Time Visualization and Calendar Preference

[vanderwal]

One missing element to kGTD is a time visualization. When I move a due date I don't have a view of other things this action may impact. I would love a view of what I have in OmniFocus by time (requires estimating time of tasks) and priority/importance with time visualization. I often have little idea of the amount of stuff I have stacking up against a deadline. I need to know when to delegate or more a task or project out a week or month.

Some of the time visualization in OmniPlan could be helpful, or a link to OmniPlan possibly (OmniPlan has different emotional meaning as it is more formal than possibly is needed). A calendar view of meeting and call actions (or whatever a user prefers).

A built-in calendar view in OmniFocus would be helpful, which could sync or publish to iCal. This view could be more flexible than standard time blocks and with some work could be used to input and flow around interruptions. I really would like a stack of time estimated tasks with their priority/importance and allow me to understand I don't have 26 hours that day to actually get all of the tasks done on that day.

[SpiralOcean]

Just want to throw in my vote for this.

[Hoff]

I agree - it would be great to be able to see some sort of calendar view of a project, but I would keep it really simple and link to Plan if more of that kind of power is needed. I'd like to think of Plan as the full project managment solution, and Focus as the task/personal solution.

My caution comes from having looked at many project management apps - hoping to use them for my GTD system. There is usually way too much overhead to use them fluidly. Gantt charts, work time estimates, resource scheduling - those are all the kinds of things that a big project needs, but not the 95% of projects (especially if "project" is defined as ">1 task") that I work on.

Though having said that - it would be very nice to have a couple simple fields to estimate time. I too would like to be able to plan my day by easily seeing the amount of time I imagine my tasks will take. It would also be great to be able to compare my estimates to how much time I actually took. I'm always underestimating time - and that might help me fine tune.

[tacartwright]

Though having said that - it would be very nice to have a couple simple fields to estimate time. I too would like to be able to plan my day by easily seeing the amount of time I imagine my tasks will take. It would also be great to be able to compare my estimates to how much time I actually took. I'm always underestimating time - and that might help me fine tune.

I would be happy with a single time estimate field. It could be optional. To further simplify, it could be “bucketized” — instead of allowing any time (in minutes) to be entered, it could be a (user-definable) drop-down of durations. Something like “Quick (minutes)”, “Medium (ten of minutes)”, and “Long (hours)” would be sufficient for me. Then you don’t have to worry as much about accuracy and recording actuals.

Thoughts?

— Tim

[pjb]

... Something like “Quick (minutes)”, “Medium (ten of minutes)”, and “Long (hours)” would be sufficient for me. ...— Tim

Me too.
-Paul

[yucca]

Me too! And before someone rains on this parade, no! iCal integration is not what we are referring to!

[Craig]

It would be terrific if, at some point, OmniFocus could (or could interface easily with a program that could) offer planning along the lines of David Seah's Emergent Task Planners (http://davidseah.com/archives/2007/01/02/emergent-task-planner-2007-updates/).

It would be an entirely new additional interface, so I imagine this is seen as beyond the scope of what OmniFocus is for. But since the time estimates and starred/flagged tasks are already being built in, perhaps it's not so farfetched an idea to have a space for dragging and dropping tasks into a daily or weekly planner.

[steve]

To add on to this thread:

I love how in itunes you can check on the length of a playlist or your library. A playlist could be 45 minutes and the entire music library could be 9.5 days.

I would be fantastic if you focus on a project and see that you had 1.5 hours left or look at all of your tasks within a particular range and see that you are estimated 50.5 hours of NA's.

For me and my geekiness, this would be a cool way to motivate myself to crank through a project. It could also be helpful when a boss wants to add on a new project to have the ability to say, "I currently estimate that I have a nine day back up before I start that new project. However, I could put the Smith project on hold in which case I would have a four day back-up."

It would also be fantastic to see this in terms of contexts. You could look at your email context and see that you have 20 minutes of emails to crank out. It would be fun to see the time get reduced every time you checked off another task.

