Looks like ATX is FIXED!

[NYTaxLady]

Joan, you are not going to figure out why one works or another doesnt. ATX couldnt figure it out with 48000 custimers. The core engine is screwed up.The Raven engine is screwed up and they need a re-write.

And it runs on too many things that can be changed or updated, that ATX doesnt even check for. They have a lot of variables.

For instance, .net versions are not checked for, but if you run the latest it goes faster. You would never know without the forum.

It isnt worth your time thinking about figuring it out - there is no holy grail here. They need to start from scratch, using a platform whose database can do networking correctly. Raven isnt it.

I stuck with 12.10 because it works for me, and 12.11 held no great shakes for me. I didnt want to risk screwing up a good thing. I may go to 12.12 or 12.13, to get out more bugs..

[NYTaxLady]

This is a part time office. Does it matter how many I do? You either have problems or you dont.

[Jack from Ohio]

This is a part time office. Does it matter how many I do? You either have problems or you dont.

I wish that what you say is true. In fact, it is NOT. The program becomes very unstable above 250 returns. This applies whether standalone or network. Network is WORSE by a factor of 10.

Problems are different based on hardware, Operating System, other programs, network, server and at least a dozen other factors.

"Does it matter how many I do?" YES!!!! If you have never used the program with 1,000+ returns, you cannot imagine...

[jklcpa]

I wish that what you say is true. In fact, it is NOT. The program becomes very unstable above 250 returns. This applies whether standalone or network. Network is WORSE by a factor of 10.

Problems are different based on hardware, Operating System, other programs, network, server and at least a dozen other factors.

"Does it matter how many I do?" YES!!!! If you have never used the program with 1,000+ returns, you cannot imagine...

Jack, I don't think that's completely true. Someone over on the official forum posted yesterday that they are at the 1700 mark for returns processed so far this season on a standalone installation and are not having the major problems except for general slowness and some crashing. There are too many variables to make sweeping generalizations about the functionality of the program from one user's setup to the next. One think is for sure, and that is that the program wasn't designed to run properly on a network.

[joelgilb]

Jack, I don't think that's completely true. Someone over on the official forum posted yesterday that they are at the 1700 mark for returns processed so far this season on a standalone installation and are not having the major problems except for general slowness and some crashing. There are too many variables to make sweeping generalizations about the functionality of the program from one user's setup to the next. One think is for sure, and that is that the program wasn't designed to run properly on a network.

Jack:

While the program does become more unstable for many when there is a large volume of returns, jklcpa is correct. Thing is the problems users are having are not all consistent. Still there is a greater likelihood for problems with high volume and networks, because the RavenDB is being used in an unsupported way.

[joelgilb]

The 140 efiled returns includes both federal and state. Both businesses and individuals. I know it isnt a lot compared to the amount I am seeing from some on here, but then, they may be on networks and are accounting for their whole office. We have one standalone. I am not sure the reason behind the original question.

Joel, glad to join you. Hope I can help here too. Is this the only non-atx board out there, or is there a whole secret underground ATX society out here?

Think this is it NY. And none of the persistent griping at the other board!

[NYTaxLady]

While the program does become more unstable for many when there is a large volume of returns, jklcpa is correct. Thing is the problems users are having are not all consistent. Still there is a greater likelihood for problems with high volume and networks, because the RavenDB is being used in an unsupported way.

I might think that if you are doing such a large volume of returns, for most installations of high volume I would imagine it could be very possible they also have multiple users on a network. Some of the instability could be from the network, but that isnt to say that the database doesnt have issues when it hits 250 or greater. Bottom line, which we all agree, is that the engine running it has issues.. Maybe when I finish my stack here I may have issues like others. But as a standalone, I have been ok. Maybe some issues have to do with memory - high memory addressing or something similar. My crippled system of 1gb might be protecting me!

[joanmcq]

I know that for me, the more returns I've opened during one program session increases the memory useage, and printing seems to be an area where memory leaks, since I've noticed increases just from printing alone. Sometimes I can get to 1.2GB ok, but printing so etching will throw it over the top. I pushed my envelope last night by trying to print a return when I was over 1GB and crashed. It's a huge return, and I just wanted the thing printed before I went to bed. One thing that does work for me is continually gathering data about what works for me and what doesn't and incorporating that into how I work. Which is a lot easier if you're the only one in the program, I'll admit.

[Jack from Ohio]

At the firm these days, there may be as many as 8 users accessing the database on the server. My network is Gigabit solid and clean of "junk."

We had the multi-user slowness and instability for the last 4 years. The "new" software was supposed to deal with that...

At this point, it is faster to go to the file cabinet, pull the printed copy, talk to the client about questions, put the file back in the proper place than to open a return on ATX and look at it.

[North Idaho Rich]

Jack if you just want to look at it why not view the pdf copy.

I keep icons on my desktop to the folders for the last few tax years pdf files.

A quick double click and type the first few letters of the last name and I'm there.

Very handy...

[Jack from Ohio]

Still faster when on the phone to have the paper copy. I can hold place for 2-3 forms and swap back and forth to answer the questions. pdf you can only see one page at a time and have to scroll. We do keep .pdf copies, but this year, pulling the file is faster. Plus, it has last year's return. They ALWAYS want to know "...why is it different from last year...?" If the program would open in a reasonable amount of time, I put the comparison worksheet in every return.

But alas, with all the updated fast technology, the program is defective.

"You can't polish a turd." (Grandpaw taught me that!)

