 |
|
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Darren New wrote:
> Does it do both double and single entry bookkeeping (in different files,
> obviously)? Does it download statements from your bank? Does it export
> to tax preparation software?
As for the first, I believe so. I've kind of forgotten what
double/single entry bookkeeping is. <Looks up Wikipedia>
I suspect it does double by default. You have an account for, say, your
checking account. And separate accounts for stuff like Groceries, Bills,
Clothes, etc (you can create your own). If you go to Walmart and buy
some groceries and clothes, and pay with a credit card, then you can
enter the total in the credit card amount, and then "split" that entry
to specify how much went for groceries and how much for clothes. It then
automatically updates the groceries and clothes account to reflect this.
You could, of course, manually enter them in those accounts and have the
CC account be automatically updated - it's all up to you.
Not sure what you mean by different files. I never checked how it
stores the stuff on the disk - other than noticing that it does use more
than one file.<G>
I've never checked for single entry capability. But, you know, can't
you just create a dummy account and use double entry as single entry?
You just itemize in the main account, and have the other entry go to the
dummy account...
I know they have some download capabilities from banks. I somehow doubt
it's as convenient as Quicken et. al. You can try it.
Export to tax software - what format does it expect it in? It has no
custom feature for this - just a generic export command.
(I live a simple life - haven't needed these things). Downloading CC
statements for me is a no-no as it doesn't contain information on how
much I spent on groceries, supplies, etc in one shopping trip to a
store. I manually enter that (actually fairly easy with Gnucash).
Actually, gnucash handles all my needs quite well, except for budgeting
which I sorely want. I'll either code it myself - if it's easy. Or
perhaps I'll try Moneydance that Jim suggested. It's just that I've kind
of gotten used to gnucash. And I'm somewhat wary regarding proprietary
software. If Moneydance can export into a format that gnucash can easily
read - I may switch to it. Always want a backup plan when it comes to
stuff like money ;-)
--
"Apple I" (c) Copyright 1767, Sir Isaac Newton.
/\ /\ /\ /
/ \/ \ u e e n / \/ a w a z
>>>>>>mue### [at] nawaz org<<<<<<
anl
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Invisible wrote:
>
> I'm just astonished that after all the editor wars, there still isn't a
> Unix text-mode editor that's actually *easy* to use, that's all...
Nano?
-Aero
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Eero Ahonen escreveu:
> Invisible wrote:
>> I'm just astonished that after all the editor wars, there still isn't a
>> Unix text-mode editor that's actually *easy* to use, that's all...
Ease of usage is highly overrated and subjective.
There's nothing easier in usage than notepad-style editing and yet it
fails solemnly under heavy text editing conditions. It's perfect for
your aunt writing down cookie receipts, not for a programmer editing
lots of structured source code, doing lots of refactoring, selecting big
chunks of text, making repetitive actions and jumping up and down
through large pages of text.
Such tasks are handled with much more ease with vim/emacs, while people
using notepad for its "ease of use" are suffering badly, without even
noticing it or believing it could be any different...
Steeper learning curve also means there's much more there to learn to
help you, and it pays. But people don't like to learn, they enjoy
suffering and pain.
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Darren New escreveu:
> Jim Henderson wrote:
>> but once you do, those drivers get downloaded and installed
>> automatically.
>
> For you, maybe.
Count me in too. My nvidia got correctly detected and the right driver
downloaded during installation of Ubuntu. And I don't even work for a
Linux company. (damn Windows + Delphi here!)
But yes, I remember those bold times when I had to edit X.conf by hand... :)
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Mueen Nawaz wrote:
> As for the first, I believe so. I've kind of forgotten what
> double/single entry bookkeeping is. <Looks up Wikipedia>
Single-entry bookkeeping is for people (like, normal household stuff), e.g.
quicken. Double-entry is for businesses, e.g. quickbooks.
> automatically updates the groceries and clothes account to reflect this.
But then do you have a "trash" account for when you throw the clothes away
again? If not, it's still single-entry bookkeeping. :-)
> Not sure what you mean by different files.
You can't have the same account in both a single-entry system and a
double-entry system, is all I meant. I was clarifying that I didn't want it
to do single-entry and double-entry bookkeeping at the same time.
> I've never checked for single entry capability. But, you know, can't
> you just create a dummy account and use double entry as single entry?