[brooce]

I haven't re-read GTD in a while, but wasn't DE-emphasizing calendars part of the point?

;)

-bbb

[Be.]

Me too. Calendar view in OF on an approriate (adjustable) 24h scale.
Be.

[ksenia]

To add on to this thread:

I love how in itunes you can check on the length of a playlist or your library. A playlist could be 45 minutes and the entire music library could be 9.5 days.

I would be fantastic if you focus on a project and see that you had 1.5 hours left or look at all of your tasks within a particular range and see that you are estimated 50.5 hours of NA's.

For me and my geekiness, this would be a cool way to motivate myself to crank through a project. It could also be helpful when a boss wants to add on a new project to have the ability to say, "I currently estimate that I have a nine day back up before I start that new project. However, I could put the Smith project on hold in which case I would have a four day back-up."

It would also be fantastic to see this in terms of contexts. You could look at your email context and see that you have 20 minutes of emails to crank out. It would be fun to see the time get reduced every time you checked off another task.

I second that. It would be a big help in answering that inevitable question: "WHEN can you implement this request?"

[michelle]

I would be happy with a single time estimate field. It could be optional. To further simplify, it could be “bucketized” — instead of allowing any time (in minutes) to be entered, it could be a (user-definable) drop-down of durations. Something like “Quick (minutes)”, “Medium (ten of minutes)”, and “Long (hours)” would be sufficient for me. Then you don’t have to worry as much about accuracy and recording actuals.

Thoughts?

— Tim

Currently there is a time estimate field in the task inspector. There is also a column for time estimates. In the future, we'll have UI to hide this column if you don't want to see it. Right now we only allow hours and minutes in the field. If you type 3 days, it will be converted to 24 hrs (because it assumes 8 hr days). We realize this isn't ideal and we're trying to come up with a solution. Also, there is an option to sort tasks by time estimate in the filter bar. This isn't fully implemented yet, but when it is you'll be able to see all tasks that are less than one hr, less than 30 min, etc.

[mcoad]

There’s been no movement in this thread for a while, but rather than starting another on the same topic I’d like to add my vote here and maybe restart it. Yes, please, some time vizualization would be a much valued addition to OF (badly needed, I’d say). I’ve only recently taken up my alpha option for OF and am excited by it. It seems set to be by far the best personal planning and organization app out there - clean, elegant, transparent, intuitive, a joy to use, like its sister Omni apps. But for many of us time vizualization is an intrinsic part of project and task management. By this I mean something that goes one modest step beyond OF as it is at the moment but without becoming in any way a fully-fledged, multi-person, large-scale project planner and manager of the OmniPlan or Merlin type.

For example, I’m a writer. I work on my own, but have several projects on the go concurrently: a novel I’m planning, a TV project I’m researching, several others. OF will greatly help to plan and manage tasks for these, but I also want to be able to map out visually how long each will last, how I can best allocate time and manage them concurrently, work out target dates for my agent, travel, etc. For me this is all of a piece with the listing and structuring of tasks, not some great step beyond them, and there must be many other activities, professional and otherwise, for which this is true. Some calendar or minimal Gantt-type view would be of enormous assistance in doing this. I don’t need anything heavy calibre, so OmniPlan et al are massive overkill; but OF as it stands just stops short of complete usefulness. An option might be to import time periods into iCal rather than just ToDos, but its capacity for this is pretty small and the results would be second-best at most. An in-built calendar/Gantt view in OF would be perfect, and surely should be a doddle to include for the creators of OmniPlan (much less than a lite version of this).

This all seems very obvious to someone in my position, but I’ve searched far and wide and there really seems to be nothing out there that does this. There are a billion task managers (though none as attractive as OF) and large-scale project managers, but nothing that fills this niche - which surely can’t be a small one, as there must be many people out there in a similar position. The only alternative I’ve found is to use something like ChartConstructor to build Gantt charts separately, but without the huge advantages of integration with the overall planner. Add this to OF and the app would just about be perfect, for someone like me at least, without making it too bloated for everyone else.

