lars@spectrum.cmc.com (Lars Poulsen) (01/03/91)
It is the time of year when I start worrying again about whether I should switch to a different accounting program. Maybe someone out there can answer my questions and give me peace of mind ... For 4 years, now, I have been using Dollars and Sense to track the family's expenses, and gather data for our tax returns. And mostly, I like it a lot. It sure is nice to be able to do a trial run of my Federal and State tax returns in about 90 minutes when the forms come in the mailbox. (Using an Excel template that I save from year to year). But there is this nagging thing about the old data ... One of the goals when switching to computerized home bookkeeping was to be able to retrieve data from prior years on demand. It appears that this is not at all possible with Dollars and Sense ... or is it just not documented ? The Dollars and Sense program maintains two years of active data in its file. When the new year arrives, no new transactions can be posted, until the old year has been "closed"; a procedure which includes "archiving" the old "last year" so that the year just ended can become "last year". This procedure produces an "archive file" in a proprietary format, which must be "unarchived" in order to read it. The problem is that I have never managed to succesfully unarchive one of these files. The program insists that I must have an open data file to "unarchive" into. So I have tried cloning the active file, but upon retrying the "unarchive" operation at this point, I have always run out of disk space before completing the operation. It also seems that this should fail: If the program has slots only for two active years of data, where would the three or four year old data that was unarchived go to ? Am I right in concluding that I was stupid in letting the program talk me into performing the "close" operation, and I should have saved a backup of the data file BEFORE the close ? Any help is appreciated. -- / Lars Poulsen, SMTS Software Engineer CMC Rockwell lars@CMC.COM
libby@mips.com (Jeff Libby) (01/03/91)
In article <1991Jan2.203320.29488@spectrum.CMC.COM>, lars@spectrum.cmc.com (Lars Poulsen) writes: > The Dollars and Sense program maintains two years of active data in its > file. When the new year arrives, no new transactions can be posted, > until the old year has been "closed"; a procedure which includes > "archiving" the old "last year" so that the year just ended can become > "last year". This procedure produces an "archive file" in a proprietary > format, which must be "unarchived" in order to read it. The problem is > that I have never managed to succesfully unarchive one of these files. The archive file seems to just be a Dollars and Sense data file. So rather than trying to unarchive the archive file, just open the archive directly (close the current data file first, if it's already open). You'll see a warning not to change anything in the archive, after which you can do anything to the archive that you can do to your active data file. This includes generating and exporting reports. Despite the warning, you can edit an archive file. However, if you change anything in an archive that changes the end-of-year account balances for assets or liabilities, you'll need to update the starting balances in the current data file by hand. I think that unarchiving is only useful if you archive away some of the current or last year's data to reduce file sizes and speed things up, and then want access to the archived stuff. ========== Jeff Libby Mips Computer Systems {decvax,ucbvax,hplabs,sun,ames,prls}!decwrl!mips!libby or libby@mips.com
lars@spectrum.CMC.COM (Lars Poulsen) (01/04/91)
In article <1991Jan2.203320.29488@spectrum.CMC.COM>, I (Lars Poulsen) [lars@spectrum.cmc.com] that I had never successfully made use of the "archive" file that Dollars and Sense produces when you close out an old accounting year. In article <44440@mips.mips.COM> libby@mips.com (Jeff Libby) writes: >The archive file seems to just be a Dollars and Sense data file. >So rather than trying to unarchive the archive file, just open the >archive directly (close the current data file first, if it's already >open). You'll see a warning not to change anything in the archive, >after which you can do anything to the archive that you can do to >your active data file. This includes generating and exporting reports. - and he's right. Works just like I would have wanted it to. So why did I have problems ? It turns out there are three problems. (1) In the documentation, Monogram uses the term "archive" for the "old year" file; this is the same term that they use for a file of raw transactions that has been extracted from the database in order to speed up daily operations. And such an archive can indeed only be used by "unarchiving" it back into the main file. So I was primed to expect to have to do that. (2) When you open the "old year" file, D&S puts up a modal dialog with a message beginning with the word "Sorry", giving you a clear cue that what you just tried to do has failed. Since there is only one button on the dialog, labeled "OK", I would have discovered that it was OK, except for the third problem: (3) I have been keeping my old year files on locked floppies. When opening the "old year" file, it appears that D&S tries to open a workfile on the same volume as the "old year" file. So I get a modaldialog with an error message that says "Unable to open file", again with only an "OK" button. And when dismissing THAT, yet another modal dialog reporting an IO error -39 appears ... But armed with the above information, I persisted, and just kept dismissing error dialogs, and .... it came up !! Thanks for the helpful information. I just love the net. (And Monogram should fix this !!!) -- / Lars Poulsen, SMTS Software Engineer CMC Rockwell lars@CMC.COM
