[misnome]

I don't like the GNUcash model very much, it is a bit fiddly to use, and is pretty hard to get the right stats I want out of it. I've used and settled on several other packages in the past.

But GNUCash existed when I first got a job decades ago.

GNUCash exists today.

I don't think any other package really matches the endurance.

[DaoVeles]

It is charming in that it has that mid 90s utility design.

It is absolutely frustrating because it has that mid 90s utility design.

I don't think I have seen any other utility hasnt really progressed on interface design like GNUcash. Like they built a prototype went "Nailed it!" And then moved onto back end stuff while ignoring all input from users.

[jjav]

That's a big win! There are very few things more frustrating than software that keeps changing the UI just because some designed somewhere wants to feel busy.

Make it work well and then stop fiddling with it.

[moe_sc]

There is a middleground. Of course, change for the sake of change sucks, you just have to relearn for no benefit.

But change for the sake of implementing m New features and having a well thought out redesign after collecting issues over a decade or so makes software more accessible and allows you to streamline workflows where new features just got tacked on over time.

[jjav]

> I don't think any other package really matches the endurance.

This is hugely valuable. I've been using gnucash since the late 90s, and have the all data files going back to 2000.