The Omni Group
These forums are now read-only. Please visit our new forums to participate in discussion. A new account will be required to post in the new forums. For more info on the switch, see this post. Thank you!

Go Back   The Omni Group Forums > OmniFocus > OmniFocus Syncing
FAQ Members List Calendar Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read

 
Beta Quality Software Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tetsugaku-San View Post
However now my iphone version of focus won't load!!
Sorry, we're working with a completely new platform and have no way to beta-test our software (or to even get crash reports for any issues people are encountering). But we think we've tracked down a crash in the loading code, and we plan to release a version 1.0.1 update to fix it as soon as possible.

(Note: we don't know how long that will actually take, since there's a manual review process at Apple where they make sure our update doesn't misbehave. How long that takes depends on how much other software they have to review, and I'm guessing there's a lot of software being submitted right now!)

Last edited by Ken Case; 2008-07-14 at 01:07 PM.. Reason: Fixed a typo
 
Quote:
Don't make it sound like WebDAV is super tricky and there was no way you could have avoided the initial problems. WebDAV is a standard protocol used all over the place. -- yann
Yann, you're wrong. Whilst WebDAV is a standard, few implementations conform to what you would interoperate. I've tested 5 WebDAV implementations in the last 72 hours, and only two of them are close enough to be called "baked." The two that work are WebDAV on my own Leopard, and the free miscit one set up for OF testing. There's a world of difference between reference and implementation.

Quote:
everyone uses Cpanel, it's one of the most popular default control panels for any linux/Apache systems, in my capacity as a web designer for the past 10 years, I have rarely come across anything else. -- Tetsugaku-San
Just because your breadth across implementations is so narrow it's no good reason to brag about it. I've been working with UN*X systems since the early 1980s, and with TCP/IP-based infrastructure since 1993, and with commercial ISPs since about the same time. I've never heard of CPanel until today. It's good that you crave consistency in your work environment, but presuming that your experience somehow informs the rest of the computing world is really, really wrong. Heck, even "Linux"es don't often interoperate, and let's not even start chatting about POSIX.

Kudos to Ken & Co. for dealing with such blowhards in a calm and collected manner. Better than I could have done :-)
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ken Case View Post
(Note: we don't know how long that will actually take, since there's a manual review process at Apple where they make sure our update doesn't misbehave. How long that takes depends on how much other software they have to review, and I'm guessing there's a lot of software being submitted right now!)
I'm hoping they expedite OF a bit. It is the marquee productivity product for app store and they gave you guys an award for software development. I would think it would be in their interest to get it working smoothly as quickly as possible. Moving you guys quietly toward the front of the queue would be a quick, easy way to do that
 
I bought OF because of its advertised synchronization possibilities. While I am as disappointed by the synchronization issues as the next person, I'm taking the "wait and see" approach. I survived for years without this program on either my desktop or my iPod Touch, and I won't die if I have to wait a little longer for all the kinks to be ironed out. As several people have pointed out, we're working with an alpha desktop program and beta iPhone software with no real way to test either of them except by letting real users use them. And the support on forums has been really good.
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by mickey View Post
Just because your breadth across implementations is so narrow it's no good reason to brag about it. I've been working with UN*X systems since the early 1980s, and with TCP/IP-based infrastructure since 1993, and with commercial ISPs since about the same time. I've never heard of CPanel until today. It's good that you crave consistency in your work environment, but presuming that your experience somehow informs the rest of the computing world is really, really wrong. Heck, even "Linux"es don't often interoperate, and let's not even start chatting about POSIX.

Kudos to Ken & Co. for dealing with such blowhards in a calm and collected manner. Better than I could have done :-)
Listen to me Fanboy - I know all about software incompatibilities and vendors straying quite a long way from the spec - I spend a very good portion of my time making sure that things work with shoddy CSS and DOM implementation models for Internet Explorer - I know how the game is played.

But if something is available for sale (on the app store) it should be better than Beta software.

My Iphone copy of focus corrupted all on it's own and I had to reinstall - that's not me - that's the software.

Even using Idisk, the latest build of desktop focus - te syncing doesn't work 100% correct. And if it's not 100% trusted - I can hardly use it as my task management software can I?
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by mickey View Post
Yann, you're wrong.
No - I'm right. And since last time I said that, it got censored by the OMNI Police, I'll justify it in greater length this time...

My point was that WebDAV is "a standard protocol used all over the place" not "a standard protocol perfectly implemented everywhere." The original sticky I was referring to made it sound like there was no way OMNI could have foreseen the problems they ran into. Thanks for the insight mickey, but everyone knows that in the real world, specifications are not perfectly implemented in every environment. As a web developer, I perfectly aware of that.

The fact that OMNI openly admitted (I do respect that) they never heard of cPanel until then is proof enough that they didn't do enough research on the subject.

And Accusing someone (not me this time...) of being "really, really wrong" when he's only stating a fact: "Cpanel, it's one of the most popular default control panels" makes no sense. If I say "Internet Explorer is the most used browser everywhere," is it "really, really wrong" too? I think you're getting a little confused between facts and personal preferences...

I remain curious as to why it's ok to be clearly condescending and call people "blowhards" on one side, but answering on the same level gets your post deleted... I guess you only have to remain polite and justify your opinions when you're not a fanboy...
 