wiseman@tellabs.com (Jeff Wiseman) (01/04/91)
In article <44440@mips.mips.COM> libby@mips.com (Jeff Libby) writes: >In article <1991Jan2.203320.29488@spectrum.CMC.COM>, lars@spectrum.cmc.com > (Lars Poulsen) writes: >> "last year". This procedure produces an "archive file" in a proprietary >> format, which must be "unarchived" in order to read it. The problem is >> that I have never managed to succesfully unarchive one of these files. > >The archive file seems to just be a Dollars and Sense data file. So rather >than trying to unarchive the archive file, just open the archive directly >(close the current data file first, if it's already open). You'll see a I believe that Jeff is correct. This is an example of where Monogram called a horse a horse but later on they called a dog a horse. The file created by the year end close out is in fact NOT an archive file as the term is used by Monogram. It can in fact be opened as any other account file which I find very useful and desirable. For safe D&S'ing always remember: 1) Never, never, never disperse twice into the same account (or you'll get the drity database problem) 2) Frequently run the save-as and in the subsequent session, use a duplicated copy of the save-as file. This keeps the database "neat" and seems to reduce the number of problems that occures (as well as forces you to do backups :-). 3) Even though it is possible, avoid editing from non asset or non liability accounts. 4) Beware of accidently using a descriptor in an account that it was not set up for (can cause DB screwups) -- Jeff Wiseman: ....uunet!tellab5!wiseman OR wiseman@TELLABS.COM
wiseman@tellabs.com (Jeff Wiseman) (01/05/91)
In article <1991Jan3.182402.9150@spectrum.CMC.COM> lars@spectrum.CMC.COM (Lars Poulsen) writes: <<<text on archiving documentation problems in Dollars and $ense deleted>>> > >Thanks for the helpful information. I just love the net. >(And Monogram should fix this !!!) It may be someone from Monogram that fixes it but Monogram has been bought out and another company (I think it's called Software Toolworks or something like that) is now selling D&S version 5.0. I doubt very much that 4.1c is going to get a whole lot of support with these new developments but time will tell! -- Jeff Wiseman: ....uunet!tellab5!wiseman OR wiseman@TELLABS.COM
matth@locus.com (Matt Hardin) (01/05/91)
In article <4936@tellab5.tellabs.com> wiseman@tellabs.com (Jeff Wiseman) writes: > [Stuff about D&S Archives deleted...] >For safe D&S'ing always remember: > >1) Never, never, never disperse twice into the same account (or you'll get the >drity database problem) > >2) Frequently run the save-as and in the subsequent session, use a duplicated >copy of the save-as file. This keeps the database "neat" and seems to reduce >the number of problems that occures (as well as forces you to do backups :-). > >3) Even though it is possible, avoid editing from non asset or non liability >accounts. > >4) Beware of accidently using a descriptor in an account that it was not set up >for (can cause DB screwups) > This is pretty scary stuff. This set of "work-arounds" seems to be rather extensive. Do the databases really get trashed so easily? Frankly, number 2 seems to imply that D&S will trash its database at the least possible excuse and also seems to be a real pain in the rear to do. I was considering buying D&S, but after hearing this, I am thinking again. Does anyone else have similar experience that backs up what Jeff says? Is there a later version of D&S that fixes the problems that these workarounds are designed to avoid? How about it Monogram? Did you guys really release a program that eats its databases as often as the above workarounds imply? Matt Hardin matth@locus.com ------------------------------------------------------------------- I speak for myself only. My employer neither knows nor cares. -------------------------------------------------------------------
andyp@treehouse.UUCP (Andy Peterman) (01/05/91)
In article <20989@.la.locus.com> matth@locus.com (Matt Hardin) writes: >In article <4936@tellab5.tellabs.com> wiseman@tellabs.com (Jeff Wiseman) writes: >> [Stuff about D&S Archives deleted...] > >>For safe D&S'ing always remember: >> >> [Warnings about database problems deleted...] > >I was considering buying D&S, but after hearing this, I am thinking again. >Does anyone else have similar experience that backs up what Jeff says? Is >there a later version of D&S that fixes the problems that these workarounds >are designed to avoid? How about it Monogram? Did you guys really release >a program that eats its databases as often as the above workarounds imply? I believe most of these warnings are for version 4.1c of D&S, which has since been replaced with version 5.0. I use D&S daily for both my business and personal accounts and only once have I seen a problem, and that was with version 4.1c. I forgot what I did to recover, but I didn't lose anything. Among other improvements, version 5.0 has fixed these database problems (so I'm told - I haven't seen any problems yet). I've been really happy with it and find it much easier to use than the other accounting programs. My only complaint is that the print in the manual is too small - but the manual is otherwise quite good (about 275 pages). I've never really read it, though :-). Disclaimer: I have no connection with Software Toolworks - I've just been using D&S for 5 years and have been really happy with it. -- Andy Peterman | Opinions expressed treehouse!andyp@gvgpsa.gvg.tek.com | are definitely those of (916) 273-4569 | my employer!
