an open letter...

When I found Liquid Ledger sometime last year, I was pleased that it seemed to be the only piece of finance software that could meet my needs—it ran on the Macintosh, appeared sufficiently robust, and provided at least basic support for operating accounts in more than one currency.

Since I started using LL, I've become more impressed with the attention to detail in some aspects of the program design. It's also clear Itrat that you've got some kind of background in Accountancy, and you quickly answer queries that users have about how to design their chart of accounts with information that is more than simply software support. That's excellent.

Unfortunately, Itrat, it appears that the development of Liquid Ledger is not continuing either at a pace that is acceptable to me as a user, or, I have to say, at the pace that you have promised to users who have been with the product for some time.

A history lesson...
On the 18th of November 2003 you wrote: “There's still a lot of work to do for Liquid Ledger 2, so the best release estimate I can give right now would be early 2004."

On the 26th of January 2004, in response to a question from Steve Heaney, you wrote “There is a limitation with the current Liquid Ledger document model in that cleared dates are shared among both sides of a transfer. This has been corrected in Liquid Ledger 2..."

On the 16th of March 2004, in response to a question I had, you wrote: “The Version 1.3.2 update currently in progress has added drag and drop support, so you can drag transactions in the "Unreconciled Purchases" and simply drop them onto an account in the Accounts drawer to move those transactions to the desired account. The update should be available in the next few days."

Four days later, I posted a message to this list, praising you and Liquid Ledger highly, Itrat: “This is the thing about Liquid Ledger... why I am so glad that I am using it. True, there is the occasional feature I look for and find it isn't there yet. But invariably, you're responsive to user requests and things are actually done to implement these in a relatively short period of time..."

I even (ironically) went on to say, “I once heard that when a air force jet pilot is navigating, they treat small aircraft like microlights as though they were stationery objects. In terms of update schedules, Liquid Ledger can just about do the same to the competition."

Yet it was not to be. Rather than just 'a few more days', over five months later even this point-release bug fix update has not arrived. And where is the mythical Version 2.0, which since before I purchased LL has been promised to users as a free upgrade which addresses so many issues? (I note now that on the 21st of July 2004 you did post an email that included that “[certain] fixes were included in the Version 1.3.2 update which is not available through the updater utility, so I will arrange for you to download it and contact you separately.” Yet I had never heard this was available previously?)

On the 6th of March 2004 talk of LL 1.3.2 disappeared, but you wrote: “The current release has a bug with respect to running balances and account balances for foreign currency accounts which make them unusable for comparing against a bank statement. The upcoming Liquid Ledger 1.4 release is expected to fix this and other problems with multiple currency documents by retrofitting the Liquid Ledger 2 multiple currency model into the current release. This has been a pretty significant change and has been taking a little longer than expected, but it is almost complete."

On the 18th of May 2004 you wrote: “Getting the Version 1.4 release out is a priority, specifically because of the multiple currency bug in Version 1.3. A beta version will be available by no later than the end of this month."

On the 31st of May 2004 you emailed the list, reporting “A couple of weeks ago I mentioned that the v1.4 beta release would be available by the end of the month. That was a bit optimistic and the release still needs some work before being made generally available.” You offered a early special-implementation of some new features, for those running foreign currency accounts who required it. I'm running foreign currency accounts, but have not requested an 'unofficial build'... I think the idea of an 'unofficial build' is just a little too scary.

And an observation on company identity...
Modeless Software's website is an impressive creation, carefully designed to give the sense that there is a significant company behind Liquid Ledger. You have different email addresses for sales, for general inquiries, for website feedback. Over time I've come to the conclusion though that if this isn't a single person operation, it's pretty close to it. And in some ways, that's great. You are so much more accessible and responsive to your users than the Microsofts of the world. It is amazing to see someone request a feature, and have it appear in the next version of the software. And while lately something has clearly gone awry with the update schedules, previously those updates were shipping pretty quickly. But I did feel a bit mislead, too, wondering whether LL is more like a great piece of shareware with a clever business model, than a genuinely “professional” piece of software. I could suggest that the delays over recent months support the idea that LL is more a piece of commercialised shareware. However in this regard a single word reply should probably silence me: “Longhorn”...   : )

The future...
Hopefully, you're about to release Liquid Ledger 1.4 and are hard at work on LL2.0. I pray that you haven't experienced some personal catastrophe that has shaken your life, and prevented you from working to develop this program further. If you have, then my apologies for adding to your load. As your users, I guess we'll never know—it's not our business to pry into your personal circumstances.

However, it's important that you know how your core users are feeling. And I suspect I'm not alone when I say that I'm getting tired of waiting for the promised features of LL1.4/2.0. I won't try to throw my tiny consumer weight around and pretend I'll otherwise “take my business elsewhere”. Apart from the fact that LL2.0 will be a free upgrade to me, I don't have the time, energy or inclination to change finance software packages again. And anyway, LL still is the best software out there for my circumstances. despite any ongoing issues.

But there are some fundamental issues in the software that I need fixed. They can't wait for LL2.0 any longer, or maybe even 1.4. They are basic functionality issues that need to be corrected in the current version. I drew attention to the problem in my post to this list of the 22nd of March 2004, titled “5 accounts continued...” Admittedly, there were some tricky points raised in that discussion. Since then I've had some further thoughts, and I'll post them in a separate email to the list. The two basic fixes I'm proposing are simple, should be easy to implement, and will markedly reduce the frustration I experience when using LL. And I think they're a litmus test to me. I'm keen to be a part of an active LL community, but it's a two-way street. And lately I've been feeling there has been a growing credibility gap in what has been appearing from you Itrat.

So, in response?
Of course it would be nice to hear from you. I think you've learned the lesson of no promising a release schedule; many companies have been burned before by failing to meet those, usually for the best of reasons. But more importantly, how about a rapid bug-fix release, addressing some of the issues raised in this list over the last few months? I don't care whether it includes any of the new features at this point, I just want to see all of the existing features working correctly.

You need to do this Itrat. There is now an issue of credibility at stake.

Yours sincerely,
Duncan Babbage