Comments on: Frustrated with Intuit http://blog.markwshead.com/307/frustrated-with-intuit/ Mark's thoughts on being Mark Shead and other random subjects Thu, 29 Jul 2010 03:22:39 +0000 hourly 1 http://wordpress.org/?v=3.0 By: Jason Reagan http://blog.markwshead.com/307/frustrated-with-intuit/comment-page-1/#comment-373 Jason Reagan Wed, 05 May 2010 18:18:19 +0000 http://blog.markwshead.com/?p=307#comment-373 When I got my iPhone in January, I downloaded PocketMoneyLite so I could easily track debit-card purchase (I only write about 2-3 checks per month). It does everything I need to track checking. Of course, I can't upload it into Quicken for the above-mentioned OFX reasons. My solution? I stopped using Quicken. I can do everything Quicken offers through web-based applications and PocketMoneyLite keeps my checkbook reconciled every day with my bank's online statement. So, no more monthly balancing. I know how much money I have daily. In short, Quicken made itself obsolete through greed and failure to evolve. @Andrew: Quicken proved they were no longer a "highly valuable program." When I got my iPhone in January, I downloaded PocketMoneyLite so I could easily track debit-card purchase (I only write about 2-3 checks per month). It does everything I need to track checking. Of course, I can’t upload it into Quicken for the above-mentioned OFX reasons. My solution? I stopped using Quicken. I can do everything Quicken offers through web-based applications and PocketMoneyLite keeps my checkbook reconciled every day with my bank’s online statement. So, no more monthly balancing. I know how much money I have daily.

In short, Quicken made itself obsolete through greed and failure to evolve.

@Andrew: Quicken proved they were no longer a “highly valuable program.”

]]> By: Mark Shead http://blog.markwshead.com/307/frustrated-with-intuit/comment-page-1/#comment-341 Mark Shead Mon, 18 Jan 2010 02:43:38 +0000 http://blog.markwshead.com/?p=307#comment-341 If Intuit was somehow less expensive than their competition or free, then I might agree with you. But they aren't. They intentionally lock you out of importing a file that their software is perfectly capable of importing to try to get users to pressure the banks to give them more money. If Intuit was somehow less expensive than their competition or free, then I might agree with you. But they aren’t.

They intentionally lock you out of importing a file that their software is perfectly capable of importing to try to get users to pressure the banks to give them more money.

]]> By: Andrew http://blog.markwshead.com/307/frustrated-with-intuit/comment-page-1/#comment-340 Andrew Sun, 17 Jan 2010 08:52:27 +0000 http://blog.markwshead.com/?p=307#comment-340 I don't know the situation in America, but Australian banks provide very simple statements, and online access does little to improve this. Bank customers clearly value how Quicken converts simple transaction data into knowledge, but the banks didn't have to pay to develop these programs. Charging the costs (including the rightful profit attached to designing a highly valuable program) directly to customers requires either a high per customer cost for a limited number of customers, despite the programs universally usefulness, or a low per customer cost and all the risk and marketing burden of trying to rich a high customer base. Using this method to directly charge the banks lets the per customer cost fall whilst tapping into the banks huge customer base. The banks win by essentially outsourcing the demand for financial KNOWLEDGE to smaller, more dynamic companies. After all, they will only pay for formats of highly demanded programs. I don’t know the situation in America, but Australian banks provide very simple statements, and online access does little to improve this. Bank customers clearly value how Quicken converts simple transaction data into knowledge, but the banks didn’t have to pay to develop these programs. Charging the costs (including the rightful profit attached to designing a highly valuable program) directly to customers requires either a high per customer cost for a limited number of customers, despite the programs universally usefulness, or a low per customer cost and all the risk and marketing burden of trying to rich a high customer base. Using this method to directly charge the banks lets the per customer cost fall whilst tapping into the banks huge customer base. The banks win by essentially outsourcing the demand for financial KNOWLEDGE to smaller, more dynamic companies. After all, they will only pay for formats of highly demanded programs.

]]>