It would be great to read other views on this and build up some momentum on behalf of those of us who need such a feature. Meanwhile, I’m going to email this to the Omni guys separately as requested.

[Foosjitsu]

Gantt integration would be AWESOME. I only would need the most basic Gantt functionality not enough to ever purchase separate Gantt software but it would be the icing on the cake for me just to be able to get an idea how much stuff I can fit in my day realistically.

[joelande]

I would be happy with a single time estimate field. It could be optional. To further simplify, it could be “bucketized” — instead of allowing any time (in minutes) to be entered, it could be a (user-definable) drop-down of durations. Something like “Quick (minutes)”, “Medium (ten of minutes)”, and “Long (hours)” would be sufficient for me. Then you don’t have to worry as much about accuracy and recording actuals.

Thoughts?

— Tim
There already is a duration field.

EDIT: Oops sorry, didn't notice that was an old post

[mcoad]

Gantt integration would be AWESOME. I only would need the most basic Gantt functionality not enough to ever purchase separate Gantt software but it would be the icing on the cake for me just to be able to get an idea how much stuff I can fit in my day realistically.

Yes, exactly. As simple as that. But it would make a huge difference for a heck of a lot of users. Seems crazy that a task management app - GTD management, if you will - should rule this out, shooting it off into the big league of project manager apps. What is seeing how your tasks pan out together in time if not a huge aid to managing them and getting them done?

[joelande]

Of course to play the devils advocate, the problem is where do you stop?

You add a calendar view. You add a Gantt view. You add action dependencies.

I do agree however, it would be useful tool to see some sort of time-visualization tool.

[mcoad]

Of course to play the devils advocate, the problem is where do you stop?

You add a calendar view. You add a Gantt view. You add action dependencies.

I do agree however, it would be useful tool to see some sort of time-visualization tool.

Sure, that is a problem. I guess a good criterion would be when the app starts to be something different from what it’s intended to be. This is subjective, of course, but what I’m suggesting is that adding a simple time visualization view would be far from this. It wouldn’t demand any more data, just an elementary timeline visualization of what’s already there and the ability to tweak it somewhat. This implies some sort of simple calendar view, of course, but in a sense this is what OF is already all about - you just can’t see it graphically. Certainly not action dependencies, though. Those would move OF into being a project management app. The ability to create links with other docs already exists, and is powerful as it is.

I agree with whoever it was in the forum who said that OF should be about managing and planning your tasks, not carrying them out. And it should be this in as lean and transparent a way as possible - which at the moment it achieves well. The point is that being able to see how your tasks pan out together in time is part-and-parcel of this, not some different sphere. Listing the tasks hierarchically and contextualizing them is part of this management, seeing how they fit together in the working day, week or months is another, directly implied by the first. It just seems crazy to me that in order to do this - and it’s really important for many - you have either to leap into the stratosphere of heavy-duty project managers, or wrestle with some separate Gantt chart builder, or something like OmniGraffle, and lose the dynamic connection with the data in the process. All very clumsy and not conducive to easing Getting Things Done.

Cheers

Malcolm

[mcoad]

As a PS to the above, if it really is thought that such a feature would take OF out of its class, one solution would be the release of a much simplified, lite version of OmniPlan which would work with OF. OF is not cheap - or won’t be once released - but I personally would be willing to pay the few extra bucks for this extra functionality. (Though I don’t think it’s asking too much at the price to build it in!)

[jafish]

I want to throw in my vote for this. I'm in a research position that requires that I work 20 hours per week. I'm also an artist who is struggling to make the time to work on my own projects, so a way to estimate and summarize the amount of time I spend weekly on projects for my research position would be indispensable. All I would need is a way to look back at the week and see the amount of time spent on actions in a given project. OmniFocus could even use the estimate field that's already there for this - all I'm looking for is a daily/weekly/monthly summary.

