[whpalmer4]

No, OmniFocus on the iPad will be the current iPhone/iPod touch version initially, according to Ken's more recent statement here:

http://twitter.com/kcase/status/10373468929

[jdh]

The original comments I remember seeing from Ken were on Twitter, here and here.

Further, from what Ken said during an interview at Macworld, apparently OmniFocus will only be available as a "resized iPhone app" with a "fully-developed OmniFocus due by year's end."

I suppose this implies that OmniFocus will at least appear properly on the iPad in full-screen without ugly pixel-doubling, but the current UI will likely still look kind of strange when increased to an iPad screen size. Personally, I'm more excited to see what OF 2.x brings, both to the iPad and the iPhone, but it sounds like that's still a bit of a while out.

Perhaps Ken can clarify further in this thread assuming that he actually has any time to read the forums these days.... :)

[whpalmer4]

I reserve the right to change my mind when I see it, but I think an iPad-sized version of the iPhone app might have a pretty nice feel. The current screen size makes for a bit of a cramped layout, particularly if you get two or three-digit counters, detailed project/action names, notes, etc.

[ksrhee]

Originally Posted by jdh

The original comments I remember seeing from Ken were on Twitter, here and here.

Perhaps Ken can clarify further in this thread assuming that he actually has any time to read the forums these days.... :)

Yes, I would welcome that. If the initial iPad application is only pixel doubling, then why are so many builds of OF produced lately?

I asked Ken whether they plan to release another version of iPhone OF soon since there are still bugs existing for perspectives in 1.61, but I haven't heard back.

Ken

[jdh]

No, I don't think it will be just pixel-doubled -- the comment was a "resized" iPhone app, implying that it will run at native resolution on the iPad but won't necessarily be redesigned specifically to take advantage of the new iPad UI options or even change the existing layout all that much.

Just because they're not doing a major redesign doesn't mean that they don't still need to test OF on the iPad platform and with OS 3.2, so that would explain all of the builds. It also sounds as if the initial iPad-compatible release will be universal and will therefore probably just be an update to the existing OF for iPhone that brings iPad support with it. So this might also be the OF 1.62 update. Keep in mind that there are no "sneaky peeks" for the iPhone version due to Apple's testing restrictions, so we don't get to see the iPhone builds either.

I think Ken mentioned on Twitter that OF 2.0 might end up being a separate app for the iPad, but of course it would be fully designed to take advantage of the iPad UI as well.

[whpalmer4]

Originally Posted by jdh

No, I don't think it will be just pixel-doubled -- the comment was a "resized" iPhone app, implying that it will run at native resolution on the iPad but won't necessarily be redesigned specifically to take advantage of the new iPad UI options or even change the existing layout all that much.

Right -- it will look as it would have on an iPhone or iPod that happened to have had a 1024x768 screen. You'll be able to see more text on each line, more lines on the screen, probably some tweaking of layouts but it will still look like the current app, just on a bigger canvas.

Keep in mind that there are no "sneaky peeks" for the iPhone version due to Apple's testing restrictions, so we don't get to see the iPhone builds either.

A developer can let up to 100 devices use an app without going through the App Store. Unfortunately, they can't reset the list very often (sounds like the list lasts for a year, and once you've used a slot, you can't assign it to another device), and there are a lot of people (and more devices) at Omni who are naturally pressed into testing duty. For the most recent round of iPhone/iPod changes, Omni did do some external testing, but there were only 4 of us on the outside because most of the 100 spots are already gone. I'm a bit apprehensive that I'll be sitting on the sidelines for the next dance, as I had to trade iPods with the Apple Store the other day after my display failed, and now my UDID no longer matches the certificate. You are correct that they can't do a wide-open "sneaky peek" program on the iPhone OS devices like we are used to with the desktop app. Apple wouldn't be assured of getting their cut of the revenue (or the control they enjoy) without that limit.

[macula]

I just noticed a bug in the 1.8 betas: Action groups containing at least one flagged action invisibly inherit the 'flagged' property. Therefore, filtering by 'flagged items' displays those action groups even though they themselves are not flagged.

Just a heads up for the developers for when they resume Mac development.

Thank you.

[whpalmer4]

Any bug reports should be submitted with Help->Send Feedback to make sure they are actually seen by the developers. The development database is their "trusted system", not the forum :-)

[Ken Case]

Originally Posted by ksrhee

I was pretty sure OF will be available on the day if not immediately after the iPad launch. Here is what KC said in OG's blog: "This is a big undertaking, and we can't do it all at once. We started working on iPad adaptations of OmniGraffle and OmniFocus as soon as the SDK was made available Wednesday afternoon, and we're hoping to get started with OmniGraphSketcher for iPad within the next few weeks."

I apologize for the confusion! As I said in that same blog post, our plans can and will change—which, in fact, they did: since OmniFocus for iPhone already runs on iPad, we decided to prioritize our other apps which aren't available there yet. And since we didn't want to delay the upcoming Mac releases of either OmniOutliner or OmniPlan, we decided to start with OmniGraffle and OmniGraphSketcher.

[Hope]

I'm among those who are glad to hear that the behavior of groups/projects in context mode will be changed before 1.8 goes final.

In the discussion, I've especially appreciated the suggestions from Curt and jdh. As I read through the thread today, I wondered if maybe the best solution would be to have a combination of the two - jdh's solution, but also (optionally?) a parents bin at the top.

And then Curt said:

Originally Posted by curt.clifton

I think jdh's proposal has merit, especially if the context for parents could be set to default to something like "Review" (or whatever the user chose). That default would essentially replace the Parent bin that I suggested.

Alright... that seems good... maybe. But suppose someone manually sets a parent's context to something other than the default - and it turns out not to be the one that is most intuitive or useful when all of the children are complete? Isn't the parent then at risk of "falling through the cracks"?

In other words: Some users may want certain parents to show up in a particular context when the children are complete - if they tend to plow through a perspective which shows a single context. Misjudging what context should be applied may result in a stalled project, and some difficulty in tracking down the culprit. A hard-wired parents bin (which displays and counts parents according to the applied filters) would help here.

Am I off-base? Or missing something?