[remedy5]

So....are tags going to make it into the next version of Omnifocus if the new focus is on the iPad? Should we consider multiple contexts or tags and option in the near future?

[whpalmer4]

My guess is "almost certainly not" because even before the iPad was unveiled there were (and still are, AFAIK) plans for another version of OmniFocus (1.8) which wouldn't have tags, multiple contexts, etc. I think there's some functionality they still want to get out to us in a 1.x release before charging us for 2.0 (where tags, multiple contexts, putting individual actions on hold, etc. are supposed to arrive). I don't speak for Omni, however, and haven't spoken to anyone there since the iPad announcement, so they could make a fool of me yet :-)

I understand everyone at Omni is having a professional portrait taken, so that their family will remember what they look like considering the long hours they'll be putting in at the office this year :-)

[fruitbat]

Here's my vote for *both* multiple contexts *and* tags.

[blewis]

Well I hope it's inaccurate, but Ars Technica had this to report:

"Omni has pushed back its plans to release OmniGraffle 6 and OmniFocus 2 for the Mac in favor of iPad development. "The schedule depends entirely on how things go on the iPad," he said, though he added later that Omni expects to release those updates sometime in 2011"

Ouch. Possbly another year to get your tags/multi contexts if they are indeed linked to 2.0

[Robbie1702]

; ( snief snief........

[dkmn]

Howdy.

I would strongly vote in favor of at least simple tagging. To implement this in an "orthogonal" manner would not seem too difficult to ask. Interoperability with other tag-aware apps (e.g. MailTags) would be very positive.

I can appreciate that multiple contexts would be more difficult to implement quickly and thoroughly, given the deeply integrated nature of contexts in the current product.

I would be a bit annoyed to wait until 2011 and buy another version for this functionality, which is fairly uniformly implemented in competing products.

That said, I do appreciate the quality Omnigroup achieves with OF. I have been evaluating it for a couple of weeks and would really like to "pull the trigger". The presence of tagging the competitors makes me hesitate a bit. OF is definitely the more bomb-proof product, but I would hate to feel as if there is any "stringing along" of the customer base to segment demand and create more purchases... I'd be happy to pay for value, but I would rather have features added as technically achievable, and pay an upgrade or maintenance fee later (e.g. Snow Leopard).

My 2cents, anyhow.
The large user base of OF is a big plus, for sure.

[whpalmer4]

Originally Posted by dkmn

I would strongly vote in favor of at least simple tagging. To implement this in an "orthogonal" manner would not seem too difficult to ask. Interoperability with other tag-aware apps (e.g. MailTags) would be very positive.

Not too difficult to ask; considerably more difficult to do :-)

I can appreciate that multiple contexts would be more difficult to implement quickly and thoroughly, given the deeply integrated nature of contexts in the current product.

The stated plan (for years, dating back even prior to OmniFocus 1.0 FCS) has been that they wanted to provide a "metadata column" which we could use as we saw fit to implement whatever pet feature we thought was missing, whether it be priorities, tags, multiple contexts, etc. I don't recall anyone from Omni ever promising to expand the program's logic to explicitly support multiple contexts in all the ways it supports single contexts now; I always got the impression that it was simply going to be an arbitrary column into which we could stuff some data and some tools for sorting, searching and grouping based on it. Multiple contexts would be just multiple values (tags, really) in that column. That's the conservative expectation, I think.

I would be a bit annoyed to wait until 2011 and buy another version for this functionality, which is fairly uniformly implemented in competing products.

The only thing that has changed is the date -- the "metadata column" has been an OF 2 feature since OF 1 FCS, which means a paid upgrade has always been on the table. That being said, Omni's policy has long (always?) been that the owner of a previous version gets a very substantial break on the price when upgrading to the latest version. Given that you're going to be using OF 1 for many moons before OF 2 comes out, that's not a bad deal. And it may compare favorably to the price of a competing product (which frankly does not have even OF 1's feature set or capability) which you then cast aside because you discover it may look pretty but doesn't deliver the depth you need. It's sort of like comparing a sporty convertible to an Abrams M1A2 tank :-) As you look at the competition, give some thought to how well their design choices would hold up with 100 projects and 1,000 actions. OmniFocus handles it quite well. Well, I'm told it does, my database hasn't ever been that small!

