Re: Quicken
- From: "sholdeman" <sholdeman@xxxxxxx>
- To: <jfw@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Sat, 29 Oct 2005 08:41:14 -0400
Probably about the same as 2001. I just mean that Quicken can haveits
frustrating moments.
Stan
----- Original Message -----
From: Alyssa
To: jfw@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
Sent: Friday, October 28, 2005 3:50 PM
Subject: RE: Quicken
Stan, what do you mean? Is it less than accessible than Quicken 2001?
-----Original Message-----
From: jfw-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx [mailto:jfw-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx]On Behalf
Of sholdeman
Sent: Friday, October 28, 2005 2:45 PM
To: jfw@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: Re: Quicken
Hi Alyssa: I am using Quicken 2003 with jaws 6.2. It is not the best, but
it does work.
Stan
----- Original Message -----
From: Alyssa
To: jfw@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
Sent: Friday, October 28, 2005 3:09 PM
Subject: Quicken
Hi everyone.
My name is Alyssa, and I am new to the list. I have been a JAWS user for
several years and haven't had too many problems with it, but I have suddenly
come upon something that concerns me.
I purchased Quicken Basic 2006 yesterday, only to bring it home and find
out that it is a little too graphical for JFW. So I called the company, and
they are going to send me a free version of Quicken 2003 deluxe. In comparison
with the 2006 version, does this work well with JFW? I used to have Quicken
2001 Basic on an old computer, which worked fine... And I noticed that the JFW
help says that 2003 will work. I just wanted to get some input from fellow
users of the program!
-Alyssa
Other related posts:
