[Scott TX]

Well for the record my eval of OmniFocus is on hold while I spend the next week looking at Things. This feature is a deal breaker for me. Not being able to simply say I want something to repeat only on weekdays seems overly simple and if it is not then all the other developer must be brilliant (to use a Steve Jobs word!).

I hope the devs listen and you guys get this feature. If I find some glaring hole like this in Things I may be back. Can't have everything but right now intelligent repeating is is on my "must have" list.

BTW....The comments about using the in app functionality to report this seem a bit misplaced. This is an OmniFocus forum. They set it up and they are paying for it's operation so I am going to guess they are reading it and paying attention. Besides given the huge number of "me to!!!" posts I would imagine it has been submitted in app more than a few times.

[curt.clifton]

Originally Posted by Scott TX

BTW....The comments about using the in app functionality to report this seem a bit misplaced. This is an OmniFocus forum. They set it up and they are paying for it's operation so I am going to guess they are reading it and paying attention.

You are, of course, welcome to guess however you'd like. On the other hand, you could also read and see that you're mistaken.

[Scott TX]

Curt I would guess you have lots of friends. You have added so much value with your positive upbeat and constructive comments to this thread. Do you add this much value everywhere you go? I feel so much better about OmniFocus as a product and great community members like you.

Way to be a great contributor!!

[whpalmer4]

Curt is not only one of the most insightful and prolific contributors to this forum, he's also one of the least likely to respond in anything but a calm, reasoned fashion. I can only surmise that due to that tragic childhood accident, it takes him much longer to count to 100 during his cooling-off phase before responding, giving me an opportunity to beat him to the punch (I usually only count to 2 or maybe 3) :-)

So, let's go down the list. You made a statement that reflected a mistaken understanding of the purpose of these forums, and Curt pointed you to an official statement (a sticky at the top of each page of forum posts, no less!) so that you could get your feedback heard (whether or not Curt might agree with the request). In fact, it appears that every one of his posts in this thread includes directions on how to get your opinion heard by Omni, whatever it might be. With enemies like that, who needs friends?

Or perhaps you didn't like his assertion that developing software is hard? Not much reason to think that a professor of computer science who actually develops software would know anything about that, is there?

Frankly, if you're interested in learning about OmniFocus and its use, just reading Curt's posts would be an excellent approach. His knowledge of the product is as comprehensive as that of anyone outside of Omni. He's contributed widely-used scripts that substantially extend OmniFocus' usefulness and illuminated the path for others to do likewise. He gives assistance to the community freely and at length -- he's posted more times here than there are total postings on the Things iPhone/iPod Touch forum!

Speaking of Things, while browsing their forums to see if I could find out if they have a Curt equivalent over there, I came across this thread which merits reading for a number of different reasons:

1. A reminder that Things doesn't offer sequential projects, etc.
2. Users pointing out that development appears to have ground to a halt
3. A reminder over to the right that just like with the Omni forums, if you need to contact the Things developers, you need to use a different means of communication

I think you should use whatever tool best fits your needs -- if that's OmniFocus, that's great, and I'll do my best (as will Curt, I'm sure) to help you over any bumps in the road. If it is Things, or The Hit List, or any of the other tools out there, best of luck, and if it doesn't work out, come on back!

[Scott TX]

Thanks for your comments. I just think a little less "you are an idiot", RTFM approach goes a long way.

Pretending like the project mangers and the devs are unaware of this request and we just need to tell them is crazy given the level of attention this topic has gotten here. They know it and for whatever reason they don't want to do it or don't think it is a priority and that is certainly their choice.

As an owner of a software development firm with about 20 developers working for me, I certainly know what it takes to implement new features or make changes. As this one goes it is not a big one. If you look at the list of changes since this thread started there are lots of features that have been added which were significantly more complex and difficult. The fact this feature is not included is a choice, and that is perfectly fine. For me this so severly limits the usefulness of the program that I find myself spending more time working around it and given that this application specifically should keep me organized, on-track and save time that is a problem.

