Does anyone know what the linux equivalent to quickbooks is? I am trying to go 100% linux, so I am searching out alternatives the M$ programs I have to use. I really need a good book keeping program that can import my company file from QB as well. It would be a hellacious pain to try and redo the whole thing...

You might have a look at gnucash.

Though not a bookkeeping application per se, Mondeydance (http://moneydance.com) is a runs-on-everything Java application that does double entry between one or more cash accounts and one or more expense accounts (not quite Quickbooks, but may be all right for your purposes). Moneydance imports and exports QIF files and does online transaction updates from many banks that provide such services.

Gnucash is more sophisticated, but if you don't have Gnome installed, it's a royal pain in the hieney to get installed and working.

If you search for "linux bookkeeping" in Google, there are quite a few packages you can review to see if something fits your needs.

Okay, I will check those out, My main thing is I need to be able to keep track of which customers owe, my income, my expenses, and send invoices via email. Quickbooks makes it incredibly easy to do all of those things and fills in most of the information for me automatically so I don't have to repeat the same things over and over. It is really very good book keeping software. If I cannot find something that fits my needs that is open source, maybe QB can be ported over?

Alas, no, Quickbooks is a winders-only (maybe Mac, too, dunno) unless you install, say, VMware server, install XP (you don't want Vista) in VMware, then install Quickbooks in the XP installation. You simple start VMware, boot XP and do what you need to do (Quickbooks works just fine in VMware server).

With the extra description of your needs, Moneydance is probably not what you're looking for so I'd review the list of applications that show up in a Google search...

Hope this helps some.

I have been thinking about installing vmware anyway. But before I do that I have to commit to using linux exclusively. That is pretty tempting though since I thoroughly hate M$, never really did appreciate being spied on and loaded full of viruses too much along with being DRMed. death.

I bought this machine used and it came with Vista (YUCK!) and it has been horrible. Ubuntu has proved tons more stable. Getting it configured to run on this PC has been a royal pain, but anything is better then using an easily hijacked, spying virus hole for an OS.

I have noticed that linux, although it is harder to get used to, actually teaches you something about computers in the process. M$ only teaches you how to run their software, which is ultimately a useless skill. Linux/BSD is the future!

Having said all that, is that vmware easy to install/configure/use? I remember trying in my previous dabbles with linux to get windoze programs to work through wine, and not having anywhere close to an easy time with it...

Personally I think virtualbox is easier to install then vmware. http://www.virtualbox.org

Well, I can't comment about Ubuntu, my experience is with Slackware -- it's easy as pie to install on Slackware because a full Slackware installation includes the kernel source (VMware adds modules to the kernel -- not modify, just adds). So, I imagine you'd need to install the kernel source (if it's not already done during installation). One thing you might want to do is create a separate partition for VMware to use as disk space although that's not really necessary it can be handy -- remember that you're going to need at least what Windows uses now.

The difference between VMware (or pretty much any virtual machine software) and Wine is that you install Windows as a virtual machine; i.e., it's 100% Windows and will (other than, I understand, some 3D games) run as if you'd booted Windows on a drive all by itself. Wine on the other hand is a native Linux environment (if that's a good word) that has analogs of Windows drivers and the like written in Linux. The more common Windows packages (Office, IE and others) install and run just fine as far as I know but other packages don't so you need to check carefully to determine whether or not what you want will install at all and run without trouble.

An advantage of VMware (don't know about others) is that you create a back up (a "snapshot") which, when Windows fills its diapers, is a simple matter to restore the virtual machine quickly and easily (you're actually running Windows, so...).

I've tried both and I've settled on VMware because I can run multiple virtual machines (I run XP and 98 for specific applications that are not available otherwise). I tried Wine, had problems, didn't want to reinvent the wheel for a couple of things I had to have (because I get paid to have them), nuts to that.

I'd take a good look at VMware Server (don't bother with the other incantations, you're not running a vast array of virtual machines you don't need to bother with them) just to get over the hump of the one or two applications that you need until you can replace them with something that fits your needs.

Then dump the Evil Empire forever and be happy!

And you should realize Ubuntu is not even the most stable distro...

I doubt that. I want to see a comparison between someone who starts to use a computer using Vista and someone using Ubuntu. Especially Vista is horrible with its new style file manager where the contents of all subfolders is shown in one Window. Or the 'automatic' storage of scanned images. No matter if Vista offers transparent or fading windows, it is highly confusing. Having said this, sometimes I find it quite difficult to configure Linux so it behaves the way I want. But that is on the admin level, not on the user level.

