Usability questions

[Anthony Dardis]

FWIW Quicken on Windows (2009?) works that way, and the weird psychology  
of screen real estate does make it feel "cramped" although of course there  
is no functional meaning to "cramped," since being at the bottom of the  
screen makes no difference to what you can or can't do.




On Sat, 11 Dec 2010 10:48:58 -0500, Derek Atkins <derek at ihtfp.com> wrote:

> Hi,
>
> On Sat, December 11, 2010 10:34 am, Talengix wrote:
>> Thanks Derek,
>>
>> Your tip did indeed solve the second point on my list. Hopefully,  
>> somebody
>> has an answer for my other comment. Cheers. Kevin
>
> Sorry, no way to do that.  It wont scroll past the end of the list, and I
> think it would confusing if it did.  Honestly, sometimes I HATE that when
> I'm scrolling down a spreadsheet it just keeps going well past the end of
> my actual data.  I HATE HATE HATE that, and I'm very glad GnuCash doesn't
> do that.
>
> A row is a row, and GnuCash will add and scroll for you to make sure the
> whole transaction is visible (until you get so many splits that it gets
> bigger than the screen).
>
> -derek
>
>> On Sat, Dec 11, 2010 at 6:55 AM, Derek Atkins <derek at ihtfp.com> wrote:
>>
>>> Hi,
>>>
>>> On Sat, December 11, 2010 6:21 am, Talengix wrote:
>>> > Greetings,
>>> >
>>> [snip]
>>> > 2. The process of creating splits seems very unintuitive (if I'm  
>>> doing
>>> it
>>> > right) to me. First I adjust the date and then add a description.
>>> Next, I
>>> > must go way up to the main buttons and click Split. Then I must go  
>>> way
>>> > down
>>> > to the transaction and add the transaction amount for one account.
>>> Then I
>>> > must be careful to not hit enter or it wrecks the whole transaction
>>> and I
>>> > must cancel and start over. Assuming I don't mistakenly hit the enter
>>> > button
>>> > by habit, to get the next part of the transaction I must go way back
>>> up
>>> to
>>> > the split button on the main bar and click not once but twice. The
>>> first
>>> > click collapses the first split line (why?). The second click finally
>>> > opens
>>> > them both up. Now, finally, I can choose the other account and finish
>>> the
>>> > split. Furthermore, I was unable to find any shortcuts to do splits
>>> > quicker
>>> > and more efficiently. I think this is a serious problem since in
>>> double
>>> > entry accounting probably 95% of all transactions involve a Split.  
>>> Let
>>> me
>>> > know if I am doing this wrong.
>>>
>>> I think you're doing it wrong.
>>>
>>> First, I think 95% of all transactions are "Basic" transactions,  
>>> meaning
>>> they have exactly two Splits, one debit and one credit of equal value.
>>> GnuCash is designed to make it extremely easy to enter in a Basic
>>> transaction.  All you do is put the "other" account into the transfer
>>> column.  Voila, you're done.  GnuCash will enter in both Splits for you
>>> automatically.
>>>
>>> For that other 5% where you really DO have a multi-split transaction
>>> (involved >2 accounts), then yes, you need to expand the transaction.
>>> The
>>> way I do it is to still put one of the other accounts into the transfer
>>> account, put the transaction value into the debit or credit column, and
>>> *THEN* go push the Split button.  At this point it will expand into two
>>> Splits (the current account and the account you entered in the transfer
>>> column).
>>>
>>> From this point you can move around and edit the values.  When you need
>>> to
>>> make a new blank split either change rows using the up or down arrow,  
>>> or
>>> just hit <TAB> until you tab off the end of the line.  Then it will
>>> create
>>> the new blank split for you.
>>>
>>> Hope this helps,
>>>
>>> > Please remember to CC this list on all your replies.
>>> > You can do this by using Reply-To-List or Reply-All.
>>>
>>> -derek
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>
>
> _______________________________________________
> gnucash-user mailing list
> gnucash-user at gnucash.org
> https://lists.gnucash.org/mailman/listinfo/gnucash-user
> -----
> Please remember to CC this list on all your replies.
> You can do this by using Reply-To-List or Reply-All.