On Jan 12, 2017 4:42 PM, "Christopher Browne via talk" <talk@gtalug.org> wrote:

On 12 January 2017 at 16:26, William Park via talk <talk@gtalug.org> wrote:
> On Thu, Jan 12, 2017 at 04:00:50PM -0500, CLIFFORD ILKAY via talk wrote:
>> On 12/01/17 08:16 AM, o1bigtenor via talk wrote:
>> > Greetings
>> >
>> > Am trying to find (for need in the not to distant future) some of what

<snip>

>> One of the criterion to what you should be using is to find out if your
>> accountant is familiar with what you're using. If they are not, which is
>> more important to you, your accountant or the software you use?
>
> Yes, eventually, you'd need to "export" to his/her format.

Hum?

That's sensible if you handle accounting by paying a third party accountant to
generate your accounting records.

At one time, that used to be one of (AccPac, Bedford Accounting), back in the
MS-DOS days.

Don't forget VisiCac. In fact wasn't one of Microsoft's first succesfull apps Excel for Mac, eventually replacing VisiCalc. Harvard Graphics and Crystal Reports were also later used for assembling printed reports. It was said that Excels engine could process up to 1,000,000 records using input and output forms before you had to upgrade to Access RDBMS.

But if you're actually managing your own accounting records, the question
will be, what will your accountant charge for *reviewing* your records, and
how does that vary based on what flavour of accounting system you're using.

Wave claims that they make it easy to share appropriate records with your
accountant; I imagine that's true. Whether or not that makes Wave a good
choice is a separate question.
--
When confronted by a difficult problem, solve it by reducing it to the
question, "How would the Lone Ranger handle this?"

---
Talk Mailing List
talk@gtalug.org
https://gtalug.org/mailman/listinfo/talk

Russell

Sent from mobile.