SEE Finance Reviews

You can set the date range of the transactions shown for accounts in version 2. Version 2 was written from scratch and has some significant changes. Above the transactions area there’s a settings button that looks like a gear just to the right of where it shows “Transactions: X Items”. That settings button will show a popover that contains the options to control the transactions shown including the option to set a custom date range or use a pre-set date period option like “This Year”. You can also set it to where only uncategorized transactions will be displayed and/or restrict transactions based on their set status such as deselecting the option to include reconciled transactions. In version 1 you had to set this date range for each account, but in version 2 you can select to apply these settings to all accounts or set them per account. Below is a link to the help page that shows this settings button and popover:

https://scimonocesoftware.com/products/see-finance/versions/version-2/help/mac/views/accounts.html#transactions-view-settings-popover

I’m not clear on your comment about the calendar viewing option. It is just payee and amount info that is shown in calendar view. You can select an item in the calendar and press the spacebar or the Enter key to open its details in a popover. You can also double click on an item to be shown that popover. You can change the month shown using keyboard shortcuts for next/previous.

Feel free to contact us if you have any questions or other feedback.

Thanks,

SEE Finance Support

It is not that SEE Finance will not import Quicken Mac 2015+ investment transactions. It is that Quicken Mac 2015+ doesn’t export them. If the information was available for import then it would most certainly be imported. This is a result of Quicken Mac being built on Quicken Essentials for Mac which didn’t allow recording investment transactions at all, only overall values of holdings. Quicken Mac 2015 added the ability to record investment transactions, but they have yet to add the ability to export them. When Quicken Mac begins to export investment accounts you should be able to import them into other programs. Quicken users should be demanding that they stop locking users in by not allowing an viable option to export their data.

Instead of exporting as a QMTF, Quicken Mac also allows exporting a QXF file (not sure if investment transactions are included), but SEE finance can't read this format. Alternatively what about offering the option to import that Quicken Mac file directly without having to export first?

The option I had to use was the CSV format through Quicken Mac 2015+. Of course, all transfers and transaction links were lost. But it did allow me to import my years of Quicken data so I could adequately test the new 2.x version.

Overall, it's a nice upgrade from 1.0 and has many valuable new features, even though it still feels rough in comparison to Quicken...but, much closer to at least recommend worthy of a full switch. In addition, the iOS app is SO MUCH better than the horribly designed and performing Quicken mobile app.

GForce:

QXF and actual Quicken files are proprietary formats of which only Quicken knows the specifications. QMTF files are really just QIF files that for some reason Quicken Essentials for Mac and later decided to label with the QMTF file extension.

From Quicken’s website info on how to import/export a QXF file: “The import and export of investment and business accounts, transactions, budgets, attachments, reports, and application settings is not supported by QXF.”

https://www.quicken.com/support/how-do-i-importexport-quicken-transfer-format-qxf-file

That leaves the Quicken file itself as the only location of investment information. With the nature of proprietary file formats, trying to decode another program’s file formats would be a never ending game of cat and mouse. If you could somehow get the specifications in the first place, each update of the other program could include a change to the proprietary format. It’s just not a realistic approach.

Quicken should be doing the responsible thing and provide a legitimate file export option to an open file format that users are able to use to switch to another program if/when desired. The QIF file format is the common file format used to export/import between programs and would be sufficient since its specifications are known. Even with how old it is, the QIF file format is still considered the best option for transferring data between programs. Quicken’s QXF import/export info page even references “If you need to import investment or business data, we recommend that you use QIF import instead.”, but Quicken Mac doesn’t provide a QIF file option. There’s only the masked QMTF file version of it that doesn’t include investment transactions. As it stands, they seem to be intentionally locking their customers into their program.

Quicken Mac users should be demanding there be an option to export all of their data to a format that can be imported into another program.

I wrote the SEE Finance developers yesterday about the fact that Quicken relies an a SQL database that is apparently readable. Is the ball therefore in Scimonoce Software's court?

