-
Posts
-
The number is much less, however, the few who do work on the project seem to eat & sleep with it.
As David mentioned it has not been a single project, because they have had to start from scratch a number of times.
Like most non-programmers I’ve been extremely vocal on why any program should take over 10 years to complete, but that’s a question for Phil and his group.
I do feel they should have gotten input from Resellers, Consultants and End Users much sooner than they had. I believe it would have helped, but that’s just my opinion. For example I believe they have made many changes to the product over the last eight months because of the input received from those who attended the NV2 Workshops.
September 2004, eh?
Can someone say if in NV2 a ledger account screen will look like the good old fashioned “manual type” ledger account screen in NV1?
Or, has NV2 gone the way of the other accounting programs?
Walt
Good Question!?
It has been said, there will be an NV1 Skin – for those who still want the look and feel of NV1 – but I have yet to see it.
I’ll let the folks at QW Page, give the rest of the answer to this !!
David
WGray wrote:
>
> September 2004, eh?
>
> Can someone say if in NV2 a ledger account screen will look
> like the good old fashioned “manual type” ledger account screen
> in NV1?
>
> Or, has NV2 gone the way of the other accounting programs?
>
> WaltOne has to wonder if there ever will be an NV2 release. I have used this product for many years and it seems as though an upgrade has been “coming soon” or for about 10 years give or take. I cannot imagine a motive for pretending. It just seems incredible that they have pushed out the release date AGAIN.
I am nice.
Richard
I love NewViews, no doubt about it.
My only fear is that NV2 will be a disappointment compared to NV1.
I have tried trial versions of Peachtree, Quick Books, and MYOB and their windows versions do not have near the flexibility of NV1.
I wonder what odds makers would give about the September release?
Walt
About the odds, or the REAL Escape date?
Must I hold my breath ???
It is also why some of us, are continuing development for the NV1 – into Windows platform. NV1 has a “staying power” unmatched by almost any other software. Or are we just dinosaurs who refuse to die !!
Regards
DavidWGray wrote:
> I love NewViews, no doubt about it.
> My only fear is that NV2 will be a disappointment compared to NV1.
> I have tried trial versions of Peachtree, Quick Books, and MYOB and their windows versions do not have near the flexibility of NV1.
> I wonder what odds makers would give about the September release?I’ve seen and used NV2 and though impressed, still prefer NV1.
I cannot get NV2 to provide the ease of use, flexibility of setup, the ability to make changes to a set of books, speed of data entry and error free processing of NV1.
I’ve suggested many changes and upgrades for NV1 which would make it even better, but unfortunalely all of QW’s staff time is dedicated to the completion of NV2.
I know they have listened to my concerns but they say the improvements will be incorporated into NV2 (but at this time no major changes to NV1).
I’m missing the logic because they already have a great product and super staff. I’m sure that if they allocated 2-3 months they could take NV1 from great to just about unbeatable (which I believe it is already but does need some improvements).
With the exception of payroll updates I have not seen any improvements to NV1 since Prod 6 was released, was that 1987 or 1998?
Henry,
HMah wrote:
> I’ve seen and used NV2 and though impressed, still prefer NV1.
> I cannot get NV2 to provide the ease of use, flexibility of setup, the ability to make changes to a set of books, speed of data entry and error free processing of NV1.The program speed, will arrive – but “ease of use”? The NV1 patterns are so ingrained – they will be difficult to change. Hence the need for an NV1 Shell to wrap around the NV2 program – and for me, this is a KEY Selling point to converting any prior users.
> I know they have listened to my concerns but they say the
> improvements will be incorporated into NV2 (but at this time no
> major changes to NV1).
>
> I’m missing the logic because they already have a great product
> and super staff. I’m sure that if they allocated 2-3 months
> they could take NV1 from great to just about unbeatable (which
> I believe it is already but does need some improvements).Missing Logic? Well, there are a few other problems – which perhaps nobody else knows about except QW Page. NV1 is written in modified assembler. And the main reason its very fast. However, I do not think there is anyone remaining on staff, who can still write in this language – NOT a minor problem!
And for ideal logic, what does it take to figure out a multi-user NV1 – would quell everybody’s clambering for the new product. So my question would be, “Why does this simple logic escape the thinkers – at QW Page?”
When a tree falls in the forest and nobody to listen – does it make a noise?