[ales]

my vote also for time visualisation. I don't want 60+ tasks in one day couse i know that can't be done in a work i do.

[xmas]

Contributor ptone wrote an applescript that uses iCal to partially achieve what this thread seems to want:

Script to create a calendar view of your frontmost OmniFocus window (in iCal) (http://forums.omnigroup.com/showthread.php?t=6435)

[williamjwoodward]

May I reiterate the need to visualise tasks in a timeline. I'm doing a phd and need to manage my own research project. Omniplan is too feature rich for me as I only have myself to manage but I do need to be able to see how all my tasks fit together and allocate time accordingly (something that can be done in omniplan). There are fields for start and end time and duration, surely these could be translated into a simple timeline (not in ical). Something similar to what can be seen in the image under the "visual timelines" heading in the omniplan webpage. The ability to edit the start and end times from the visual timeline window would also be great.
It's great to dump all your tasks into the program but the ability to visualise/time them is essential.
Could someone from omni please comment on this feature request. This thread is already 3 pages long.

[mcoad]

Absolutely. OF is excellent in so many respects, but after months using it, in beta and since, this is one of the two lacks that just get more and more frustrating. The other is the inability to assign tasks to more than one context. Both are matters that have led to long threads on the forum. Lengthy use has only confirmed to me the pressing need for both. I’m a huge fan of Omni and all its works - to me they are true stars in the Mac firmament. But there appears to be a curious dogmatism attached to OF, due unfortunately to its partial inspiration by GTD, which is a useful technique but for many seems to have acquired the status of a quasi religion. Adherents argues that if you want a graphic timeline, then you don’t understand what a GTD app is and really want a fullscale, big-bucks project planner, and that multiple contexts violate the sacred principle of cramming each topic into only one. Crazy, and extremely frustrating to many of us to see the potential of such a great app limited in these ways, but it seems to be the way thinking is at the moment...

[Toadling]

OF is excellent in so many respects, but after months using it, in beta and since, this is one of the two lacks that just get more and more frustrating. The other is the inability to assign tasks to more than one context. Both are matters that have led to long threads on the forum. Lengthy use has only confirmed to me the pressing need for both.

Just to offer a differing perspective, I've also been using OmniFocus for many months, but I don't particularly miss either of these features (time visualization or multiple contexts). That's not to say they wouldn't be fine additions to an already excellent application, but rather that I don't think they're glaring omissions.

I'm certainly not a GTD zealot, but in following true GTD-style, I use very few due dates. So time visualization would probably offer me little.

As for multiple contexts, I've encounter a small number of situations where it would have been useful. But I've generally been satisfied with the simplicity of just choosing the single, most appropriate context and then displaying multiple contexts in Context mode to broaden my scope.

It'll be interesting to see what happens in v1.5 and v2.0. Maybe these features will be added and I'll look back and wonder how I ever managed to get along without them. ;-)

[Brian]

Could someone from omni please comment on this feature request. This thread is already 3 pages long.

I think the only thing we can say is that we've heard the request, but we don't know how we'll ultimately respond to it. Some folks find timelines essential; others don't.

Adding features that some folks use is good for those folks, but is a net loss for folks that don't use the feature - it's more complexity to wade through to find/use the features that they want.

I can't tell you whether we'll ever do this; plans change over time. I *can* say that there are other features - machine or phone synching, for example - that we think more of our users would get value from, so we're working on those right now. Down the line, anything's possible.

[yucca]

Visualizing a project time line is a feature that is offered by all project management applications, and I would suggest that you look to these sorts of applications for immediate relief. Probably not what you wanted to hear, but at least a solution is available. Omni will point you to OmniPlan (which I use and like), but there are other alternatives if you google around.

Likewise, if you can't live without context tagging, you should checkout Things . . . apologies in advance if I've got the apps name wrong.