By the way, I raised with the Quicken Product Manager the possibility that they're intentionally locking their customers into their program, but he denied it. Apparently the data format they use would have to be extended in order to handle other types of information like investment transactions, and if the SQL data is directly accessible, who cares?

Yes, files for Quicken Essentials for Mac and later use a SQLite database to store the bulk of their information. So does ours and so does most other personal finance programs. SQLite databases can contain any information the developer wants to put in them. We could reverse engineer what is in a Quicken file’s SQLite database, but what happens when updates for Quicken Mac come out that alters the schema of the SQLite database in their files? As mentioned above, it would be a never ending game of cat and mouse. It’s just not a realistic approach when they’re open formats commonly available to transfer data.

Did you also bring up with the Quicken Product Manager why you can’t directly access Quicken Mac files in Quicken Windows? Did you read above how Quicken officially recommends to use a QIF file to transfer information if it involves investment data instead of using a QXF file? Yet you can’t export a QIF file from Quicken Mac as you can in Quicken Windows. Shouldn’t Quicken Mac users expect a reliable and complete file exporting option?

SEE Finance 2 for macOS does require macOS 10.12 or later for multiple reasons. Essentially any Mac made after 2009 can run macOS 10.12 or later. We don’t believe that is an unreasonable requirement for any new program. Although we don’t agree this is a justifiable reason to leave a 1/2 star review, we understand how frustrating hardware requirements can be. Hopefully if/when you get a newer Mac you will choose to continue being a customer.

This is the reason I will never upgrade. I bought it when it was still 0.9 and the last version I can run is 1.1.11. I concur with the 1-star review. Leaving customers who can't run the lastest and greatest version of MacOS in the dust just means this product is dead to me. As is your company because I'll never trust you not to do it again.

Our apologies, no ill will was intended. We have replied 78 times to the 103 pre-purchase emails that you have sent us in the past. We just can’t possibly continue to give that level of dedicated service to a potential customer.

Even if those figures are true, I wonder what makes you think that I was expecting "that level of dedicated service" again, 7 years later!

I beg to differ. It has changed very little over the years. It still doesn't link transfers between accounts or allow inline editing, among other deficiencies.. Its UI is dated.

Now that Quicken is independent of Intuit, it has a good team committed to it and is evolving rapidly.

See what Amcarter3 wrote below!

I've read Amcarter3's comments which he has repeated for several years. He completely ignores the many improvements have been made and he strangely focuses on near meaningless version numbers. While a few of the items on his wish list may be welcome additions to the program, they by no means make the program a deal-breaker for most people. Let's look at his requests:

1. Revised Account Reconciliation. Yes, I agree that Quicken's method was simpler and less confusing, but Reconciliation still works in SEE Finance and I have grown accustomed to it. This is probably the one weak point in SEE Finance, but it is by no means a deal breaker for me considering how SEE Finance excels in everything else.

2. Option to force link transfer transactions. This requested option actually created a lot of problems for me in Quicken and drove me mad when trying to edit data in Quicken in the past, especially with linked items with posting dates that varied greatly. SEE Finance handles this better in my opinion, since you can create both entries at one time during entry or create the corresponding transaction from a highlighted entry. Otherwise, the entries are automatically downloaded from your banking institution, anyway, albeit unlinked. I think this option has the potential to be just as problematic as helpful.

3. Revised reports and budgets. This has been enhanced over time and allows one to customize and create almost any Report for any Category, Payee, Account, etc. and view it in a number of different ways. Just play with the various settings and specify what your are interested in. Budgets are similarly powerful.

4. Inline transaction entry. I'm not sure what he is asking for here. SEE Finance has automated download, as well as manual entry with keyboard shortcuts for moving between fields and new transactions, and also memorized transactions that fill in all or part of any new entry as specified. Preferences specify whether transactions need to be unlocked or not before changing data. I prefer to use the keyboard shortcut to unlock a transaction before editing to prevent errant mouse clicks from erroneously changing my data.

