May 2, 2005 at 5:46 pm #11365
How about NV2 users posting here on NV1 forum your coments, observations and feedback on NV2 for the benefit of us NV1 diehards. It would be interesting to see what you guys have to say.May 2, 2005 at 6:49 pm #12785
I would agree but I think QW Page would allow NV1 users to have at least a read only access to the NV2 forum.
I cannot imagine what Phil Quackenbush thinks his organization has to gain by not allowing such access.
After all, are we not one big happy NewViews family?
Most of us would like to think so.May 3, 2005 at 10:51 am #12786MSchapplerModerator
NV2 is an open forum for registered users of NV2, the Windows version of NewViews.May 3, 2005 at 1:00 pm #12787DTuplingParticipant
You want comments?
NV2 is one of the most confusing programs I have seen. I have been using Nv1 for about 15 years and am familiar with Simply Accounting, Quickbooks and Business Visions.
I have not had time to fully explore NV2’s capabilities but first impression is that it’s a user’s nightmare written by programmers who have no idea what “user friendly means”.
Even if I thought it was wonderful, the licence agreement will chase many people away in my opinion.
I will give it a try over the summer but am not optimistic. Too bad after waiting sooooooo many years for this.
I have not registered yet and agree that read-only acces to the NV2 database would be good.May 3, 2005 at 3:53 pm #12788
To MSchappler: You have said that twice now, ie, NV2 is an open forum for registered users of NV2.
What we have suggested is that the NV2 formum be opened as read only to NV1 users.
What is the problem with that?
What is QW Page fearful of by opening the NV2 forum for read only to NV1 users?
What does QW Page have to gain by not opening it as read only to your other registered users?May 3, 2005 at 4:44 pm #12789
NV2 is now facing EXACTLY the same reaction NV1 prompted. NV1 was, and still is, a complete departure from the norm. It offered a different way to organize and manage accounting data. Some people took to it immediately, but most took some time to get used to it. The users that did stick with it soon experienced a few key “ah ha” moments when everything came into place.
NV2 is very different, at first glance, but NV1 users should quickly recognize their own converted books and come over the initial hump. The biggest source of confusion seems to be NV2’s separation of accounts and reports. In NV1 all accounts were on a report, and nowhere else. In NV2, all accounts are typed (e.g. BANK, AR, AP, etc.) and can appear in two places – on a report just as in NV1, and in a folder of all accounts of a particular type. If you convert a set of books and go to the NV2 report folder, you will find all of your NV1 reports (exact duplicates). From the reports down, the converted NV2 books are identical to the original NV1 books.
Let’s examine the reason for separating accounts from reports. NV1 had an internal file of all accounts in the books, and these accounts could only be seen on reports. NV1 accounts used the notes views to store additional information in an ad hoc way. This additional information allowed NV1 procedures to process accounting activity with some intelligence (e.g. calculating sales taxes for invoices).
NV2 has exposed this internal file as folders of different types of accounts. This allowed us to take the ad hoc information off the notes view and build intelligence directly into the accounts. NV2 transactions are processed automatically, without the need to run procedures. We feel this is a clear benefit, and something new NV2 users get used to very quickly.
Another potential source of confusion is the presence of journals in NV2. In NV1 the only way to manage a “journal” was to add an account and use it as a journal (i.e. post to accounts in the books of final entry, bringing the journal account balance back to zero for every transaction). Talk about confusing! Many people in the accounting profession never accepted this, so journals were included in NV2. You can enter transactions in journals, specifying the accounts to post to, or you can enter transactions to accounts (just like in NV1), and select the journal to record the transaction in. We now have the best of both worlds.
As for the original license agreement, it has been replaced with a new, far less restrictive version. The requirement to register the program annually has been removed, and the requirement to register databases has also been removed. The only restriction remaining is the requirement to register/activate once at the time of initial purchase. Please download and install service pack 1, no re-registration is required.
A point to note about the NV2 license agreement… We like to think we have the right to be paid for our product, and now, even with a greatly relaxed registration/activation, we have some assurance that we will be paid. For the past 20 years we have been selling versions of NV1. Though it is difficult to be certain, our best estimate is that for every legitimate copy we sold, more that 100 copies were stolen and/or used in violation
of our NV1 license agreement. NV1 licensing was largely based on an honor system, and it didn’t work. Q.W. Page has millions of dollars invested in NV2, mostly coming from shareholders and sacrifices made by employees. We think one phone call to register NV2 is fair.May 3, 2005 at 4:52 pm #12790
We are investigating ways to open both NV1 and NV2 forums to all users, or combine the two forums into one. We hope to have a solution to this issue in place as soon as possible.May 3, 2005 at 8:17 pm #12791
Thanks for considering/investigating opening the NV2 forum to NV1 users. That is really great.
I supsect most current DOS users would be willing to convert to the Windows version–the only question being at what point in time they can invest sufficient resources.
I hope that is not an overstatement.May 3, 2005 at 8:25 pm #12792
My guess would be that most will be cautious and will wait for more reviews to decide whether to jump in. I know I will be waiting to see comments and reviews.June 14, 2005 at 2:11 pm #12795
There are virtually no posts at all on the NV1 site and almost none on the NV2 site recently.
What’s going on?
With NV2’s release there shoudl be a lot of traffic on both sites.
The NV2 site should be open, at least read-only, to NV1 users.
Something is wrong with this picture.June 14, 2005 at 5:49 pm #12796
I have been reading the nv2 messages for some time using my password for nv1. There are two that I cannot access: pre release and conversion.
They apparently opened these up to nv1 users after the last round of complaints but did not want to tell anyone.
I also seem a little perplexed there is not much traffic in nv2 as one might think.
The latest post to nv2 came on june 12 and is quite interesting. It might be just as interesting to see if Phil answers the questions.June 15, 2005 at 8:52 pm #12797
The vast majority of our users do not even know we have forums because they simply contact us via email or via phone if they have questions. Most users we speak to don’t even like forums, so they don’t use them. They’d rather speak to us directly, and do so. This is the reason you don’t see much activity.
As for the “read only”, we already discussed this above. It’s something we are looking into but this forum software is not as flexible as we would have hoped it would be.
The pre-release forum is only to our CCs who took part in the training before the release.
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.