[mcoad]

Visualizing a project time line is a feature that is offered by all project management applications, and I would suggest that you look to these sorts of applications for immediate relief...

Likewise, if you can't live without context tagging, you should checkout Things . . . apologies in advance if I've got the apps name wrong.

Thanks, yucca. You’re right, these are the alternatives, but at the risk of repeating what’s already been said ad infinitum in this and other threads, this is just the problem. Those of us asking for a timeline are always recommended to go to OmniPlan or similar. Our point is that these are total overkill for what we need, which is the simple ability to see tasks and dates set out graphically in a basic timeline to see at a glance how they all jive together and thus organize time better (ie get things done). We don’t need the bells and whistles of a full-scale, multi-person project planner (never mind the far bigger bucks for the myriad other features we would never use). This feature would be a natural addition to the app, fully in keeping with its lean style and philosophy, and far from bloat.

As for Things, well, yes, I’ve looked at that and personally find it cluttered and plain awkward compared with the smoothness and clarity of OF. Actually, you can already tag in OF, kind of, by using the notes feature. For tagging on a grand scale, Things may be the way to go, but what I and others have been asking for is not that but the simple ability to assign a task to more than one context. This would help organization and getting things done greatly in many circumstances, but it offends the most rigid interpretation of GTD (not David Allen’s own, it should be said) which insists that all tasks must be given one context and one context alone. The fact that it would be perfectly possible for those holding this view to continue doing this cuts no ice, as doctrine insists that we must all tow the line for our own good. Unfortunately, despite the brilliance and vision that generally characterizes the Omni folks, this appears to be orthodoxy among them too, so for now at least we are stuck.

[Brian]

Unfortunately, despite the brilliance and vision that generally characterizes the Omni folks, this appears to be orthodoxy among them too, so for now at least we are stuck.

I can't speak to the reasons why OmniFocus works the way that it does, but it's safe to say that characterizing motives here doesn't actually help your cause.

[mcoad]

I can't speak to the reasons why OmniFocus works the way that it does, but it's safe to say that characterizing motives here doesn't actually help your cause.

Hi Brian. Point taken, and I’m sorry that’s how my comments came over to you. I’ve always made it clear what an admirer I am of Omni and its products (I use most of them) and, if you go to Version Tracker, you’ll find that I wrote the most enthusiastic early review for OF as well as recommending in the entry for a certain other app that its frustrated users emigrate to OF forthwith. However, as you know there’s been a very long discussion of multiple contexts on the forum and the truth is that the only argument against the idea has been the one I mention: that a single context is best GTD practice and that we should all therefore learn to be satisfied with it. There hasn’t been much participation by the Omni folks themselves in the discussion, but to the best of my recollection, this was the true of them too. Apologies if I’m misrepresenting you and I know that you have many feature suggestions to consider and juggle. But this one is widely desired, so it would be good to know if there is a chance of it being considered in the future or whether you truly do rule it out on conceptual grounds.

[Toadling]

...I know that you have many feature suggestions to consider and juggle. But this one is widely desired...

I'm not taking a side in this, but do we really know that this feature is widely desired? Some users have been vocal about it, as is evident on the forum, but are those opinions truly representative of the entire OmniFocus user base? Do they even represent a significant percentage?

I'm not sure. I think it's entirely possible that most OmniFocus users are satisfied with the current single context implementation. But who knows?

I would think Omni Group has a better sense of this than anyone else.

[mcoad]

I think it's entirely possible that most OmniFocus users are satisfied with the current single context implementation. But who knows?

Maybe. As you say, who knows, and I agree that the Omni folks will have the best sense of what people want and priorities for development. It’s worth pointing out, though, that some form of multiple contexting is taken for granted in other popular GTD-type apps, such as LifeBalance and Things, presumably for a reason.

In just about every other respect, though, OF is far superior, imho, and a superb tool, so I shall be staying with it enthusiastically, despite the gripes, and keep on recommending it. Enthusiasm and vigorous argument for improvements (a subjective thing, obviously) can go together...

