mvelopes?

A suggestion on how you can use Quicken in the manner you are talking about, repeat a suggestion. Open a new account using the checking account type and call it cash. Record transactions just as you would in a checking account - the check # being a cash transaction number. You can set up multiple budgets - set one up for cash. Just a suggestion

Jim M. PS - have never heard of mV---, let alone have experience

If I create a new checking account and call it cash, how do I see the running balance of expenses in a category that I have paid for sometimes in cash and others on my debit card? Could I see a combined balance?

More suggestions to try --- Use an income & expense report. Customize it to include the cash account only or -- Customize it to include all accounts or whatever turns you on. From my experience, you can make Quicken do almost anything you want. Almost!

Jim M.

It was not clear in your first post what limitations you found on tracking expenses in a cash account, but I personally can't think of any such limitations.

Quicken doesn't do "running" balances very well (not sure why you need running balances); but there is no reason why you could not keep track of expenses paid for from your cash account, alone or in combination with expenses paid for from a checking account or a credit card account or even an investment account (well, Q2006 may have a small bug here, but I suspect that will be fixed). You can certainly include expenses from any account in a Quicken budget report.

By running balances I mean like how much you might have left to spend on dining out or groceries, etc. MVelopes is an "envelope" budget system like most people are used to in making sure they don't exceed each budget category. As one spends on each category, an entry is entered that would reduce the running balance. In Quicken, running a report might work...I haven't tried that but it sounds a little more convoluted than Melees. By the way, MVelopes automatically downloads all transactions from all your accounts every time you log on, checking, credit cards, savings, etc.

I suppose it depends on how you look at it. I think that the only true "running balance" in Quicken is in your account registers. That is where you can see the immediate effect of each transaction on your balance. Quicken does not provide any reports that show the effect of each transaction on your balance, though I wish they would.

In a Quicken budget report you can see where you stand for the period in question and how you stand for the entire date range included in the report. As far as I know this is about as good as you can do. I can't imagine how MVelopes could do any better, but if it can, perhaps someone here can explain how. And I definitely do not understand how generating a report in Quicken could be more "convoluted" than anything. Once you set it up, it can be as simple as making one click ... and you have to set up a budget anywhere you go.

Out of curiosity, I took the tour. My reaction was that if someone has the inclination to follow their spending habits this closely, they already have their spending under control. If you need to track the spending of a spouse who is out of control, well, that's another story!

I cannot answer your technical question so this is a "for whatever it is worth" type of comment. Jim M.

As a computer networking professional, I will say the following:

Any computer connected to a public network such as the Internet is vulnerable to intrusion. I might trust vendors with a credit card number, and a few times over the years, there have been "hack-ins" necessitating that my credit card number be changed. I do trust my credit union, online broker, Fidelity NetBenefits and Vanguard with various accounts and perform online transactions at all of their sites. But to give any company access to *all* my financial information is more than I'm willing to risk. I do use Quicken.Com's site, but I only upload ticker symbols and shares for all investments so I can check them while I'm away from home. That said, of course my own computer, which has *all* my financial data on it, is connected to the Internet via broadband. But it's behind a hardware firewall as well as a software firewall, I run a hardened version of my OS, and antivirus and antimalware apps that are updated daily. I regularly check logs and scan for intrusions. To protect against data loss, I also maintain backups to an external drive as well as a second machine (similarly protected), and occasionally zip up my Quicken data and burn it to CD. In short, I trust my own security skills more than those of others. Someday I may eat these words and maintain my data online. But as of today, I don't see it coming anytime soon.

Note that I have not addressed security issues as a result of physical access to the machine which stores data. If someone breaks into my house and steals my computer, I'm dead meat. But I would immediately be on the phone with all the financial companies with whom I do business, so accounts could be frozen, numbers changed, etc. I would hope companies take steps to physically secure their servers, but then there's the issue of dishonest or disgruntled employees doing damage, stealing data, etc.

