Peachtree 2007 - Am I the only one ?

Posted by Ted on July 19, 2006, 1:08 pm

Please log in for more thread options

I've just reviewed a trial version of Peachtree 2007. I can't but help think
about the fable about the Emperor without clothes in reference to the 2007 User
Interface.

The user interface, and the fact that it doesn't seem possible to turn it off is
enough to dissuade me from recommending users to upgrade. The only good feature
about the 2004-2006 "Peachtree Today" was that at least you could turn it off.

It strikes me that Peachtree products are targeting the computer illiterate
bookkeeping neophytes instead of seeking the real market of competent and
knowledgeable existing and potential users.

Maybe I'm just getting old, and maybe in my younger years I was influenced too
much by Alan Cooper's text "About Face", The Essentials of User Interface
Design. Being credited as the "father of Windows", Alan Cooper's premise was
that "If achieving the user's goals is the basis of ... user interface design,
then the user will be satisfied..."

In my old age I think that Peachtree has failed miserably with Peachtree 2007
user interface. It's like the resurrection of their failed 1998 "Peachtree
Office Accounting" all over again.

When replying, please remove from the email address.

Posted by Diane Koers on July 19, 2006, 11:16 pm

Please log in for more thread options

I agree with your opinion of the interface. I absolutely HATE it...but the
funny thing is, several of my clients who upgraded seem to like it! Go
figure.....

Peachtree is trying to keep up with the Joneses or in this case, the
Microsoft Small Business Accounting....
--
Diane Koers
www.thepeachtreelady.com
Co-author Peachtree for Dummies

> I've just reviewed a trial version of Peachtree 2007. I can't but help

> think about the fable about the Emperor without clothes in reference to

> the 2007 User Interface.

> The user interface, and the fact that it doesn't seem possible to turn it

> off is enough to dissuade me from recommending users to upgrade. The only

> good feature about the 2004-2006 "Peachtree Today" was that at least you

> could turn it off.

> It strikes me that Peachtree products are targeting the computer

> illiterate bookkeeping neophytes instead of seeking the real market of

> competent and knowledgeable existing and potential users.

> Maybe I'm just getting old, and maybe in my younger years I was influenced

> too much by Alan Cooper's text "About Face", The Essentials of User

> Interface Design. Being credited as the "father of Windows", Alan

> Cooper's premise was that "If achieving the user's goals is the basis of

> ... user interface design, then the user will be satisfied..."

> In my old age I think that Peachtree has failed miserably with Peachtree

> 2007 user interface. It's like the resurrection of their failed 1998

> "Peachtree Office Accounting" all over again.

> When replying, please remove from the email address.

Posted by Mike Koenecke on July 20, 2006, 10:14 am

Please log in for more thread options

On Wed, 19 Jul 2006 23:16:05 -0400, "Diane Koers"

>I agree with your opinion of the interface. I absolutely HATE it...but the

>funny thing is, several of my clients who upgraded seem to like it! Go

>figure.....

>Peachtree is trying to keep up with the Joneses or in this case, the

>Microsoft Small Business Accounting....

They've been after me to upgrade (I'm still using 2004), and these
comments are not encouraging. What really bugs me is the software
appears to have had obsolescence planned in: recently every time I
start it up I get a box titled "Peachtree Online Update" which says
"The Online Update program files appear to be corrupt. Please
reinstall your most recent version of Online Update."

This started happening on my laptop as well, so I think it's
date-driven and meant to prod a user into buying a new version.
--
Mike Koenecke
http://macros.koenecke.us
to e-mail, change domain to "alum.haverford.edu"

Posted by Laura on July 20, 2006, 9:17 pm

Please log in for more thread options

Mike Koenecke wrote:

> On Wed, 19 Jul 2006 23:16:05 -0400, "Diane Koers"

>> I agree with your opinion of the interface. I absolutely HATE it...but the

>> funny thing is, several of my clients who upgraded seem to like it! Go

>> figure.....

>> Peachtree is trying to keep up with the Joneses or in this case, the

>> Microsoft Small Business Accounting....

> They've been after me to upgrade (I'm still using 2004), and these

> comments are not encouraging. What really bugs me is the software

> appears to have had obsolescence planned in: recently every time I

> start it up I get a box titled "Peachtree Online Update" which says

> "The Online Update program files appear to be corrupt. Please

> reinstall your most recent version of Online Update."

> This started happening on my laptop as well, so I think it's

> date-driven and meant to prod a user into buying a new version.

I'm still using 2004 and have not encountered this problem myself.

What I don't like is that with the new database engine in 2007 many of us
can't upgrade because our computers won't run it. My laptop is only a year
old and is not fast enough to run the program. I am not about to buy a new
computer just to upgrade to 2007.

Posted by Chad A. Gross [SBS-MVP] on July 23, 2006, 5:02 pm

Please log in for more thread options

I'm pretty sure that Quantum is the only product with a new database backend
(Pervasive 9.1) . . . the other PT products (Complete, Premium, etc.) still
use btrieve. Obviously this is the first step in Sage killing off btrieve
(which is *LONG* overdue . . . active development on btrieve stopped
around '94 . . . so we're still using a databackend that was designed for
DOS & Windows 3.1 (which has been my major gripe with PT) I so wish they
would just move to a Microsoft backend (SQL Express 2005) . . .

I completely agree about the interface - I hate it. I found Peachtree Today
useful - but it was nice to be able to open it when I wanted to glance at
everything, then close it when I was done . . .

As far as Diane's comment on keeping up with the Joneses (Microsoft SBA) -
Peachtree would be better served to try to play catchup in the realm of 3rd
party integration (a la QuickBooks) . . . SBA has not been catching on
well (especially for the non-accounting types who can't understand why they
can't delete transactions, etc.) And there are a lot of QuickBooks users
who hate QB, but continue to use it due to 3rd party products that only
integrate with QB. We're a prime example - I merged my business with
another small business a couple years ago, and in the reorg I ended up being
the technical lead and not handling the back office stuff any more. We're
using QuickBooks there because of direct integration with our LOB app . . .
(and God do I *hate* QuickBooks) . . . I'm trying to get us to convert to
PT - but until I can find the time to build our own integration piece, it's
not gonna happen . . .

--

Chad A. Gross [SBS-MVP]
SBS ROCKS!
www.msmvps.com/blogs/cgross
www.mobitech.biz

> Mike Koenecke wrote:

>> On Wed, 19 Jul 2006 23:16:05 -0400, "Diane Koers"

>>> I agree with your opinion of the interface. I absolutely HATE it...but

>>> the funny thing is, several of my clients who upgraded seem to like it!

>>> Go figure.....

>>>

>>> Peachtree is trying to keep up with the Joneses or in this case, the

>>> Microsoft Small Business Accounting....

>> They've been after me to upgrade (I'm still using 2004), and these

>> comments are not encouraging. What really bugs me is the software

>> appears to have had obsolescence planned in: recently every time I

>> start it up I get a box titled "Peachtree Online Update" which says

>> "The Online Update program files appear to be corrupt. Please

>> reinstall your most recent version of Online Update." This started

>> happening on my laptop as well, so I think it's

>> date-driven and meant to prod a user into buying a new version.

> I'm still using 2004 and have not encountered this problem myself.

> What I don't like is that with the new database engine in 2007 many of us

> can't upgrade because our computers won't run it. My laptop is only a year

> old and is not fast enough to run the program. I am not about to buy a new

> computer just to upgrade to 2007.