That said, I do appreciate the quality Omnigroup achieves with OF. I have been evaluating it for a couple of weeks and would really like to "pull the trigger". The presence of tagging the competitors makes me hesitate a bit. OF is definitely the more bomb-proof product, but I would hate to feel as if there is any "stringing along" of the customer base to segment demand and create more purchases... I'd be happy to pay for value, but I would rather have features added as technically achievable, and pay an upgrade or maintenance fee later (e.g. Snow Leopard).

Every project and every action in OmniFocus has a notes field. If you want to define a convention for tagging your actions, you can, today. That notes field is searchable, and OmniFocus has excellent scriptability, too. Could it be even nicer as a built-in feature? Certainly.



I've been a loyal Omni customer since the days of the Titanium-bodied PowerBook. I haven't seen any signs that they are trying to string us along to extract more money from our pockets. In fact, I'm continually surprised at how many free releases they keep shoving at us when there are so many voices clamoring for features that won't be shipped until the next paid upgrade. My impression is that they have a view of how much functionality should be delivered in each major release, and they feel they owe it to us to deliver that functionality before they ask for more money, even if many of us would be willing to ante up again. Take a look at the historical release notes at Help->Release Notes in OmniFocus (not just the page it shows you, but the link to the archive for the full history). Does it look like they are chiseling us?

Finally, I'm obviously biased, but not only do I think Omni has the best support of pretty much any software company I've encountered, I think they've got the best user community. Omni posts its plans to a degree unmatched by The Hit List and Things' developers. There are a number of us on the forum who can answer just about any reasonable question, which means you get a pretty decent facsimile of 7x24 customer support.

[Taco John]

Originally Posted by dkmn

Howdy.

I would strongly vote in favor of at least simple tagging. To implement this in an "orthogonal" manner would not seem too difficult to ask. Interoperability with other tag-aware apps (e.g. MailTags) would be very positive.

I can appreciate that multiple contexts would be more difficult to implement quickly and thoroughly, given the deeply integrated nature of contexts in the current product.

I would be a bit annoyed to wait until 2011 and buy another version for this functionality, which is fairly uniformly implemented in competing products.

That said, I do appreciate the quality Omnigroup achieves with OF. I have been evaluating it for a couple of weeks and would really like to "pull the trigger". The presence of tagging the competitors makes me hesitate a bit. OF is definitely the more bomb-proof product, but I would hate to feel as if there is any "stringing along" of the customer base to segment demand and create more purchases... I'd be happy to pay for value, but I would rather have features added as technically achievable, and pay an upgrade or maintenance fee later (e.g. Snow Leopard).

My 2cents, anyhow.
The large user base of OF is a big plus, for sure.

The presence of tagging in OmniFocus' competitors has been what's driven me back to OmniFocus every time. I don't want to spend the mental energy required to create and maintain a tagging/metadata language.

Take The Hit List. I initially loved THL for the interface, the timer, the bells and whistles. And while OmniFocus is, at it's core, a free-form outliner, The Hit List maintains that identity so much more.

But I found I was spending too much time trying to figure out elaborate systems not only for using multiple contexts (supported in THL) but also for using the tags. Not to mention the other metadata OmniFocus already has like start date, due date, and time estimate.

THL had other problems (lack of an iPhone app and lack of an ability to easily "complete" a project), but the biggest was that I was fiddling too much with it. OmniFocus imposes on me a discipline that I have not yet learned.

[eurobubba]

This may be of interest for those following this thread. Part of an excellent series on using OF — the guy's a true OF power user.

http://kouroshdini.com/2010/02/22/us...s-and-agendas/

[joelande]

Originally Posted by eurobubba

This may be of interest for those following this thread. Part of an excellent series on using OF — the guy's a true OF power user.
http://kouroshdini.com/2010/02/22/us...s-and-agendas/

I don't like that solution - it involves several steps, with a link and creating two tasks for the same thing, one in calls, and one in agenda:

Originally Posted by otheronline blog

The solution is one of those that took a while to stumble upon, but is rather a simple combination of the two:
• List all items which are to be discussed or otherwise with an Agenda context. They are agenda items after all.
• Keep “Call Jim” as a separate task with a Calls context. This task can then receive a start date, flag or whatever marker.
• To smooth the process, go to the context “Agenda : Jim”, «Command-click» and select “Copy as Link” and paste the link in the notes field of the call task.