But this is supposed to be a thread about timelines, not multiple contexts, so that said I’m out of here...

[Toadling]

It’s worth pointing out, though, that some form of multiple contexting is taken for granted in other popular GTD-type apps, such as LifeBalance and Things, presumably for a reason.

It is a common feature, I agree. And I wouldn't complain if it were added to OmniFocus. But there are other, more pressing issues that I'd like to see addressed first (like search performance across large databases with all items displayed).

In just about every other respect, though, OF is far superior, imho, and a superb tool, so I shall be staying with it enthusiastically, despite the gripes, and keep on recommending it. Enthusiasm and vigorous argument for improvements (a subjective thing, obviously) can go together...

I wholeheartedly agree. OmniFocus is not perfect, but all things considered, it's the best option available. And I applaud your desire and effort to make it even better. In my mind, that's really the whole point of these discussions and Omni Group's openness.

[mcoad]

Absolutely!

[Brian]

it would be good to know if there is a chance of it being considered in the future or whether you truly do rule it out on conceptual grounds.

We generally don't like to rule anything in or out absolutely - plans always change over time. We always listen to what folks want our apps to do, but keep in mind that we have to balance the needs of folks that want thing X, the folks that like our app because it excludes thing X, and the folks that don't know or care about thing X one way or the other but just want an application without a lot of extra features they don't care about or use.

If we're flat-out not going to do something, we'll say so, if only because we know folks will keep asking about it. That's a pretty small category, though.

(Will we do any more work on our port of Oni? No. That's the only one I could think of, though.)

If we haven't said anything, it generally means that we're thinking about the problem but haven't decided what course of action to take; that's all.

[mcoad]

Thanks, Brian, and fair enough. Hope springs eternal, and meanwhile gratitude and kudos for the superb products as ever.

[mjstarks]

I too am stuck in the nether world between omnifocus and omniplan. Particularly I would like to be able to set up dependencies across many projects. As in I can't start project y until project x is complete even though they are completely different, due to "necessary work space" issues for example.

Things work fine on sequential actions if it is contained within a projects action list, but it is much more difficult to have a secondary project become active after, say, the 3rd item is complete from a different project list.

With development of the iPhone omnifocus, and logically when the entire mac platform goes to touch - it would be fantastic to be able to just "touch" grab and project and drop it onto a step in a different project to create a "has to be done before" or "can't be completed until" dependency much like what is possible in omniplan.

For those who say I should do this (with a mouse) in omniplan, the problem is I cant transfer omnifocus files back and forth between the 2 and keep any relevant information!

I guess that is where things need to start - allow omniplan cross transferable manipulation of omnifocus data for those who have paid for the higher end functions. It is really frustrating to not be able to use the same data across both programs. Dual Entry, even when minimal, sucks.

[williamjwoodward]

Thanks, yucca. You’re right, these are the alternatives, but at the risk of repeating what’s already been said ad infinitum in this and other threads, this is just the problem. Those of us asking for a timeline are always recommended to go to OmniPlan or similar. Our point is that these are total overkill for what we need, which is the simple ability to see tasks and dates set out graphically in a basic timeline to see at a glance how they all jive together and thus organize time better (ie get things done). We don’t need the bells and whistles of a full-scale, multi-person project planner (never mind the far bigger bucks for the myriad other features we would never use). This feature would be a natural addition to the app, fully in keeping with its lean style and philosophy, and far from bloat.

I can't agree more. Hopefully this a feature that will not add to much more complexity to the program (for people who like the simplicity of OF) and will be a good point of differentiation from the competitors. It could at least look fancy.
If "Things" was to add this feature I would consider switching to it although it lacks the depth of features that OF offers.

[Brian]

I guess that is where things need to start - allow omniplan cross transferable manipulation of omnifocus data for those who have paid for the higher end functions. It is really frustrating to not be able to use the same data across both programs. Dual Entry, even when minimal, sucks.