Not as such.
> I know they have some download capabilities from banks. I somehow doubt
> it's as convenient as Quicken et. al. You can try it.
OK. We get account statements with hundreds of lines of stuff on it each
month, which would be ... tedious to enter by hand. It's already tedious
just fixing the stuff that the format isn't designed to handle, like stock
ticker names changing.
> Export to tax software - what format does it expect it in? It has no
> custom feature for this - just a generic export command.
There are some fairly standard formats for this, at least in the USA.
Basically, the file says "add $X to line Y of form Z".
> Actually, gnucash handles all my needs quite well, except for budgeting
> which I sorely want.
When Intuit finishes pissing me off, I'll go read up on gnucash, assuming
their documentation doesn't suck.
--
Darren New, San Diego CA, USA (PST)
The NFL should go international. I'd pay to
see the Detroit Lions vs the Roman Catholics.
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
On Wed, 17 Dec 2008 16:26:22 +0000, Invisible wrote:
>>>> It's obvious once you learn to operate it.
>>> Isn't everything? ;-)
>>
>> As long as you take the time to learn it instead of giving up after 5
>> minutes and declare it "impossible". ;-)
>
> Actually it was 2 hours and not 5 minutes, so :-P
You know what I mean. My stepson, when he was 12 or 13, decided to take
up the flute. He got frustrated when he didn't become an expert in two
weeks.
That just doesn't happen, even with natural talent. There is no
substitute for actual experience, and that doesn't happen overnight (as I
constantly taught in classes I taught; I had consultants who wanted me to
impart 15 years of directory services experience in 5 days. Sorry, that
ain't gonna happen).
>>>> But a man page. "man vim" is a good starting place on a modern *nix
>>>> system for learning how to use vi.
>>> I'm pretty sure when I tried that, it told you how to invoke vi and
>>> all the command-line switches, but not how to actually work the
>>> editor. (A bit like the man page for GCC not telling you how to write
>>> C programs.)
>>>
>>> (Also, I'm almost cetain it was vi, not vim.)
>>
>> The current man page is pretty good. vi = vim, they're the same
>> program now.
>
> I'm just astonished that after all the editor wars, there still isn't a
> Unix text-mode editor that's actually *easy* to use, that's all...
vi *is* easy to use. I use it daily. You think I'd use something that
was difficult to use?
But there are plenty of other choices - emacs, pico, nano, joe - all text-
mode editors, all with different interfaces so you can pick one and use
it.
Jim
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
On Wed, 17 Dec 2008 16:59:50 +0000, Invisible wrote:
>>>>>> Well, then, there's really no excuse for not submitting bugs, is
>>>>>> there? ;-)
>>>>> How do you figure that?
>>>> Because you're on the 'net now?
>>> And I don't use klogic any more?
>>
>> You said you tried it again when you did have an Internet connection.
>
> Let's get this straight: I tried KLogic in 1997 or so. Back then, while
> technically we *did* have an Internet connection, after having just
> spent 3 weeks (!!) getting the graphics card to work, I didn't even
> bother *trying* to get the modem to work. (It's probably a winmodem
> anyway...)
>
> So yeah, not very easy to report bugs. :-P
Presumably you had more than one machine with a modem?
>>> Sure, there are about 25,000 Mahjong clones for Linux. But how many
>>> large-scale games are there?
>>
>> There are several. I'm not a gamer, but I'm told by people who are who
>> use Linux that game support is better now than ever.
>
> "Better now than ever" could just mean that there are 2 games now
> instead of only 1. ;-)
Except that that is not the state of things. Don't buy into the FUD.
>
> As I say, I imagine in future the number will go up rather than down.
> That still doesn't change the fact that at the moment it's rather low.
>
>> Like I said, go to freshmeat.net and have a look.
>
> ...so Doom, Quake-2 and Unreal then?
You didn't go look, did you?
> (BTW, I've always wondered what the heck "freshmeat" is. I guess now I
> know... sorta...)
It's a catalog of open-source (and other) software. It's an excellent
resource.
>> Go to sourceforge.net and have a look.
>
> Not seeing anything interesting here. (Obviously the wrong serarch term
> or something.)
"games". 3151 hits.
>> Go to Cedega's website and look at what Windows games are supported.
>
> Who?
Shall I give you another URL to "letmegooglethatforyou.com"? Are we
learning yet? ;-)
>>> Valve don't release games for Linux.
