I'm not sure why you rate these programs as you have Pat.
I think the rating that he put was based on the following...
Excel matches the same colours as the BIABrewer.info site whereas Libre and Open substitute different colours. Libre was then put ahead of Open because of the gridline problem which johnaberry has solved above. (Thanks johnaberry
Have you considered adding the gravity/alcohol addition to the BIABacus that occurs during priming?
I still use the method from my coopers kits days of adding 0.5% regardless of priming rate
I know this is likely to be one of those requests that needs more effort than reward, but thought i would add it anyhow.
I don't think any software does this although they should mally. It's another one of these areas that are given no attention but that can be dramatically important. I don't think it is important so much on the ABV thing (I'd be going 0.25% btw as a generic adjustment for that) but more on recipe integrity.
When I used the word, "dramatically," above I meant it. You can actually prime exactly the same wort with say carbonation caps and plain sugar and get two beers that would be, for want of better wording, 20% different. I was astounded when I tasted this. One beer was nice and the other one was excellent! I'll never forget that.
[EDIT: Just writing here got me thinking more and more and maybe there is a solution so ignore my initial thinking below.]
Anyway, we have thought on it briefly for the BIABacus some time ago but, whilst in spreadsheet form (without macros), it's impossible to do properly. I thought on it more today after seeing your post this morning and thought of even more problems than we had originally seen. For example, now that we are a bit more clever on this whole recipe integrity thing, we look at the Recipe Report first and work backwards from there.
In the Recipe Report, you'd have to have something that says how the beer was carbonated. But what would be the default? No one reports how they carbonate their recipe let alone what they do it with. They should. In fact, coincidentally, I think the first recipe report I have ever seen that included this info was today. (And that recipe still has lots of other critical info missing.)
So, just because no other software (I think) allows for it doesn't give us an excuse for not addressing this problem. On the numbers side of things, we'd have to go generic in spreadsheet form to some extent. It's more the Recipe Report and re-design of the first sheet that would be the problem.
I'm not confident that we can come up with a solution but the whole point of the BIABacus and the site, in general, is to get brewers focused on important questions. How and what you carbonate your beer with is definitely an area we are missing.
It's something that could be done very easily in a proper program where we could shrink and expand relevant areas but, because this is an area that would require a left and right hand side creates a lot of design and space problems. You'll see we don't have a left and right on many areas. Section G is a most critical one that has no 'right' hand side.
Just thinking it through some more and maybe the best way around this would be trying to squeeze the following two questions in somewhere...
1. Was the original recipe primed? Y/N (Would new users know what this meant?)
2. If so what with?
These are probably the two important questions when it comes to recipe integrity and we probably could build the numbers from there to an acceptable degree of accuracy.
Very nice question mally
Even adding the above means adding one line to The BIABacus but as you will see that adding one line in one column means adding another line to the other five columns and everything lines up so nicely now
On reflection, I think your suggestion is quite silly and that we shouldn't worry about it. Just joking of course
. I will have a look at this. Wish we could write a real program so as we could make The BIABacus even more user-friendly.
C'est la vie, a spreadsheet, for now,