intuit.com/support/help/SLN59486.html
Lion: http://quicken.intuit.com/support/help/SLN59495.html
I have been reading these complaints against Intuit and Quicken literally for decades now. This is a case of a very, very complicated software package being developed for an environment that the OS vendor itself forsakes to force future hardware updates. Note the comments about historical data, financial service firm connections, and critical features.
You cannot even run OS9 apps on Lion even though you could on Tiger, and I guess Leopard. Yes Rosetta was compiled for PowerPC, but why not recompile it for Intel or heck, even the A5?
I get the impression Apple made some custom Lion APIs for Intuit to duplicate the particular hooks they used in Rosetta for the Intel/Lion environment.
But based on past experience with Apple, this is likely to only last for about 2 hardware and software revision cycles.
Other vendors who wrote complicated programs on Apple on either OS7-9 or OX10.0-10.4 have not translated to IntelMac for the same reason. By the time they spend a year or two developing for a platform that is NOT pre-announced so they can have stuff at release, Apple has moved on yet again to a new world view that forsakes this again.
x86 and wintel is looking pretty good from this perspective, eh?
The iPad is proof this is happening again right now. There is legitimate talk there may be an EOL Powermac this cycle!
What I am impressed by is Intuit's commitment to make things work for their committed installed base "some way at all", despite the Apple rollercoaster, and doing so despite being a relatively small company and selling relatively low price point products.
Free advise from Rocketman to Intuit. Start a server side cloud based version right this second, and plan to go to that 100% on all platforms, yes, including for older hardware installs since they all have browsers.
Heck, even My Mac IIc pizzabox had a browser!
Rocketman
You cannot even run OS9 apps on Lion even though you could on Tiger, and I guess Leopard. Yes Rosetta was compiled for PowerPC, but why not recompile it for Intel or heck, even the A5?
I get the impression Apple made some custom Lion APIs for Intuit to duplicate the particular hooks they used in Rosetta for the Intel/Lion environment.
But based on past experience with Apple, this is likely to only last for about 2 hardware and software revision cycles.
Other vendors who wrote complicated programs on Apple on either OS7-9 or OX10.0-10.4 have not translated to IntelMac for the same reason. By the time they spend a year or two developing for a platform that is NOT pre-announced so they can have stuff at release, Apple has moved on yet again to a new world view that forsakes this again.
x86 and wintel is looking pretty good from this perspective, eh?
The iPad is proof this is happening again right now. There is legitimate talk there may be an EOL Powermac this cycle!
What I am impressed by is Intuit's commitment to make things work for their committed installed base "some way at all", despite the Apple rollercoaster, and doing so despite being a relatively small company and selling relatively low price point products.
Free advise from Rocketman to Intuit. Start a server side cloud based version right this second, and plan to go to that 100% on all platforms, yes, including for older hardware installs since they all have browsers.
Heck, even My Mac IIc pizzabox had a browser!
Rocketman
There were many vista machines that shipped with vista 64bit (excellent OS btw contrary to what people say). Ram was cheaper than ever then so many machines shipped with 6gb of ram and vista 64bit. Even cheap 500 dollar machines.
Last edited:
What a crock!!! Either support the Mac platform, or don't. But don't half*ss it.
I can't believe there is a Quicken for Mac user alive that would make excuses for Intuit. Frankly, it makes me suspect that you aren't one...
Uh, try to keep up, that's why they bought Mint.com...
I wouldn't say apple did it best either. Almost every intel mac other than core duos (cpu wasn't 64bit) can run fully 64bit windows with a 64bit kernel. The same cannot be said of mac os. I have had very few issues with any devices from 2003 on running 64bit windows.
I'm happy for now
quite a lot of bitching here
For me, i am happy they did it - i have used Quicken for a long time (never went to essentials crap)
started looking at alternatives - seeFinance is pretty good but not nearly as good for investment issues
I also hope (albeit unrealistic) that Quicken will devote some energy to further developing their mac -line of products
turbotax is excellent
quite a lot of bitching here
For me, i am happy they did it - i have used Quicken for a long time (never went to essentials crap)
started looking at alternatives - seeFinance is pretty good but not nearly as good for investment issues
I also hope (albeit unrealistic) that Quicken will devote some energy to further developing their mac -line of products
turbotax is excellent
I'll go back to a spreadsheet before putting over 20 years of financial data in the cloud.
This is a valid point. If your data resides on your device and the processing occured in the cloud, this may be sufficient since individual packets or streams would not have enough content to develop a picture of your confidential information.
Do what I did during a period of intolerable BS. Use an accountant, CPA, or gag, H&R Block. It worked. It was more labor intensive.
There are several programs that I run that force me to keep an older Mac running. Needing to use two different hardware installs to deal with life on my terms is not Apple like, and is evidence even Apple is not Apple like.