5. Easier investment transaction entry. Just how can it be simpler? It downloads your transactions automatically from your brokerage or it presents you with clear fields to manually enter the transaction data. All fields can be navigated via keyboard shortcuts or mouse clicks.

6. Improved investment tracking. Investment tracking in SEE Finance is much more comprehensive that any other software I have tried, including iBank, Quicken, etc. To my knowledge, these others cannot track bonds and options easily and can be confused by such things as securities splits, specifying security lots, etc. I would, however, like to see drill-down graphs being applied throughout the investments section in SEE Finance.

7. Improved recurring transactions. This must have already been addressed since I see no deficiency in how recurring transactions are being handled.

8. Improved downloading/importing. This sounds like Amcarter3 is just looking to list anything here to try to present an unfavorable impression of SEE Finance. To actual users of SEE Finance, this is a silly request. SEE Finance has very comprehensive downloading and the most robust import/export of any finance software I have tried (and I have tried everything I could find via MacUpdate and Google.) It consistently is able to import Quicken data files covering decades of transactions that even the new versions of Quicken can't.

9. Companion iOS app syncing. Some may appreciate entering financial data on a portable device. I rather stick to the efficiency of doing so on a computer with a larger screen and a physical keyboard. I capture receipts on my iOS device with its camera (try Scanner Pro or Genius Scan) and save them as PDF on a secure shared cloud drive which I later use to fill in transaction details in SEE Finance on my computer. Keying in such details on my iPhone would be far less efficient. Personally, I rather not have the developer get distracted with an iPhone app unless it creates much better efficiencies in managing my finances.

While improvements to SEE Finance are always welcome, none of these points that Amcarter3 keeps reiterating are "deal-breakers" for me. So almost all of what Amcarter3 wrote carries very little weight in my decision to use SEE Finance. Others are free to agree or disagree. This is my personal perspective. I invite others to try SEE Finance for themselves for free and make their own decision.

No. The program is really going nowhere.

It's a great list, because of all the things planned for v.1.0 on July 6, 2012, *none* have been implemented nearly 4 years later!

Check all the Change Logs for both pre and post version 1 on the developer's website. Much of the program has been improved or revised rather regularly since 2009. What is remarkable during all this, even since the program was initially released pre-version 1, is how extremely reliable and robust this program has been. This is in stark contrast to Quicken which I recall on several occasions having corrupted my data file which required a rebuild. Personally, I have found the developer of SEE Finance to be very responsive and actually enjoy using this program, but as the saying goes, you can't please everyone. Personally, nothing on your list is a "deal breaker" for me, although I do think Reconciliation was simpler on Quicken. However, for me, this small difference does not detract from the overall massive advantages of SEE Finance over the competition.

https://scimonocesoftware.com/seefinance/versions/version_0_9/changes.html

https://scimonocesoftware.com/seefinance/versions/version_1/changes.html

PS
According to the Change Logs, there have been many improvements to investment tracking, recurring transactions, downloading/importing, etc., so it looks like it is your list that is in need of revision more than SEE Finance.

Truly odd. I have version 0.9.18.0 which is listed as most recent when "Checking for update.."
Yet I received 2 notices from MU for versions 0.9.18.1 and 1.05.
On their website no mention of the change, simply the availability of 1.05 for download..

That's because from the user's point of view, there really is nothing new in 1.0.5.

There are none of the oft-requested improvements such as:

1. Improved reconcile for checking
2. True linking of transfer transactions
3. Inline transaction editing

In-app documentation is minimal, and the UI hasn’t changed in years and is dated.

I've been using this program for 4 years (when Quicken dropped support for OS X) and really like it. It imported 18 years of Quicken data with ease, and is the only program I have found that accurately tracks employee stock options.

The program isn't flawless - double-entry transactions involving 2 accounts aren't automatically created as they were in Quicken, and return on investment calculations need work (especially for securities that receive substantial dividend income).