wiseman@tellabs.com (Jeff Wiseman) (01/10/91)
In article <20989@.la.locus.com> matth@locus.com (Matt Hardin) writes: >This is pretty scary stuff. This set of "work-arounds" seems to be rather >extensive. Do the databases really get trashed so easily? Frankly, number 2 Note that the operations that I mentioned were operations that noramlly are not performed. The interface to the product simply ALLOWs them to be performed. Note that other budget packages don't even allow some of these things to be performed. >seems to imply that D&S will trash its database at the least possible excuse >and also seems to be a real pain in the rear to do. The reason I do the save-as's is because it speeds up the accesses mainly. However, from my own experiences as a software engineer, I know that a sorted database is far likely to NOT exposes any strange side-effect bugs. Since I have been doing this, I have had NO problem at all. >I was considering buying D&S, but after hearing this, I am thinking again. >Does anyone else have similar experience that backs up what Jeff says? Is >there a later version of D&S that fixes the problems that these workarounds >are designed to avoid? How about it Monogram? Did you guys really release >a program that eats its databases as often as the above workarounds imply? Matt, this is indeed an interesting issue. For the past year I have been talking to many D&S users about it. A nutshell summary follows: If you want a very solid program with top notch, excellent customer support, DON'T BUY Dollars and $ense (Please note that I am only referring to version 4.1c and NOT version 5.0 which is now being sold by Software Toolworks and contains a totally refurbished database. Many of the problems of the old 4.1c were database problems). HOWEVER I talked to at least 5 people who indicated that they (like myself) had tried to move away from D&S (for example to MacMoney which I understand to be an excellant product by the way with good support people). They eventually came back because of the intuitive and FLEXABLE user interface that D&S has. D&S seems to have the best feature set, even though parts of them are broken (again, version 4.1c). Since 5.0 came out recently, I have heard of some minor problems (I have not upgraded yet, think I'll wait for 5.1) but the main thing is the dangerous database problems (the cyclic reference ones) have been fixed with the new database. I suspect that since 5.0 is basically the same feature set and interface as 4.1c only with the database problems fixed, if Software Toolworks (or whatever their name is) can provide top notch customer support, We could see D&S really give some other products like MacMoney and Managing your money a RUN for their money! And in the meantime, If you have a copy of 4.1c, just knowing what creates the "dirty database" condition is enough to allow you to avoid it. Hope this helps! -- Jeff Wiseman: ....uunet!tellab5!wiseman OR wiseman@TELLABS.COM
willcox@urbana.mcd.mot.com (David A Willcox) (01/14/91)
My own two bits on Dollars and $ense... (Having been out of town for a while, I just saw this thread.) I agree with many of the comments about D&S 4.1c. While it has some bugs (the corrupted database resulting from using the same account for funding and distribution being the most well known and nasty), they usually aren't a problem, and you can get around them. I am willing to live with the problems, since otherwise the program is very good. I bought an upgrade to 5.0 several months ago, soon after it came out. The new version fixes a number of the old problems, including the "corrupted database" one. There is some increased flexibility in the reports, in that you can modify the width of columns, remove columns altogether, and specify the size (and font?) for the report. There also is an iconic interface that lets you assign icons to frequently used operations. (You can make icons for entering checks into each of your checking accounts, for example, rather than having to type the account name into a dialog box each time.) You also have more control over the formatting of printed checks (though there is a major kludge if you have to deal with several different check formats). HOWEVER, I have not switched over to using 5.0, and will not before there is another release. The problem is that the database file grows without bound; there is no way to recover unused space in it. In 4.1c, if your file got too big, you could archive some transactions and then do a "Save as". The new saved file would have the unused (archived) transactions compressed out. This isn't true in 5.0. My database file under 5.0 was well over a megabyte, and I could see no way to reduce it. I reported this problem to the company in October. They promised I would get an upgrade when it was available. So far, no word from them. David A. Willcox "Just say 'NO' to universal drug testing" Motorola TSD - Urbana UUCP: ...!uiucuxc!udc!willcox 1101 E. University Ave. INET: willcox@urbana.mcd.mot.com Urbana, IL 61801 FONE: 217-384-8534
willcox@urbana.mcd.mot.com (David A Willcox) (01/18/91)
In article <1470@urbana.mcd.mot.com> willcox@urbana.mcd.mot.com (David A Willcox) writes: >HOWEVER, I have not switched over to using 5.0, and will not before >there is another release. The problem is that the database file grows >without bound; there is no way to recover unused space in it. In >4.1c, if your file got too big, you could archive some transactions >and then do a "Save as". The new saved file would have the unused >(archived) transactions compressed out. This isn't true in 5.0. My >database file under 5.0 was well over a megabyte, and I could see no >way to reduce it. Just to follow up - I talked to The Software Toolworks today, and they say that this won't be fixed until version 5.1. I'm supposed to call them again if I don't hear from them by early April. David A. Willcox "Just say 'NO' to universal drug testing" Motorola TSD - Urbana UUCP: ...!uiucuxc!udc!willcox 1101 E. University Ave. INET: willcox@urbana.mcd.mot.com Urbana, IL 61801 FONE: 217-384-8534