Talk:Comparison of accounting software/Archives/2013

External link addition

I added a link to my Software Evaluation website because it offers assistance with the comparison of software and it is a free service that requires no registration or sign up. The matrix/spreadsheet concept used on the site can also be used by across all forms of software evaluation so it is a useful free resource that would be of interest to people using this page. Unfortunately someone chose to remove it. Perhaps it could be restored? [http://www.software-evaluation.co.uk]

It was me who removed the link. The general policy in the wikipedia is to have only few external links that provide significant additional value. Since there are quite a few comparison pages, after adding your page others would ask not without reason for the same. So unless you can show that your page is THE page for software comparison, I don't see why yours in particular should be added. --S.K. 18:11, 24 October 2005 (UTC)

Forgive me, but I seem to misunderstand this policy. The information I added a while back links to my company's page for the time being because we do not have a wikipedia article. My company's page has information about this product. I also guess I misunderstand why this is a policy. nQativ Nobody 20:34, 30 August 2007 (UTC)

Merge list of accounting software to comparison of accounting software

There was no consensus in the AfD:

• 9 delete
• 7 keep
• 4 merge & redirect

The merge & redirect option appeared fairly late and changed 2 delete and 2 keep votes. The Comparison has a majority of programs in the List & is far more useful. More people seem to not want to keep the list in the current form than who want to keep it. A merge seems to have no downsides other than that of effort. --Karnesky 22:13, 13 February 2006 (UTC)

In favor of merging Sanjiv swarup (talk) 06:52, 6 March 2008 (UTC)

One row per product please

Lets have only one row per product. Peachtree has so many rows for all its different options. This is a clear case of commercial marketing. I suggest deleting all rows of Peachtree and replacing it with one single row. Dhshah 11:02, 20 March 2007 (UTC)

go ahead and make the correction Sanjiv swarup (talk) 09:39, 20 August 2008 (UTC)

Can you add in more companies? Sun Accounts for one

I'd like to see information about Sun Accounts added in. www.sunsystems.com

Also this is a good external link http://www.180systems.com/accounting-software.php

Can we reference it?

Jonaitken 20:50, 18 April 2007 (UTC)

What about LiquidLedger?

And also SapphireOne. Michael Hodgson (talk) 22:13, 30 March 2009 (UTC)

database dependencies

Most of the open source accounting software seems to be very complex to install, requiring additional database software and computer language support. All such major dependencies, beyond the OS, should be noted in the table. -69.87.199.226 20:21, 25 July 2007 (UTC)

I want to echo this sentiment. At the very least, for the web-based software, it should be noted which of the major databases is used: MySQL, PostgreSQL, MS SQL, or "other". Marlasdad (talk) 03:09, 23 May 2009 (UTC)

Re-write of the table

I have been thinking of re-writing this comparison table for some in line with the other comparison tables. I have tried to take on board the constructive comments on this talk page to make the new table. The idea of a comparison table is that people can take a quick glance of what the software does. As the old table was just text you could not just take a quick glance at it. Hopefully this new table is generally all round better. The old table can be viewed at: User:Benjaminevans82/old Comparison of accounting software. Feel free to add any helpful additional Columns. --Benjaminevans82 12:51, 8 September 2007 (UTC)

Massively better, thanks! Chris Cunningham 13:23, 8 September 2007 (UTC)

Separate Table for GPL Software

Why is there a separate table for GPL software? GPL is one of the license types listed in the first table. Squideshi (talk) 20:09, 14 December 2007 (UTC)

There shouldn't be. It should either be generalised or deleted. Chris Cunningham (talk) 13:09, 23 January 2008 (UTC)

Agresso Business World, CODA and CCS are not included in this comparison?

How can we include the international Acccounting Software solutions from the Dutch stock listed company Unit 4 Agresso in this comparison. Agresso Business World, CODA and also CCS should be included for a correct comparison. --Hurby.sliepen (talk) 13:42, 15 April 2008 (UTC)

Thank you for your suggestion. When you feel an article needs improvement, please feel free to make those changes. Wikipedia is a wiki, so anyone can edit almost any article by simply following the Edit this page link at the top. The Wikipedia community encourages you to be bold in updating pages. Don't worry too much about making honest mistakes — they're likely to be found and corrected quickly. If you're not sure how editing works, check out how to edit a page, or use the sandbox to try out your editing skills. New contributors are always welcome. You don't even need to log in (although there are many reasons why you might want to). --Hroðulf (or Hrothulf) (Talk) 17:59, 15 April 2008 (UTC)

Easy Cash Manager

It would be nice to see this freeware included: it is much easier to use than Grisbi, and people requiring something simple will like it. The overpowering green colour can be changed to grey or blue. 92.29.31.202 (talk) 20:52, 22 January 2010 (UTC)

See comment above under ActionStep, especially: "The page tries to compare notable products and therefore only accepts entries for applications that have Wikipedia articles as you can read when editing the page." --philu 8 March 2010

ledger missing

unless i've missed something this is not on the list even though it has a wikipedia article that links to the list:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ledger_%28software%29 — Preceding unsigned comment added by 69.116.92.84 (talk) 15:37, 21 August 2013 (UTC)

Article Name, does it match the content of the article

Is this table supposed to be more informative than the List of accounting software? Currently I don't think that it is. Maybe there should be some sort of comparison, maybe by features? --Sleepyhead81 13:00, 8 August 2005 (UTC)

See Category:Lists of software and Category:Software comparison for some examples of other pages. The list page normally becomes "just a list" (prevents people trying to add all sorts of extraneous advertising, background information, descriptions, URLs, etc), and the comparison page normally tells you the URL, what platforms the software runs on, what it costs, who it's aimed at. who it's written by, etc.

Obviously this page isn't complete yet, but see that category for what it should/will look like. Ojw 14:51, 8 August 2005 (UTC)

Followup on that -- if people just fill in the features column with anything they think relevant, then we can see what sorts of things would warrant their own column/table. I'm not an accountant, so haven't proscribed anything yet. Also, the intention is probably to remove everything except name/URL from the list of accounting software, and remove the duplicates (e.g. GnuCash is there at least twice)

The list page seems to group by "intended audience" as well as by license, causing a lot of duplicates, whereas most other lists of software are only grouped by Free/freeware/proprietary. Ojw 21:56, 8 August 2005 (UTC)

My two cents worth on turning this page into a true 'comparison' page is mostly negative. Whose opinion are you using as judge? And if you remove all subjectivity from the comparison and only list features - this type software can be VERY feature rich and all the info will clutter the page making it unreadable. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Joebray (talk • contribs) 18:01, 5 December 2008 (UTC)

What information is this article now giving. What are the comparison criteria. Does anyone care? I know there have been votes on comparison versus list. What did that achieve? --NilssonDenver 22:13, 11 July 2006 (UTC)

I am the person who (inadvertently logged out) changed the lede to reflect the fact that the article refers to US-based $ currency software only. I can find no reference anywhere in the article to software available or useable in the rest of the world. I believe that the article title should be changed accordingly to something like "Comparison of accounting software available in the USA" Rachel Pearce (talk) 13:00, 28 August 2013 (UTC)