I had no idea a 1.0 release was imminent - just saw it here today. The company hasn't emailed users about the new release yet, and I don't see significant changes listed for the new version other than El Capitan compatibility. Will stay at 0.9.x for now until I know more.

if you noticed this version 1.0.5 is listed as a paid update... so I guess if you want to go with the updates we must pay again? If so, most disappointing, as I paid full price for my current version about a year or so ago.
If the the 0.9.18 will not work with El Capitan, and the new version is a paid update, I am out of here and will find another app to take care my financials. I find paying 2x for an app in such a short time span to be unacceptable.

Valid points, for the most part. I have never experienced a time when I tried to access the developer's website when it was down, so I can't agree that that is a problem. I do think it would be trivial for the developer to create a search capability for the support documents on his site and agree it is quite odd that that is not yet in place. A user forum would also be useful as users familiar with the workings of the program could surely help to explain how certain things, like the reconcile feature, function. And the developer could also glean some insight on what areas of the program could use some adjustments for ease of use, etc. Having said that, the reconcile function does work fine, although it is a bit different than Quicken. In SEE Finance you usually view imported data from your financial institutions on the top of a split pane and compare that to the recorded information in the lower pane. I usually check off the items in the top while comparing to my paper, email and PDF receipts and then copy those checked items to the lower pane for reconciliation. Works fine for me, but yes, not as straight forward as Quicken was. As for printing checks... that is a good point. I could see where some people might need that function. Personally, I write very few checks nowadays... like maybe one a month, so I never missed such a feature... but I can understand that it would be important to some. Credit cards, Electronic Transfers, etc. have replaced paper checks for the most part in my life.

I appreciate the link to the Top 12 Mac Finance Software web article, Bowlerboy_jmb. That's a great side-by-side comparison showing the value of each with the major features required. However, I'm a bit puzzled as to why an in-depth study such as this has excluded probably the most popular Mac Quicken alternative, iBank. I can think of Jumsoft Money, MoneyWiz and Checkbook Pro as other alternatives that could be excluded, but iBank certainly seems to be a major option this article has overlooked. I don't even like iBank but I'd like to see how it is evaluated by others.

Just curious... what are you using Bill Pay for? I have never had the need. All my bills are either automatically deducted from my checking account, billed to my visa or paid via app with no additional fees or charges. My bank has a Bill Payer service, but I have never found a use for it.

Built in Bill Pay in program gives me full control over who gets paid. when they get it, and how much they get. It minimizes problems in case of billing errors, and allows me to fully control my account with less risk of hacking or identity theft. It also allows me to change banks or credit cards, such as lost cards, or hacked information without notifying all the payee's of these changes. If you are using automatic payments for all of your bills you have a lot more faith and trust in your payee's than I do. I just hope your trust is not taken advantage of, or misused.

I mostly agree with you and Craigharl that See Finance is a step above all other Mac-based personal finance programs. It has huge potential. However... they know many of us have been waiting for many years for Ver 1.0. I currently use iBank, but would switch in a flash IF and WHEN they release Ver 1.0. Why? Because, as good as this beta version is, there are still many issues that they acknowledge and plan to fix in Ver 1.0. Here's why I'm holding off: On Jul 6, 2012, at 7:38 AM, See Finance wrote: The general list of feature changes planned for in version 1.0 is rather large and really encompasses most aspects of the program. The following is a short list: • Revised account reconciliation • Option to force link transfer transactions • Revised reports and budgets • Inline transaction entry • Easier investment transaction entry • Improved investment tracking • Improved recurring transactions • Improved downloading/importing • Companion iOS app syncing I suggest that anyone interested in See Finance VER 1.0, send them a message encouraging them to 'GET'ER DONE"!