Regards,

Margaret

Margaret, thanks for your reply! Your answer was exactly what I was looking for. By the way, sorry about the typo "melees"; I ran spell checker in Outlook Express and I told it to ignore "mvelopes" but it changed it anyway, I changed it back but it still posted it "melees". Thanks for not blasting me for nonsense.

I have had my concerns just as you have posted yours about all my data being on someone else's server instead of all on my own computer. All it would take is a disgruntled employee, etc.

Thanks again,

Neil

Y'welcome, Neil. Now that I've turned you off to handing over all your financial data to one company, let me tell you what's likely to be the upside. Any company that makes their business managing customers' sensitive data most likely pays scrupulous attention to security and making sure their employees are trustworthy, even bonded. Otherwise, they won't be in business very long. Still, I'm keeping my data on my own computers. :-)

Regards,

Margaret

snipped-----------------

Have you considered using a virtual drive for data storage? If your computer or CD is stolen, it's highly unlikely anyone could view the data. I can't say there is not a back-door into my virtual drive, but even if there is, I think the odds of a thief being privvy to it are very low.

JB

What exactly do you mean by a "virtual drive?" Do you mean a "drive" created by substituting a drive letter for a long pathname? I must be missing something, because that method is certaintly not going to keep anyone out if they have access to the computer. Please clarify your definition of virtual drive.

Thanks and Regards,

Margaret

I don't know a formal definition for a virtual drive but I can tell you how it acts. First of all, I will clarify that I meant: "encrypted virtual drive". When "unmounted" it exists as a file of random numbers called a container. The container is "mounted" with a small program. During mounting, the contents are decrypted on-the-fly and appears in a new drive which has whatever drive letter you assigned to it during mounting.. There is virtually no waiting during this process, unlike ordinary encryption schemes.

When mounted, it's indistinguishable from a real hard drive. When dismounted, it disappears but the information is encrypted on-the-fly and saved in the container.

If you choose a good password, for all practical purposes the contents cannot be decrypted by brute force. The file will not be mounted when the computer is turned off so a thief won't be able to view the data. Copy the container to a CD and you have no worries if it walks away.

If you were to leave the container mounted, anyone who can access your computer could view them, however.

I use TrueCrypt and you can read about it here:

I've used this and it's predecessors Scamdisk and E4M for years and never had a serious problem.

Other similar programs are available but this is the only one of it's type that I know that is free. You can also download the source code if you wish.

With this type program the possibility of a "back door" comes to mind. If this is a big enough concern, you might be able to assure yourself that the source code does not allow for that and then run a version which you compile yourself. Otherwise you can just run what they have compiled.

OK, it seems our definitions of "virtual drive" are the same. It's the encryption & mounting/dismounting handled by TrueCrypt that provides the security. You're right, it would definitely provide more security if someone obtained physical access to the computer. But the nature of the software increases the risk of data corruption, so having multiple, good backups becomes even more important. Your point of a back door is well taken. Do you run the vanilla version, or do you compile it yourself?

Thanks and Regards,

Margaret

I run the vanilla version and have never had data corruption from the virtual disk software. I use a bat file to backup the container to another hard drive at least once a day but do not keep the previous copy unless I have a specific reason. I also backup once a week to an external drive, about once a quarter to CD and to a flash drive at random times. The containers are too large for the flash drives I have so just put selected folders in it and use the Sandisk software for encryption.

Earlier versions of TrueCrypt crashed at times when dismounting but that only requires a reboot....no repair necessary. The latest version claims to have fixed that problem. I installed it yesterday and have had no problems.

The readme file explains that containers made under certain earlier versions may not be mountable with the latest version so I made a temporary copy of the naked data outside a container berfore upgrading. There was no problem so I'll trash those files.

I notice that they have added a feature to reduce the chance of "rubber hose" decryption but I have not read it yet. I think it's a matter of hiding a container within another container. When the guy with the hose makes you cough up your password, supposedly he will find nothing of value when he uses it.

Skeptical types may reason that there must be a back door to the program for the government in the interest of national security. The authors of predecessors to this program say no to this FWIW but I don't know what they say about this version. Myself, I don't care...if they use it to catch crooks, more power to em.

JB