Thanks for the insight on Things. I am not keen on the lack of sync. A issue similar to this for their user community. It is something users have requested for a least a year. In the scheme of things that is much harder to develop than some logic around reoccurring tasks but it is still a huge problem for their users.

I really want OmniFocus to work. I spent time going through all the documentation and videos provided, went out an got the ScreenCasts Online tutorials and really have committed more time than I would with most any application, and I regretted moving away a few days ago, but this one feature is really that important to me, and unfortunately the only place to deliver a message like that is through email or a forum post. Both of which I have done.

[whpalmer4]

Originally Posted by Scott TX

Pretending like the project mangers and the devs are unaware of this request and we just need to tell them is crazy given the level of attention this topic has gotten here. They know it and for whatever reason they don't want to do it or don't think it is a priority and that is certainly their choice.

They are aware that some users want the feature, yes. Many of them probably could use it themselves. However, as the list of desired features is much longer than the list of available resources to implement them, they have to make judgment calls on what will do the most good for the product and its users, and one of the factors they use is just how many people are willing to go to the very minimal trouble of sending an email to register their interest in the feature. If one isn't willing to do that, in my book you aren't all that interested in the feature in question. Think about it -- Omni is specifically asking the user population for input in prioritizing features! Now, why is it so hard to believe that the general opinion might be that there are other features that more of the people who are willing to submit feedback want than this feature? Especially when Brian, the guy who manages the people who fill that database with your feedback, says that very thing earlier in the thread?

There are a number of workarounds for this issue; I don't know if you haven't come across them or have rejected them out of hand. If the former, here's a thread that covers some of them: http://forums.omnigroup.com/showthread.php?t=15120.

[Callen]

Would like to have a repeat feature like ToDo App.

This will make it the best App for to dos.

[herbgarden]

Originally Posted by sangha

I love a lot of the features of OmniFocus, but this lack of robust repeating is driving me toward Things or Life Balance. I can hang on to Omni, but need some reassurance that this feature is coming soon... please!!

I've just come from Things as I was expecting more but ..... the very excellent thing about Things is the repeating capability with Tasks. I have things that need to be done weekly, monthly or yearly but always on a working day so setting say the 1st is no good. The first Monday or second Wednesday each month or other month, week or other week would be great.

If not then maybe this isn't for me after all. Its great in many other respects but this one is a major GTD need.

[whpalmer4]

I find it takes me very little time to make up for the lack of "first Monday" repeating. I put a note in the notes field (first line) of the repeating action that more precisely describes what the desired repeat is, and set it to repeat for the closest available option. When I check something off that has such a note, I fix the date for the next one. Or, I don't bother — I work mostly on a start date basis, with a perspective that shows me all the items starting that day. If I see something that obviously needs to be done on a work day, and it is a weekend day, I just bump the date to the next work day. Sure, I'll be happy to skip doing this when they deliver reacher repeat date support, but I find OmniFocus superior in so many different ways that it would be crazy to stop using it because of something like this. Your mileage may vary, of course.

I suppose I ought to point out that the former approach works better with things where it is important that it be scheduled for the earliest possible date (1st Monday may actually fall before a month is up, for example), and the latter better with things where the date is approximate and just needs to meet some constraint like banks being open, etc. Don't want anyone coming after me in early March and blaming me for leading them astray :-) There are some other approaches outlined in the thread I refer to earlier in this thread, too.

[c.nick]

I can't understand why people keep discribing all sorts of WORKAROUNDS to cope with missing features of the product. After all we love our OmniGroup products because they offer great FUNCTIONALITY instead of the hassle with workarounds in the first place.

I'm sure most of us figure out their own workarounds for whatever they feel missing on the feature list so far.

I engage here not to discuss workarounds but to find the leanest and meanest possible ways how to implement and enhance features.

If I wanted to discuss all the needs and possibilities of workarounds over workarounds of workarounds I'd have more food for thought on the Things forums ;-)