@Amcarter3... Waiting for a "Ver. 1.0" is plain silly. That Version number means very little relative to other software offerings. It is just a label. This "beta" of SEE Finance that I have been using for the past couple of years is FAR more stable and usable than any version of Quicken for Mac. As far as that list you are waiting for for Ver. 1, most are already done and many are just standard mentions of improvements which are standard changes in almost any software update. SEE Finance could be listed at Ver. 5.0 by now if held to the same lower standard of any other software developer. That the developer has chosen to leave the enumeration as a beta is the developer's choice, but it does not detract from the fitness or usability of this particular product from my actual user's standpoint. I normally steer well clear of beta versions of any software, but in this case, I have found the software to be extremely stable, usable and error free. I am more than happy that the developer takes his time to ensure that even these pre-version-1 releases are stable, robust and usable. I truly hope he ignores your request to "Get 'er done" and just continues his steady improvements and strict quality control. Your request sounds like you are in favor of the ridiculous version numbering of software such as Mozilla's Firefox which releases a full-point update almost monthly with no substantiative improvement to quality, features or stability of the product. "A rose by any other name would smell as sweet...and poop stinks just as bad."

I maintain my assessment of See Finance. Until the changes that the developer indicated would NOT be done until Ver 1 is finally released, I will not use it. In the meantime, this app is rapidly losing ground on iBank. I've been using iBank for 3 years and am very happy with it.

I tried iBank a few times. I really wanted to like iBank since I like its developer and already use another one of his products (iBiz). iBank was originally my first choice when leaving Quicken. Unfortunately, I found iBank buggy and far less robust (it choked on my decades of Quicken data) compared with SEE Finance (which imported all my data and worked with it without a hiccup.) From comments made by other users, I was not the only one who experienced frustration with iBank. I encourage users here to try out both iBank and SEE Finance and choose which works for them.

For those interested, iBank is just about ready to release Version 5. This comes 3 years after Ver 4 was released. Ver 4 has been extremely stable and works very well for all aspects of personal finance management. Ver 5 will be a significant upgrade. (I participated in the Alpha and Beta testing of it).

@Amcarter3: Since you use iBank5, what is your opinion of the subscription fees that are levied by iBank to synch and update bank data? Personally, I HATE having to pay ongoing subscriptions for anything. The cost for subscription services always ends up costing the consumers way more than traditional purchase arrangements. It is becoming all too common as a means for greedy developers to milk more profit out of there customers. Microsoft has been leading the charge in this method of ripping-off consumers for several years and it is worrisome that iBank's developers have now headed down that path.

rezstudios... you are mistaken. There are no subscription fees at all for syncing any bank transactions in iBank. The only IGG product that charges subscription fees is the iBank Investments app. That is completely separate from iBank itself.

@Amcarter3: Re: iBank not utilizing subscriptions... that's odd. The iBank description touts a new subscription service as part of iBank5; "Direct Access. IGG’s exclusive subscription service for automatically updating transactions in all accounts...." I prefer SEE Finance... it updates all transactions and connects to all my finance institutions without having to pay any additional fees.

@Amcarter: I just verified that iBank charges $4.99/month or $39.99/year for their new Direct Access synching subscription service, although it says the subscription service isn't required. It seems a bit confusing... it isn't too clear what functions you will lose if you do not subscribe to the service. My concern is that once introduced, subscription services like these end up becoming a requirement and become more costly over time. (Remember that cable TV began as a paid service that touted the elimination of commercials which paid for the programming... I don't know about you, but on every subscription TV service I've used in the past few years, all of them "double-dip" by generating revenue from commercials AND subscription fees--- heck, they have entire swatches of channels that are nothing BUT commercials now.) Anyway, related comments on this subject are probably best moved to the iBank listing. Amcarter, feel free to enlighten us over there.

Just as I suspected... the list of financial institutions that are supported in the free Direct Connect service in iBank 5 is smaller than in SEE finance. So in my case, if I want to be able to easily download and update my account information for my main bank, I would have to pay the additional Direct Access subscription fee to iBank, whereas in SEE Finance it is completely supported and free. That's a big reason for me to prefer SEE Finance to iBank 5. Just think about it logically... what incentive does the developer of iBank have to update and expand support for the free Direct Connect service in iBank if it competes with their subscription based Direct Access service?