I recently downloaded Quasar accounting software from http://www.linuxcanada.com/quasar.html and it looks great, I just haven't had the time to switch over yet.  I'm curious if any other readers have tried it.

Case in point: I've used Peachtree for years as my accounting system, and also for a nonprofit organization of which I was the treasurer for 7 years (that's how I self-justified the purchase). Only once did I ever upgrade. Why? Because the annual updates are primarily for taxes and payroll -- does nothing for me as an individual, and the organization (a) has no paid staff, and (b) doesn't have enough gross income every year to even require filing a return. But, being one whose company publishes accounting software (not suitable for either of the aforementioned purposes -- trust me!), I want something more than just an electronic checkbook.

I have no trouble with support ending after a certain amount of time, but not being able to reactivate software is unforgivable. There's no excuse for tying the activation code to the hardware. Another plus for Peachtree: when I got a new computer, I just reinstalled and used the same authorization code as 5 years earlier (and yes, I removed the program from the old computer).

Now, if you bought QB 2001 at the end of 2001, not only do you only get to use it for two years, but because the US government considers software to be depreciable 3-year property, then because of the half-year convention you're going to be depreciating that copy of QB 2001 THROUGH tax year 2004 - even though you can't use it.  According to the IRS, that piece of software has capital value for 2004 - even though according to Intuit it's useless.

Something is severely broken with this whole tax scenario anyway.  The IRS considers software to be depreciable (and therefore resaleable) property, and yet current EULA's, activation schemes, and short sunset periods guarantee that we effectively CANNOT resell software we no longer need.  Manufacturers are now guaranteeing that new customers have to buy new-in-the-box units - and therefore guaranteeing themselves extra income.  And so far the courts are backing the software manufacturers, which means our own government has set up the scenario where software-consuming companies (arguably the largest part of the software-consuming market) are forced to keep capital tied up in assets they can't use, but also can't sell, all while spending MORE capital on required upgrades.  Is it any wonder the US economy is hurting?

Welcome to the mainframe software licensing model.  It has worked this way for at least the 25 years I have been involved with mainframe software like SAS or SPSS and other packages - you paid for a license key/code that expired after a predetermined period.  And really, it makes sense in that environment - ongoing support and upgrades cannot be done for free.  At least with SAS I remember there being a substantial grace period of 2-3 months (with plenty of warnings popping up in the output) based on the assumption that it could take that long to push through the purchasing process.   And support was provided by the good vendors, and if not by the other kind, they lost business in due course.

Now applying this model to consumer products as with a personal tax package in the heavy-handed, error-prone fashion that TurboTax tried last year is excessively burdensome, unjustifiable, and stupid.  However, I tried TaxCut a few times, and it never seemed to quite deal with all my particular needs and questions. I would not expect TurboTax to be any better.  I take my tax business to a CPA, who does use a software package, but he "fills in the gaps", and I can also talk to him about my unique situation for the stuff not so easily programmed.  Flat Tax, anybody?

However, if a business is using a product of any sort to conduct its business, then it should expect to have costs associated therewith as long as they are reasonable - "the cost of doing business". If, as one writer states, the software is useless before it can be fully depreciated, then something is amiss.  In that case, the aggrieved customer should work with the vendor to rectify matters, or take their business elsewhere as others have suggested. (I believe the notion that one should expect to make money off a depreciated asset is not a standard business practice. I always thought depreciation was the idea of setting aside money to replace something that becomes obsolete, worn out, or otherwise uneconomical by the end of the depreciation period, without expectation of selling the depreciated asset for a gain, which would be an incidental bonus - but then maybe I am misremembering my college accounting...).

Generally, this appears to fit the pattern of a monopolist, and the best way to deal with that is to refuse to deal with them.  However, if your financial information is locked into a proprietary format, then you have to consider whether there is any way to gain "freedom" with a conversion, and at what cost - is the time and effort required cost-effective?  That kind of change in your business operations is also a cost of doing business that must be weighed against expected benefits versus the "benefit" of costs saved by not changing.

Ugly Realities.

This company s/b studied at Harvard on how to tank a gold mine.

In any case, I believe Intuit has a 30 or 60 day Money back guarrantee. If you find yourself having to renew just to salvage your data I suggest you buy the latest version, load it, export your data, and then return the product.