Everyone, please remember to treat each other with respect on these forums. (Whether you're defending or critiquing us is irrelevant to whether you'll be moderated.)

Yann, I didn't remove your last post, but reviewing it now I believe it was removed because it didn't actually contain any information other than a responding insult. We believe it's important to let people express their opinions of our applications here (both good and bad), and we don't censor content on that basis, but we don't believe it's important to preserve insults between forum participants—so in this case, we didn't.
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tetsugaku-San View Post
When I saw Omni Focus on the App store I presumed that it and the desktop version were tested and ready to roll - that's not me being presumptuous - that's just standard practice.

And As I've already pressed that handy buy button - I have no choice other than 'to wait' do I?
With you here 100%, Tetsugaku-San. Leaving aside all issues that seem difficult to test prior to release (WebDAV implementation variance, thorough testing on target platform) I have to say I was shocked to see that a publlc release with advertised functionality actually needed an alpha version of the desktop app to exploit said functionality. Simple fact - the app, as a synchable version, was not ready for release and should not have gone out as such. As a standalone, fair enough. In British consumer law I would be entitled to a refund as the product is clearly not fit for advertised purpose.

Poor behaviour, Omni people. One thing I enjoy in the Mac world is the supportive community, but that's no excuse for foisting unfinished s/ware on us, and also no excuse for others to defend unprofessional practice.

Sorry if that seems harsh but, Omni, you do need to be aware of how some people feel about this.
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by eddyb64 View Post
One thing I enjoy in the Mac world is the supportive community, but that's no excuse for foisting unfinished s/ware on us, and also no excuse for others to defend unprofessional practice.

Sorry if that seems harsh but, Omni, you do need to be aware of how some people feel about this.
That does seem overly harsh. Not everyone has been experiencing these problems. I've been using the OmniFocus 1.1 alpha on my Mac since early July and OmniFocus on my iPhone since its release around the 11th and I've had nothing more than a few minor hiccups. The software is clearly working in my situation. I'm not saying it's perfect, but if everybody waited for perfect software to ship, we wouldn't have any software.

Don't get me wrong, I sympathize with anyone running into problems. Really, I know it sucks. The Omni Group should do their best to smooth things out and get those people up and running again as soon as possible. And everything I've seen so far suggests that's exactly what the Omni Group is doing.

In a perfect world, all of these issues would have been foreseen and avoided before the app went public. But the reality of the situation is much different:
  1. The iPhone is a very new platform

  2. The iTunes App Store is a new (and restrictive) delivery medium

  3. Open testing of iPhone apps is very difficult

  4. Updates delivered through the iTunes App Store are delayed by Apple's meticulous procedures (for better or worse)

  5. Development was up against tight deadlines (for everyone, not just Omni Group)

  6. Two-way syncing is deceptively complex

  7. Many WebDAV implementations fail to follow the spec. If 60% of the WebDAV implementations are getting it wrong (based on mickey's admittedly anecdotal evidence), that's a pretty serious obstacle, arguably far worse than having to deal with WinIE6 in web development (then again, WinIE is pretty awful :-).

Are these just excuses? Maybe, maybe not. But I haven't seen any other development house deal with the situation any better, and most far worse. Are any other GTD apps even attempting to do syncing yet? Forget GTD apps, are any other apps, regardless of category, doing flawless syncing? Even Apple's own apps (iCal and Contacts) are facing issues with syncing; and Apple owns the freakin' framework!

So yes, it's unfortunate, but certainly not unprofessional. If anything, I've been impressed with the Omni Group's dedication to working through all of these issues. Adversity is the true test of one's mettle.

-Dennis
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Toadling View Post
So yes, it's unfortunate, but certainly not unprofessional.
-Dennis
Sorry, Dennis, I disagree. Alpha software, by it's very nature, is not fit for public release. Whether it works for some isn't the point - a stable release of the desktop software required to make the advertised functionality work is still not available. That is what I perceive as unprofessional. And that people are having issues is not completely 'unfortunate', it should have been foreseeable.

Your other points re difficulty of development, though interesting, are not relevant to my argument as you will note that in my original post I put these aside and focused on the specific issue of an unfit release.

Harsh, maybe. True, yes, and that is unfortunate.

it's tough making a decision to not sign-off and to not release software, but sometimes it is the best option as it can save money and keep reputations intact. I speculate that the release was made in order to not miss the first wave of sales in the App Store, and that dealing with any associated flak from an incomplete app was deemed an acceptable consequence. That's a business decision, and one that has probably paid off given unofficial estimates of App Store sales (can't recall source, but it's big numbers for OF).

Anyway, enough of my voice. My point is made and my frustration satisfactorily vented.

On a sympathetic note: keep up the good work, Omni people, I appreciate it's tough at times like this.
 
 


Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Improve export quality of pdf from Omnigraffle alex weber OmniGraffle General 0 2011-06-06 03:03 AM
Quality of shadows in PDF Export Till OmniGraffle General 0 2011-01-07 06:20 AM
Improve export quality of pdf from Omnigraffle elleracine OmniGraffle General 0 2008-10-24 07:35 AM
PDF Export Image Quality = Bad jonias OmniGraffle General 6 2008-04-25 06:57 AM
Quality of gif export is poor nestorph OmniGraffle General 0 2008-03-27 04:42 PM


All times are GMT -8. The time now is 08:54 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.