[mcb39]

I pull all the files the day before for the next day's appts. I also roll over the clients at that time. I like paper and always will even though a lot of people don't. However, teaching an old dog new tricks is not true.

[Eli]

I wish that what you say is true. In fact, it is NOT. The program becomes very unstable above 250 returns. This applies whether standalone or network. Network is WORSE by a factor of 10.

I've got 487 e-files with hardly any problems. I'm using a custom built computer utilizing Windows 7 Ultimate, an AMD Phenom II x4 940 3.00 Ghz processor, 8Gb ram, & 64 bit operating system.

Eli

[Guest Taxed]

I read somewhere that the database RavenDB that ATX uses is one of those "free open source" software that may not have the horsepower to run in a network setting like Oracle or other commercial databases optimised for network environment.

From the posts, it appears most of the ATX program crashes and slowdowns happens on network installation more frequently than stand alone installations.

[Jack from Ohio]

I read somewhere that the database RavenDB that ATX uses is one of those "free open source" software that may not have the horsepower to run in a network setting like Oracle or other commercial databases optimised for network environment.

From the posts, it appears most of the ATX program crashes and slowdowns happens on network installation more frequently than stand alone installations.

Absolutely correct!

[Eric]

The software license and price has nothing to do with how capable the software is. This website runs on many free open source systems. The server OS is Linux, the web server is Apache. The programming/scripting language that the forum software is written in is PHP. The database is mySQL. The only thing proprietary is the forum software, but the entire infrastructure doing the heavy lifting is free and open source, and it gets hit a heck of lot harder than any tax software database.

If free open source software is good enough to power Google's servers (and most of the rest of the internet), it's good enough for me. The problem is that CCH chose the wrong tool for the job. Software license shouldn't even be a deciding factor when choosing the infrastructure for your application.

[Guest Taxed]

Very good point, price is not the real issue it is the right software for the right job! In your opinion is the RavenDB the culprit in a network environment??

[Eric]

Thought this might help.

HarlessTax posted this on the Reg Atx board:

"... Our computers are all top of the line and ATX developers have been to our office since they did not test the software on a networked environment. Also the use of the RavenDB is being done in an unsupported manner. A RavenDB exec told me personally the way ATX was using the database is going to continue to cause issues.....from slowness to corrupt files just for starters. They suggested the database be used as a server and all users access the database opposed to the database being embedded in the software and then shared to all users."

Emphasis added

Very good point, price is not the real issue it is the right software for the right job! In your opinion is the RavenDB the culprit in a network environment??

I've never (previously) heard of RavenDB, but from what I've read, yeah, it sounds like at least part of the problem. I don't have any knowledge of how ATX software was developed this year, but the the above quote pasted by Joel makes it sound as if it's quite possible that RavenDB would have performed just fine if it had been used as designed. What's odd to me is that the quote above, from the "RavenDB exec" is exactly how I would expect almost any database server to be implemented in a network environment. I can't explain why the developers would have done it differently.

As far as the software not being tested in a networked environment.. I don't know about that. I worked in QA while at ATX (10 years ago?), and while very little of that time was spent on MAX/Saber (I worked on TaxSolver, their sales and use compliance system) it was always tested in a networked environment.

[Guest Taxed]

If it is indeed true that ATX is using RavenDB the wrong way, I say the head of development should be fired! Also RavenDB should issue a disclamer because their name is being dragged through the mud because of incorrect usage by ATX,

[NYTaxLady]

First, I spoke to soon and jinxed myself.. I am now on 12.12, because last night we lost fixed assets on a return using v12.10, and the fix that was implemented by ATX is in 12.11 and above - they added a menu item Returns> Import Data > Fixed Assets.

Deleted and re-added the depreciation form, and reimported the fixed assets. It fixed my problem.

Second, I want to note that the president of the Small Business Group was either fired, or he quite. ATX was under his wing. He may not have been responsible but he certainly was thrown in the frying pan.

Someone posted that they were told that this re-write has been going on for 6 years, but somehow, I dont think that can be correct - too long of a development cycle. Can it?

If the RavenDB is the problem, and they decide to abandon it, they will have to re-write again from scratch on some other platform for 2013.

BUT...the problems will continue for us, because we will still need to access 2012 for clients who got extensions, new clients that didnt file 2012, and of course, rollovers.

[joanmcq]

I heard it was 2 years in the making, which seems reasonable. I don't know either if Jeff Gramlich was forced to resign, or just bailed. He seemed like a nice guy when I met him at the conference last fall. How is 12.12 working for you?

[Jack from Ohio]

_{Tech support has been telling me since tax year 2008 that a rework was in progress.}

[Eric]

_{Tech support has been telling me since tax year 2008 that a rework was in progress.}

You have to wonder what "in progress" means. Does just talking about it needing to be done count? I've heard that most of the actual development (code) was done in a year.

I just can't see how it's possible that some working version was available for testing for any significant length of time, considering the quality of the initial release.

[Jack from Ohio]

You have to wonder what "in progress" means. Does just talking about it needing to be done count? I've heard that most of the actual development (code) was done in a year.

I just can't see how it's possible that some working version was available for testing for any significant length of time, considering the quality of the initial release.

I was also told that there were 1,000 copies of the beta version sent to preparers in October. I have no viable information or evidence to support such a claim.

[joanmcq]

I do remember some people on here that were approached to be beta testers. One has mentioned she worked on FAM, but I'm so tired right now I can't remember who it was, although we posted about it a few days ago.