LooseSuits

I'm sure that these issues are because they are receiving incredible traffic at the moment. Give them a week or so and all should be fine.

I think therein lies the issue with 'online' apps. If a lot of folks are using it then it slows down and breaks. Not much use at all when you think about it.

That's why I do all my bank stuff on my PalmOS device with Pocket Quicken... it's JUST me using it ;)

it's JUST me using it ;)

No, I'm using it, too. I just hadn't told you.

Well if it's you that's always in my house, I want my iMac back please.

I got my invite about a week before the beta ended and it was working very well until it went public. So don't fear, they're slammed. Things will improve and you can continue looking at your finances, in a sexy and pleasing manner soon.

and who else is looking at your finances?

;o) (probably Gnorb!)

For all who have no clue what the discussion is about it is Mint, a personal finance online application.

I don't see myself using it. I signed up and looked around but I did not put in my information. Sure, Mint doesn't store the information, another site does. And yes, that other site is supposedly "secure" but I never heard of it and Mint's service isn't compelling enough to prompt me to check it out.

If this were something I could do off-line without a 3rd party, I'd be all for it. My financial information is too valuable for me I guess.

*And I feel really bad for Shaun. Talk about someone coming out of no where and walking away with a brand...

I've been wondering about that too Tyme. How the hell can they do that? I've been on the Mint beta for a while now, and it rocks, but why did they name it that? Seems like they're just begging to get sued?

One would think Shaun COULD sue... I would assume he has the thing trademarked?

They even used the leaf concept as well so it IS a strong case for brand confusion.

Here is a video that accurately describes my concern. It shows the Man in the Middle attack against Bank One. They created a fake site but were able to connect Bank of America to give the security image needed to gain the rest of the login information.

On Mint, people input this information one time (opportunity for malicious activity) then the information is passed to another company (another opportunity for malicious activity) and that company is responsible for storing that information but Mint gets daily updates - so something is passing back to Mint (another opportunity for malicious activity). And Mint uses Bank of America as an example of security - yet there is a video showing how insecure Bank of America is (and this in theory could be any bank I suppose).

Just like the relationship note I think people are too open and too trusting sometimes. Sure, Mint is a great idea but if your stuff gets hacked would it be worth the trouble of having to restore your credit and fix the mess? If something were to happen what are the odds one would think Mint was the catalyst? They would probably replace their credit cards and put them right back into Mint because Mint is supposed to be so safe. But what if it's not? Mint might be safe but that 3rd party site might not be...just like Bank of America isn't as safe as one would think.

No, I don't think people should live in fear of what might happen but Mint can be dangerous in the fact that someone might sign up, use it a bit and forget about it. Yet, their information is still being updated daily unnecessarily. That itself exposes someone to security issues unlike Quicken that works only when you make it.

Well it isn't even available to work outside the US as I found out from the beta invite. I can't comment on how it works as a result but I am a bit pondering about the bright idea of using it over say my quickbooks set up I currently use.

I signed up to try it out. I can't figure out how to delete my account. I get how to remove Bank Accounts, but I can't delete my sign up from their system.

@matto - I'm having the same trouble. One of the bullets on sign-up is how easy it is to remove your account - apparently, I'm dumb. It's a cool service, I just don't like getting incorrect balance alerts (4 today).

@tyme - I agree about the mint vs mint branding. Inman has to be hating it, building up a brand that's now going to push traffic to an entirely different kind of stats tracker. Technically, they're in separate categories, so he'll have a hell of a time doing anything about it.

As an aside, we've held state and US trademarks / wordmarks for "electric pulp" for years, but recently the dental industry has begun using the same phrase as the name of an endodontic test. I imagine that would be pretty irritating if we spent any time at dental conventions.

I was really excited to try Mint, but ultimately ended up in disappointment. My local bank isn't supported (I figured that) and I can't use my PayPal account due to my Security Key. Oh well, looks like I'll continue to use Cha-Ching.

"Mint" isn't an altogether original name so I don't think that Shaun Inman has a case. Its hard to trademark a common word.

As far as the new site itself, I look forward to trying it out, but I will never put in my actual account info - I'm way too paranoid. I don't even give Quicken that information, I update all my transactions manually every month or two.

I've been looking for a good finance web app though, because I stopped using Quicken on my Windows PC and all of the OS X solutions are terrible.

Its hard to trademark a common word.

*cough* Apple

Its hard to trademark a common word.

There's a grocery store here in Vegas called Smith's. You can trademark damn near anything. Remember that ring announcer who trademarked his catchphrase "Let's get ready to rumble!"

The part that sucks about the mint name - mint (stats program) users were beta testers so I find it hard to believe it wasn't brought up. Sure, the company "could" use the name but if they expect me to believe they purposely swipe another companies brand yet be sincere about keeping my information secure...sorry, I'm not buying it. Already mint (finance app) is #1 on Google.

It's a lesson - always make sure you own the .com and make sure to protect yourself.

I was always stumped as to why Shaun went with www.haveamint.com and not mint.com.

Was it already grabbed?

California company register shows hundreds of companies using the name Mint in their title.

The domain name, according to whois, was registered back in 1992 (when the internet was a much simpler place...................)

There is one big difference, that I can see, between the two. Mint (the stats package) is a product of Shaun Inman, who's company has a name that escapes me. But Mint.com is run by Mint Incorporated in Calfornia.

Either way they are both using a name which is a little weird considering what they do. Since when did "Mint" become synonymous with numbers?

I was kinda wondering the same thing... but when were Apples synonymous with computing? :)

I think it's just one of those "that sounds cool" moments.

@RightOn - mint.com has been registered forever. I can imagine he tried to buy it but the price was out of this world. Personally, I wouldn't have went with mint if I couldn't get the .com but that's just me.

When I first heard about Mint (finance) I thought Shaun expanded his offerings. It's not that big of a dump if you think about it. Shaun's Mint software analyzes traffic, the other Mint analyzes finances.

That was actually the same thought I had... I heard some rumblings of something called Mint online and my first inkling of a thought was "Did Shaun do something else cool?

Yeah I figured as much with the domain, small name domains were snatched up EONS ago.

I'm going to start a company called Orange that deals with personal communications using small hand held devices ................................................. dammit!!

:o-