We're talking about 6 years here. None of the other software developers I use have this length of version cycles.
But if the development cycles were shortened as we see with Adobe Suite and Filemaker, we would be scratching our heads about why we should be upgrading to the latest and greatest when feature set upgrade is minimal.
I also think that we may be seeing the trees but can't see the forest. Omni has been busy with their other product lineup. They can't ignore their other offerings, can they?
Omni Sync Server
The only other thing I can think of is to have OmniFocus spin itself off into another company dedicated to nothing but OmniFocus. But even single product companies like Things and The Hit List haven’t been able to speed up their product cycle.
I also see the same arguments at the Things forum.
"They're so slow…"
"Why aren't they implementing my feature request already? Everybody wants it! It should be easy to implement!"
"Why can't they just hire more developers to get the job finished?"
"How come they didn't see this coming?""
"Why are they so inflexible?"
A lot of the behind-the-scenes work that went into OmniOutliner will be making its way into OmniFocus 2. So we can bet that there was significant process made to OmniFocus’ underlying engine.
OmniFocus is like a theater stage play. There are so many behind-the-scenes events that go on that the audience doesn't see. Rehearsals, revisions, tweaking, costumes, lighting, auditions, etc.
Wow, you're not doing them any favours. Six years just to keep up-to-date with os changes. Apart from some minor changes OF hasn't changed much in this space of time.
Keeping up with OS changes are not small things that should be considered trivial. In many IT departments, we can still see many who are still stuck in Windows XP or have just only recently upgraded to Windows 7. They're not in any hurry to upgrade to Windows 8.
OmniFocus has changed quite a lot since its inception. Look at the release notes to get an idea of what they’re doing. They’re not standing still.
1. Psilas mentioned sticking with OF based on multiple contexts being on the table, not because single contexts are great.
no argument here. I would also love to see tagging that can take the place of multiple contexts. But reality is what it is. We’re just gonna have to wait for multiple contexts/tags.
2. OF is serious financial investment. Desktop, iphone and ipad all together come to a not inconsequencial sum.
I think the sum I paid for the three OmniFocus apps has paid itself back ten times over for the productivity gains I received.
Hardly flexible, "change folder structure and use of contexts"! Flexible means I can change the programme to suit my workflow. This is not possibe with OF. As mentioned before apart from cumbersome work-arounds Covey's matrix cannot be used. The same applies for tasks that have multiple contexts such as a tool and a person.
Bruce Lee quote:
"Be like water making its way through cracks. Do not be assertive, but adjust to the object, and you shall find a way around or through it. If nothing within you stays rigid, outward things will disclose themselves.
Empty your mind, be formless. Shapeless, like water. If you put water into a cup, it becomes the cup. You put water into a bottle and it becomes the bottle. You put it in a teapot, it becomes the teapot. Now, water can flow or it can crash. Be water, my friend."
It seems that everyone finds their own way through a program. Flexible can also mean evolving and adapting over time to new changes.
So do I. I do not change my core system, because it is reliable and I'm effective using it. I do however, tweak the system. This is where OF has become increasingly untenable as it does not allow this.
I have a heavy workload. Covey's roles and important principles work well for me. The only task management system that was almost perfect was The Hit List. Sadly, the developer has issues and development has almost but stopped. The Mac app is still great, but I need iPad support which it doesn't offer.
I have some 40 active projects and a couple of hundred tasks. Importance plays a key role in allowing me to see what I should be working on. Roles also enable me to be balanced in life rather than focusing on just one role to the exclusion of others.
At the moment Things best allows me to use this system. Areas are great for roles and tags allow me to use urgent and important criteria. Along with this I am responsible for many people. This also needs to be included into the mix of tasks, which incidently can be rudimentally done with Things' contact option. One context is a joke. Even suggesting that one should use #tag in the item description demonstrates the need for more than one context (as suggested by Ken himself earlier in this thread). I'm amazed that omni has been dragging its feet for so long on this issue.
I've really wanted to like OF and tried to use and re-use many times, but the single context kills the whole thing or forces my to lengthy workarounds that reduce my effectiveness.
I also wished that The Hit List was able to get off the ground. Folders in OmniFocus can be used to classify projects into Roles, Areas of Responsibilities, or moments in time (Spring Projects, Summer Projects, Autumn Projects, Winter Projects). That’s what I call flexible.
Why not use hashtags for the moment? Now that we can create saved perspectives with search criteria, it appears that OmniFocus 2 for iPhone can use those perspectives as well.
But in the end, at least Omni is considering tags. The schedule has been set. OmniFocus 2.0 for Mac will keep backwards compatibility and hopefully give us that user interface refresh that many have been asking for. Then OmniFocus 2 for iPad should be coming a bit afterwards. Then it’ll be time to look forward to OmniFocus 2.1. That’s probably when we’ll see changes to OmniFocus that will give us multiple contexts and tags that some of us are asking for.
+1 to intranation's post. Come back to OmniFocus if you find it has finally changed to fit your needs. I know I've tried out the various demos whenever something new shows up. But I just keep coming back to OmniFocus.
It's not easy developing software. Customers wants their feature wish list yesterday. But it takes time and careful thought/consideration to implement. At least, we know that Omni is being deliberate and delivering feature sets on a schedule that shows promise.
We can debate until we're blue in the face. It looks like Omni is listening.