> With the exception of payroll updates I have not seen any
> improvements to NV1 since Prod 6 was released, was that 1987 or 1998?Well, what if I told you that a “semi-automatic” multi-user version of NV1 is just around the corner (to be released by me, of course). Would you try it, use it? promote it? Needless to say – it will/does require NV1.
David
Post Edited (06-16-04 16:55)
I’d gladly be willing to test andor use any update to NV1 which improves it’s functionality. Multi-user updates in any form will be looked upon highly.
I’ve already mentioned that many of my clients are using the EXPALLTR to perform data transfer which does not restrict data entry (having to only enter at Journals).
This is has been an interesting discussion. Like many of you, I’ve been using NV for a long time.
In 1986 I was shopping around for a full accounting package for our small business but couldn’t afford the $800 US *per module* the big names were charging at the time. I attended an NV demo in Milwaukee, WI, USA and was impressed with the product and its price. Payroll hadn’t been released yet but they promised it within a few months (the first broken promise) so I bought it. The ability to write or modify procs using NPL was a big factor in my decision. When Payroll was finally released I was disappointed with it so I rewrote it from scratch (it took me 6 months) and I’ve been using that version ever since. I’ve written more than a dozen procs to tailor NV to our business and can’t imagine operating without them. I don’t need multi-user capability and won’t buy NV2 if and when it’s ever released. My only concern is that Microsoft will eventually cut out DOS support altogether. It’s hard enough running NV1 on Windows XP. Oh well, I’m getting close to retirement anyway. I suppose I can keep a computer with Win98 going for another 10 years.
RR Johnson
Well, as a simple comment – it is unlikely DOS will disappear in the next few window releases.
Believe it or not, Internet Explorer is very dependent on several programming functions – that require DOS (invisbly of course).
So have no fears – DOS is here, still to continue for several more years.
Oh by the way – NV1 works very well with NT4, Win XP, and WIN2003, and for me, I find it to be very reliable, fast and easy in WinXP.
David
Post Edited (06-26-04 13:10)
Greetings RR Johnson,
I was in the precise situation as you. Then I DID retire last year, and now I use NV to keep track of my share trading and our day to day living expenses ( originally used to run the expenditure side of my Veterinary practice).
I STILL find it unbelievably intuitive to use, but is that similar to why “Wordstar” took many years to be overtaken by MS “Word” ??
I have no problems using NV1 with XP home edition. I run NV in a full screen window. But I still have problems printing reports to my HP deskjet 950c, despite downloading the latest printing update. The ONLY reason I would go with NV2 is the ease and flexibility of printing.
I will be in Calgary end of August – does QW have any displays of NV2 there (1 month before schedule realease, HoHo HoHo )
Phil Creagh, Narooma, Australia
.
All of this is very interesting. NV1 users are, as a rule, very confortable with NV1, notwithstanding that it is archaic, by today’s standards. It is so well suited to what I do (general ledger & billing for law practice) that after 17 years of using it, I am not too motivated at all to change; even to NV2.
The real dilemma that I see for us die hards, is that QWP has probably bet the bank on NV2 (there can’t possibly bee too many buyers out there for a DOS accounting program) adn if NV2 never is released, or if it is, but flops for some reason, for how long can QWP hang around to suppoort us DOS users?
Is this a realistic concern? I would like to hear some opinions.
Archaic or not, one of NV’s very strong points – is to be able to copy / create any existing accounting requirements. Something that even the larger accounting system have difficulty to do.
And through the brilliance of QW Page, or Microsoft (perhaps both) – NV continues to run in or out of windows. DOS (acronym for Disk Operating System) will not go away for next several years. It is an “underlying” requirement for all Windows Computer Operating Systems.
If perchance, QW Page closes – those depending on Payroll would have problems – but there are other products that can provide payroll too. There are no other NV product that I know of, where releases are “time dependant” such as payroll.
Like you, I enjoy the simplicity and ease of use for NV1 to perform complex tasks.
But I’m betting that many NV1 users would like to have the same, only in multi-user. And so we have been developing independently of QW Page, just that. At this point we are able to have all the transactions working in a multi-user version, back linked to a set of NV books. The problem remaining – are still the procedures. Not withstanding, cost is also a large question for the smaller users. My version and NV2 are not “in-expensive”
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.