VMWare is OK, but my recent installs are mostly VirtualBox. I recommend the closed source edition, not the OSE. A VM runs Windows, so you won't encounter any difficulties you have seen in Wine. My only problem with VM's on other user's machine is that the users might be tempted to continue using Windows. It takes policies etc to prevent that.

Check google for bookkeeping applications. When I did that lately, I was surprised with the amount of programs available. But most are commercial programs (surprise! for something being used in the financial world) so you won't find them included in your Linux distro. Although I cannot afford to switch to a different bookkeeping program myself, I would be happy to pay for a Linux application if I were in a position that I could select another program.


jlinkels

There are a couple specific things which I point to that make linux harder to me. First and foremost, there is the driver problem. Unless you buy a machine that is specifically compatible with linux, already has it pre-installed, or both then you will most likely have trouble getting it to work with all of your hardware out of the box. I still don't have everything working right as flash videos don't play and I have to run alsaconf every time I restart to get sound. Drivers are kind of the achilles heel of linux. If you buy a computer with linux already on it then no worries, but most people are going to want to try the software for a while before committing which means they will have to get it working on their windows box first.

Secondly, it is still unix based so the console is necessary to do anything meaningful with it. While I and many other people don't care about that, a lot of people are going to shy away from learning code in order to run their operating system. It is just easier to point to a picture and press a button in most people's minds. Unfortunately that is what our society has been dumbed down to.

But the benefits ultimately outweigh the downsides! The benefits are that is free, most of the software is free, it is open source, it is more stable, it teaches you more about computers, it doesn't spy on you, it has no DRM, viruses are incredibly rare, it doesn't have heavy firewalls and anti-virus programs bogging it down, it runs faster, it works better on older computers, and can ultimately do more things.

Ultimately, every year it is better. I have tried it on and off for the past 3 years and found it a little better and easier each time. It will soon overtake micro-flacid in all areas. I am more impressed each time, and I think this time I can switch for good.

I did run a google search on the accounting software. I did come up with one I was interested in, but alas it is not anywhere near being finished developed yet. They seem to have the right idea though. http://www.starnix.com/banal/

I think using one of those vm clients is going to be the best choice for me for now. I don't want to have to reenter my whole company account. That would be incredibly tedious and time consuming. QB is the best anyway. They need to make one for Linux. I don't see why they don't. Many businesses use linux or BSD anyway to to it's superior security and stability. They would expand their client base considerably just by doing that. In my opinion if they are not going to release a linux version then they should at least release the source code so it can be ported over...

After you run alsaconf be sure to run alsactl --store to save the settings (see the manual page).

Yeah, some drivers for some hardware leave something to be desired; but, because some vendors are unwilling to support Linux many have to be reverse engineered to get them ported. The best support for Linux I've experienced is Hewlett-Packard who make drivers available for every current (and most older) product. Also, even though it violates some folks' sensibilities, ATI and others give you their proprietary drivers and, on my boxes, they work just fine, thank you very much. So, it's getting better than it used to be and that's pretty much OK with me. I really can't blame a company that spends zillions developing a product for not wanting to just hand out the software when they're willing to give you a working version for free.

One problem, if that's the right word, for folk like Quicken is that their products are so tightly bound to Windows' insane way of doing things that doing a port to X or GTK or whatever flavor is in favor this week without the promise of millions of paying customers... well, would you? Maybe someday but just not today, dammit.

Ive tried a lot: gnuCash (not for business), OpenERP (too slow), OpenBravo (too buggy), Apache OfBiz (not a finished product yet)...
Now I am trying Nolapro, its almost as intuitive as Quickbooks, much better on other issues (open MySQL database, web client) but does not have so many sophisticated features.
Maybe you should try it.
What have you found?
Regards,
Julio
pradacr at gmail.com

The following offer some free web-based services:

http://lessaccounting.com/

http://www.ubikwiti.com/

Another popular web based solution:

http://www.xero.com/

BTW: you are not alone, a lot of people do not use linux just because they can find no acceptable alternative to quickbooks:

http://techtoil.org/wiki/doku.php?id...nux_accounting

GNUCash ... that's the babe!

I am the user of the Linux and found it easy to handle as there are various alternatives which has come nowadays, but Linux is still user friendly, as i use quickooks software to manage my business accounting as developed by intuit. It helps to find out the errors and bugs of the network issue at it's best as it has different platform that will help out to run it smoothly with the perfection.
https://qbdesktoppro.com/quickbooks-tool-hub/
QuickBooks 2017 provides the billing, invoicing, auditing, expense management, budgeting. All these features i performed on Linux system comfortably. Hope my this comment will help out lots of business person or entrepreneur here.