Rocketman
64-bit did not begin to outsell 32-bit until after the release of Windows 7. Also since XP was, until recently, the most popular version of Windows in use, this also slowed the adoption rate of 64-bit versions of Windows.
The compatibility break with drivers was part of the reason that Vista was received so poorly. As you point out, there were machines that shipped with Vista 64-bit, but many of them were downgraded to XP, and few users manually upgraded to 64-bit. Lack of an "upgrade" install option also hurt (migration from 32-bit to 64-bit requires a clean install).
----------
With Apple's upgrade path, users could run 64-bit applications that could access more than 3.25GB of RAM, even if they were running a 32-bit kernel. Windows could not run a 64-bit application layer on top of a 32-bit kernel (though a 32-bit application layer can run on top of a 64-bit kernel).
The practical consideration is that with Snow Leopard and even Lion, users could still run devices that shipped with 32-bit drivers. By contrast, unless drivers were updated to 64-bit, they wouldn't run on 64-bit versions of Windows. This created a lot of frustration, and was a big reason why Vista was so poorly received (many users who had no idea what a kernel is and why 32-bit vs. 64-bit matters just knew that when they installed Vista their old hardware stopped working).
There are several programs that I run that force me to keep an older Mac running. Needing to use two different hardware installs to deal with life on my terms is not Apple like, and is evidence even Apple is not Apple like.
Precisely. Somebody gets it. Apple used to go out of their way to make hardware and OS transitions as easy, seamless and painless for users as possible. A long time Mac user used to able to brag about it. No more -- that policy apparently went straight out the window with Lion. Apple obsoleted apps like Quicken that could not be replaced. It doesn't matter that Inuit is a slug and we have good reason to hate them. We really don't have a choice. Apple should have understood that better. Maybe they did, but didn't care. Now that's a painful thought.
Add to this the closely related MobileMe to iCloud debacle, and suddenly Mac veterans don't feel so loved by Apple anymore.
This point doesn't count as at the same time apple was switching from ppc to intel, so all those old powerpc drivers also no longer function meaning apple had to start from scratch with drivers as well. More printers work with 64bit vista/7 than work with mac os lion. I've had some pretty obscure printers work with windows 7 64bit, yet I could not get them to work with Lion.
It works for me
I understand why people are upset with Quicken, I sure am myself, but in all fairness I have to say that the upgrade works for me.
I have been using Quicken 2006 for Mac, since....well, 2006. I had to partition my iMac when Lion came out so that I could continue to run Quicken in Snow Leopard.
Last night I downloaded the program, tested it first on the Lion partition and it worked fine, so I upgraded the other partition to Lion and it works!
It looks exactly the same, so in affect I have managed to upgrade to Quicken 2007 for only $15. Good for me.
I understand why people are upset with Quicken, I sure am myself, but in all fairness I have to say that the upgrade works for me.
I have been using Quicken 2006 for Mac, since....well, 2006. I had to partition my iMac when Lion came out so that I could continue to run Quicken in Snow Leopard.
Last night I downloaded the program, tested it first on the Lion partition and it worked fine, so I upgraded the other partition to Lion and it works!
It looks exactly the same, so in affect I have managed to upgrade to Quicken 2007 for only $15. Good for me.
Ha Ha - when you buy it, the product you purchase is actually called:
"Quicken Mac Lion 2007 DOWNLOAD for Windows"!!
Anyway, it opened my Quicken Mac 2005 file just fine on Snow Leopard.
Hopefully, they'll sort out the Lion issues soon so I can finally upgrade my 7 year old office computer.
"Quicken Mac Lion 2007 DOWNLOAD for Windows"!!
Anyway, it opened my Quicken Mac 2005 file just fine on Snow Leopard.
Hopefully, they'll sort out the Lion issues soon so I can finally upgrade my 7 year old office computer.
When I buy a new Mac, I get the full version straight out of the box. Many Windows PCs come with neutered versions of Windows 7 that require a paid upgrade to add features such as XP Mode or BitLocker. Therefore, XP Mode is not "free" for the vast majority of PC owners.
But thanks for pointing out that Mac OS > Windows 7.
Do you mean to say that Win7 and Apple OSX are equal, or did you mean to say something else? (I'll assume the former - both Win7 and Apple OSX are nice desktop operating systems.)
But, since the majority of Windows users (including Apple users who run Windows under VMware or that other product) don't need "XP Mode" and would only injure themselves if they tried Bitlocker - this is mostly irrelevant. In particular, running "XP Mode" or Bitlocker on a virtualized instance of Windows running on an Apple borders on the absurd.
And note, of course, that "XP Mode" is just "Virtual PC" - which is free - plus some handy shortcuts. You don't need Ultimate (or Professional) to run XP virtual machines on Win7.
That's a "point of view" call, and many don't share that point of view.