[JohnJ80]

Originally Posted by Toadling

I agree, although I'll point out that I never claimed to be an expert on software development. If you read my observation as condescending (despite the smiley face), I'm sorry. Perhaps it was a little brusque. Or maybe something was lost in translation. Either way, no harm was intended.



But the OP didn't ask a question, it was an accusation! In my mind, that accusation (of broken promises) was unfair.

It seems to me that Omni has been very careful not to promise anything. All they communicated was their plan, which, of course, is subject to change.

I'm no expert, and I'm not talking down to anyone, but I have enough experience to know that software development suffers from second-order ignorance. It's extremely difficult to make accurate plans and stick to them when you don't even know what to plan for. The solution: keep your plans flexible and adapt as unforeseen obstacles present themselves. It seems to me, as an outside observer, that that's exactly what Omni has done.

Again, I'm not claiming to have any special insight into these matters nor to be any more knowledgable than otter or JohnJ80. In fact, as a development manager himself, I'm sure JohnJ80 has dealt with similar issues in his own work.

All I'm saying is that we should assume that Omni is managing these issues to the best of their ability, that they're making decisions based on a variety of factors (some of which might not be apparent to end users), and that Omni has got the best interest of their customers in mind.



Exactly, which is why I suggest we back-off on the accusations of broken promises and give Omni some credit for managing this thing.




I think these are some constructive observations. My only point of contention is that I'm not convinced the metadata column has actually been promised. I haven't seen that language used by any of the Omni folks.

Maybe it just comes down to semantics, but I think we need to have some empathy for Omni's position. On one hand, they really want to let customers know where the app is headed and keep them informed about upcoming features. But on the other hand, Omni has got be careful in managing expectations. As we've seen, it's easy to mistake plans for promises.

So what is Omni to do?

(A) Don't reveal their plans in the first place?
(B) Reveal their plans and manage the backlash when things go awry?

Seems either way is troublesome.

-Dennis

Dennis - you make my head hurt with your defensiveness.

Omni chose the open kimono route on dates and development plans. It's difficult to do this half way which causes confusion. There have been some specific mentions by Omni on versions. I think committing to getting this done with some specifics is the right answer. I appreciate the vacillation on this, especially with the wrench the iPad launch created. Either way, that is a known now, Omni has promised this feature, and it it time to probably talk about what the feature set really is and which rev it will be in - i.e. commit definitively.

So - how about a date and revision. How about we get this feature fleshed out?


J.

[Toadling]

Originally Posted by JohnJ80

Dennis - you make my head hurt with your defensiveness.

Haha. It hurts my head too.

Originally Posted by JohnJ80

Omni has promised this feature, and it it time to probably talk about what the feature set really is and which rev it will be in - i.e. commit definitively.

I'm still not clear where or when this feature was promised. Can you point me to something where Omni has specifically committed to doing it (something more concrete than just a "we're planning to...")?

Originally Posted by JohnJ80

So - how about a date and revision. How about we get this feature fleshed out?

I'm very curious to see how this feature might work and what it might allow users to do. But I'm not sure Omni is far enough along in OmniFocus 2 development to be able to go there yet. But it'd still be fun to start discussing it among ourselves.

As for a date and revision, Omni has already mentioned they're planning for OmniFocus 2, which is tentatively slated for late 2010/early 2011. But I wouldn't take that as a promise. ;-)

-Dennis

[Toadling]

Originally Posted by otter

Agreed -- it is entirely wishful thinking to expect this feature will be added in any reasonable time frame.

Maybe you're right. Looks like the earliest it might happen is by the end of this year.

It seems there either wasn't enough demand, or there were too many obstacles (technical or otherwise), to warrant doing it sooner.

-Dennis

[otter]

Originally Posted by Toadling

Maybe you're right. Looks like the earliest it might happen is by the end of this year.

-Dennis

Based on the articulated record of previous wishful thinking from OG, that would be far too fast for this.

[JohnJ80]

Originally Posted by Toadling

I'm still not clear where or when this feature was promised. Can you point me to something where Omni has specifically committed to doing it (something more concrete than just a "we're planning to...")?



<...snip....>

As for a date and revision, Omni has already mentioned they're planning for OmniFocus 2, which is tentatively slated for late 2010/early 2011. But I wouldn't take that as a promise. ;-)

-Dennis

Dennis - do you work for Omni?

If so, then please answer the question and quit debating semantics.

If not, then please let Omni answer it because you have no information that is germane that has not already been published and reviewed.

J.

[whpalmer4]

Originally Posted by JohnJ80

Dennis - do you work for Omni?

If so, then please answer the question and quit debating semantics.

If not, then please let Omni answer it because you have no information that is germane that has not already been published and reviewed.

J.

No, Dennis doesn't work for Omni. Neither do I. If you want an answer from Omni, ask them directly and maybe you will get one. Dennis is entitled to speak up on whichever side of the issue he pleases, just as you and otter are.

Omni has been willing to go on the record as stating they aren't going to do <X> (at least not any time soon) because they don't believe it is the right thing to do. They have not done that for the proposed metadata column -- they've done just the opposite. No one has a signed contract from Omni promising them this feature in exchange for consideration already provided, so no one is owed a date on which it will be delivered unless Ken & co. decide it is in their interests to do so. Anyone who's been around as long as you have who hasn't figured out that they don't like making promises about ship dates isn't very observant!

[JohnJ80]

Originally Posted by whpalmer4

No, Dennis doesn't work for Omni. Neither do I. If you want an answer from Omni, ask them directly and maybe you will get one. Dennis is entitled to speak up on whichever side of the issue he pleases, just as you and otter are.

Omni has been willing to go on the record as stating they aren't going to do <X> (at least not any time soon) because they don't believe it is the right thing to do. They have not done that for the proposed metadata column -- they've done just the opposite. No one has a signed contract from Omni promising them this feature in exchange for consideration already provided, so no one is owed a date on which it will be delivered unless Ken & co. decide it is in their interests to do so. Anyone who's been around as long as you have who hasn't figured out that they don't like making promises about ship dates isn't very observant!

So, again - nothing useful but browbeating in a condescending tone from a self appointed high priest of all things Omnifocus? Is that what you want me to take away from this? Sorry for putting the point on it like that, but enough is really enough. Certainly anyone can speak on the sides of the issues that they want, but for heavens sake, the tone of both of your posts needs some serious rethinking.

[official ask]Those in the know (i.e. Omni management) follow these forums. This is a request that they answer those questions and clarify their position - plainly stated although I thought that I had been plainly stated that already. I think many of us would find that quite helpful.[/official ask]

If that position is no position, then that ends this whole thing too and we can make other decisions. They've certainly put out there the perception that this is on the table with some specifics to the point where it sure looks like a promise to me. Clearly, there are a number of people asking when you look at the length of this epic thread.

[Toadling]

Originally Posted by JohnJ80

Certainly anyone can speak on the sides of the issues that they want, but for heavens sake, the tone of both of your posts needs some serious rethinking.

The tone of our posts needs rethinking? Sigh.

-Dennis

[JohnJ80]

Originally Posted by Toadling

The tone of our posts needs rethinking? Sigh.

-Dennis

yes.

j.

[otter]

It seems right and proper to adjust my original post to take into account the important new understanding we (hopefully) have gained about the nature of promises. The corrected statement:

This (i.e. specifically a meta tagging field to assume similar functionality ...) remains a bit of wishful thinking that has not been realized. Day by day its priority recedes further and further, out to the mythical prairie lands of unicorns, where it grazes side by side with Mac OS Copeland and other kindred vw beasts.