We have definite plans to attack this issue, though it would be in OmniFocus/OmniPlan 2.0 at the earliest.

[Brian]

Those of us asking for a timeline are always recommended to go to OmniPlan or similar. Our point is that these are total overkill for what we need, which is the simple ability to see tasks and dates set out graphically in a basic timeline to see at a glance how they all jive together and thus organize time better (ie get things done). We don’t need the bells and whistles of a full-scale, multi-person project planner (never mind the far bigger bucks for the myriad other features we would never use). This feature would be a natural addition to the app, fully in keeping with its lean style and philosophy, and far from bloat.

A couple things that bear mentioning:
As I mention here (http://forums.omnigroup.com/showthread.php?t=3734), the only feature requests that are guaranteed to make it into our bug tracking system are the ones that come to omnifocus@omnigroup.com.

Our bug system currently has over 150 open feature requests with more user votes attached than the one for Gantt charting has. The #1 request is machine-to-machine synching. It has over 20 times as many emails attached to it.

If we add stripped-down gantt charting to OmniFocus, folks will inevitably want 'just this one feature that OmniPlan has' added to OmniFocus. Except every person will want a different one feature. Interested readers may want to check this article out:
Bloatware and the 80/20 Myth (http://www.joelonsoftware.com/articles/fog0000000020.html)
It explains the phenomenon I'm describing in more detail. You start with stripped-down Gantt charts in OmniFocus, but it will not end there. I promise you.

'Bloat' is a very pejorative term, but the features being discussed here involve adding completely new view modes to the app. It's a lot of code, and you can't just copy and paste it over from OmniPlan or iCal, even to do the stripped-down charting or calendaring which is just the first step down either road.

Assuming the features I mentioned in my last post - remember, OmniFocus/OmniPlan 2 at the earliest - it is more than likely that we'll stick with a 'export data from OmniFocus to OmniPlan' approach.

Remember - even without an OmniPlan license, you can open an OP document of any size. You just can't edit the document. So, if you really don't need the features of OmniPlan enough to make a license for both apps worth it, you could still edit in OmniFocus, export to OmniPlan, and use that info to make further edits back in OmniFocus.

Is it ideal for you guys? No. But given the demand we're seeing for this feature, the ideal solution requires a lot more work to make a small portion of our user base happier.

An additional problem with this: how it would affect folks that are new to our product line. We have a minor problem now with folks not understanding how OmniOutliner, OmniFocus, and OmniPlan differ from each other. Adding Gantt charts to OmniFocus would muddy that water even further.

So, to be very clear: is the specific solution being requested here possible? Yes.

Is it likely to be implemented in the way this thread requests? No, for the reasons I've explained.

Is it likely that we'll do something to satisfy folks that want this? Yes, because we have existing work planned that covers most of the request. We want to make our users as happy as we can possibly make them.

[mcoad]

Brian, thanks for such a very full and revealing post - one of the most complete I’ve ever seen from a developer in a forum and much appreciated. It’s encouraging and helpful - and fascinating - to be given such a frank insight into things from your point of view, and certainly adds to the sense of a community of developers and users. I can well understand the issues you have to deal with, especially the problem of dealing with less pressing requests and priorities (maybe we should organize a mass email write-in to back our request and bring it up the list!).

Your OmniPlan suggestion is an interesting, if somewhat clunky, workround. At the risk of sounding pompous, I hadn’t looked into this much as I had no plans to buy the app and always feel iffy about using non-freeware without stumping up, but if it’s okay with you.

Otherwise, what you say about future prospects is tantalizing, to put it mildly. Nothing Gantt but maybe a “while new view mode” - highly intriguing. Will be on tenterhooks waiting to see how it pans out. Meanwhile, thanks again and power to you.

[joelande]

... (maybe we should organize a mass email write-in to back our request and bring it up the list!) ...