>>
>> http://www.cedega.com/gamesdb/
>>
>> Don't just read the "over 40 games certified", look at the list. Half-
>> Life and several (most?) of its derivatives run under Cedega perfectly
>> fine.
>
> Again, this utterly defies belief. Games, more than any other
> application, are legendary for intimately relying on obscure
> undocumented functionallity. Getting even one game to anything
> approaching working would be absurdly difficult. I can't begin to
> imagine how they have managed to do this in less than 20 years...
Obviously it's not absurdly difficult. Stop arguing with reality.
>> There you go again with the "purposely designed" nonsense. It's not
>> *designed* to be difficult to understand. Don't confuse complexity
>> with "intentionally meant to be difficult to understand".
>
> It's a Microsoft product. It's purposely designed to be overcomplicated
> and obfuscated.
No, it's not. God, here I am, Mr. Linux Zealot, and I'm telling you that
Microsoft products are NOT purposely designed to be overcomplicated and
obfuscated.
How many of Microsoft's engineering team have you met? Personally? And
talked with?
>>> And exactly how many thousand people are working on WINE?
>>
>> This may surprise you, but the core development team for most OSS
>> projects is relatively small. A lot of people can contribute patches,
>> but the core development team reviews and approves as well as doing
>> development.
>
> For something like GNUplot, I can believe it. For something like
> reverse-engineering an entire OS, I'd expect it to take a vast army of
> workers.
Or a few very smart people who have a background in operating system
design and programming languages.
You also expect coredump analysis to be impossible, but it's not. Again,
stop arguing with reality, you're guaranteed to lose.
>>>> I was sure there was something in there. No matter, look at Mono -
>>>> it also addresses the patent issue. Mono is a reimplementation of
>>>> the .NET framework - incidentally, done (I believe) through
>>>> clean-room reverse- engineering.
>>> Interesting - I was under the impression that it was an ISO "standard"
>>> now.
>>
>> The language may be, but that doesn't mean the libraries are.
>
> True...
>
>> Semantics, don't start with "it should be impossible" just because you
>> don't have the knowledge or experience.
>
> Oh, so I'm stupid now? That's nice. :-P
Don't put words in my mouth, Andy. There's a difference between "lacking
knowledge and/or experience" and "stupid".
Jim
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
On Wed, 17 Dec 2008 09:07:31 -0800, Darren New wrote:
> Jim Henderson wrote:
>> The language may be, but that doesn't mean the libraries are. Building
>> cross-platform applications using C# isn't very easy to do if things
>> like Winforms aren't ported to the platforms in question.
>
> Nah. You put a layer above it that abstracts out the OS-specific
> information. It's no harder to build cross-platform applications in an
> OOP language because of windowing than it is because of different file
> systems. Java managed it. Tcl managed it. Nobody needs to run X on
> Windows to support either of those.
And that may well be what was done, though I do understand it is a
reimplementation, largely for performance reasons. But I don't write C#
code, I just read what Miguel de Icaza writes about it. :-)
Jim
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
On Wed, 17 Dec 2008 14:59:54 -0200, nemesis wrote:
> Jim Henderson escreveu:
>> On Mon, 15 Dec 2008 22:21:04 -0600, Mueen Nawaz wrote:
>>> Why is that unfortunate?
>>
>> I wondered that as well. I may not like using Windows, but that
>> doesn't mean that those users should be forced to a particular platform
>> for OSS applications. That's a Microsoft attitude. <g> <scnr>
>
> Because they can act all hypocrite and diss free software while also
> taking advantage of it in their closed platform.
That's their prerogative. <shrug> Just makes them look dumb.
Jim
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
nemesis wrote:
>
> There's nothing easier in usage than notepad-style editing and yet it
> fails solemnly under heavy text editing conditions. It's perfect for
> your aunt writing down cookie receipts, not for a programmer editing
> lots of structured source code, doing lots of refactoring, selecting big
> chunks of text, making repetitive actions and jumping up and down
> through large pages of text.
Surprisingly, one of the best *and* easiest editors for Windows is...
Vi-derivative. Non-nerds have been happy to change to WinVI, since it's
easy (as long as they speak English or German) and eg. I use it at work,
since it is pretty good.
http://www.winvi.de/en/
-Aero
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
|
|