This is what I just sent in thanks to Brian's great post on enhancement request best practices:
I want to make a formal request for a Calendar-like view feature to be added in the next version of OmniFocus-

I don't like to have to jump back and forth between my calendar and OmniFocus, and often-times the current "timeline tools" ("move to context view, sort by start date/due date, expand rows") just doesn’t convey the same type of data psychologically as traditional calendar views.

I could see having monthly, weekly, and daily views; with a section of the weekly/daily views showing next actions that have no specific date information in them.

It would also be convenient if it could pull data from iCal, so I had a "unified" calendar view (meetings, etc that are not in OmniFocus).

I DO NOT need ghant views, or other similar higher-end features that are available in OmniPlan, and I don't think I even need to see the ability to transfer data between OmniFocus and OmniPlan (I already own OmniPlan by the way, so that is not a factor).

[Brian]

Otherwise, what you say about future prospects is tantalizing, to put it mildly. Nothing Gantt but maybe a “while new view mode” - highly intriguing. Will be on tenterhooks waiting to see how it pans out. Meanwhile, thanks again and power to you.

Clarification: Gantt charting or calendaring would be a whole new view mode to add to the application, which is a LOT of work, and thus something we don't enter into lightly. I'm not saying that we're having internal discussions about adding a new mode.

Sorry for the confusion; I'll edit my post to make that clearer.

[yucca]

As I recall, the trigger for folks wanting gantt charting is to avoid overcommitting on projects at work. Your approach to dealing with this should really have very little to do with OF. If you are project driven, you should aready have a handle on your time commitments to existing projects; you are either tracking or reporting status on this already. It is just a matter of keeping a running tab. Presumably, you are doing so either as a part of your business' time accounting and/or project management systems.

I realize that many businesses chronically run in unplanned crisis mode. If this is your situation, I'm sorry; but your problems are bigger than OF and GTD. That said, there is nothing stopping you from trying to bring some order to the chaos; but just be aware that it is likely that someone above you in the food chain actually wants the chaos. Tread carefully.

With this in mind, alternatives to gantt charting in OP:

1. Excel (there a many "googleable" WBS examples that should be adaptable to your situation)

2. Your time accounting application may support forecasting. If so, this is probably your best option for estimating your time commitments.

3. iCal. If you know that certain parts of your day are (or should) be reserved for certain activities, block them out. This will give you a better idea of just how much project time you actually have each week.

4. OmniOutliner (you may need the pro version). There is an example template for a budget. Treat the dollars as hours (or change the data type if you are not as lazy as I have been), and you have a very simple forecasting system that is in a format you may already be comfortable with. I use this for projects around the house . . .

[Melan]

I'd like to chime in as perhaps a "joe public" user who isn't so involved in the "OG community" and mention that I definitely would get a lot of use out some way of visualising the deadlines. A calendar view is quite an undertaking, but a way to sync actions with deadlines to ical and have them produced as 10 minute events at the time they're set to would give me all the functionality i need. As things currently stand I end up adding deadlined events to iCal and then to OF as a token gesture to my system, and iCal ends up being far more useful than context mode in deciding what to do next.

[mcoad]

As I recall, the trigger for folks wanting gantt charting is to avoid overcommitting on projects at work.

Nope. Just want a simple way of viewing stuff in easy, horizontal, timeline form so as to see how it all pans out together. That would fit hand-in-glove with OF. Anything else requires bigger guns and - as has repeatedly been said on the thread - would be overkill.

[Melan]

Here's a quote from another thread of someone I agree with:
Another option that would add a great deal of power to OF would be to be able to choose where/how an OF item is treated within iCal - as a task OR as an event.
Some of us work better with task lists as iCal presents them, and some better in events. I happen to use both, but lean more heavily on events. Generating enormous iCal task lists doesn't do me much good.
My 0.02 for Omni

[Brian]

I would ask folks that are interested in seeing this happen to please send email to omnifocus@omnigroup.com; while posts here are good for discussing ideas, it's a lot easier for us to record your feedback into the development database if it comes in via email.