Kinook Software Forum

Go Back   Kinook Software Forum > Ultra Recall > [UR] Suggestions
FAQ Community Calendar Today's Posts Search

Reply
 
Thread Tools Rating: Thread Rating: 2 votes, 5.00 average. Display Modes
  #1  
Old 06-27-2007, 03:23 AM
quant's Avatar
quant quant is online now
Registered User
 
Join Date: 11-30-2006
Posts: 967
2007 Roadmap Discussion

Do you have any comment on
http://www.kinook.com/Forum/showthre...s=&postid=9456 ?
Reply With Quote
  #2  
Old 06-27-2007, 03:28 AM
quant's Avatar
quant quant is online now
Registered User
 
Join Date: 11-30-2006
Posts: 967
regarding
# Export multiple item notes as combined RTF document

- I suppose in the language of UR, it was meant "item text". Please provide an option to include "item notes" in the export, just after each "item text". Thank you.
Reply With Quote
  #3  
Old 06-28-2007, 12:01 PM
PIMfan's Avatar
PIMfan PIMfan is online now
Registered User
 
Join Date: 02-19-2007
Location: USA
Posts: 12
Thumbs up Finally!

The "Open New Tab as Blank" update is something I've really been anxious for. Glad to hear it will be in the next release.

This may ease the carpal tunnel I've developed from excessive clicking on the "close tab" button every time it opened yet another copy of an existing item. Not to mention the tendency to curse like a sailor after discovering I'm staring at the wrong copy (missing edits) of a document I was working on.....

Life is good! Kinook support is THE model for other software development companies.....

PIMfan
Reply With Quote
  #4  
Old 06-29-2007, 12:24 AM
zargron's Avatar
zargron zargron is online now
Registered User
 
Join Date: 05-16-2007
Location: Grassy Knoll
Posts: 149
Quote:
Originally posted by quant
Do you have any comment on (2007 Roadmap)
regarding
# Export multiple item notes as combined RTF document

- I suppose in the language of UR, it was meant "item text". Please provide an option to include "item notes" in the export, just after each "item text". Thank you.
I guess it's in response to thread http://www.kinook.com/Forum/showthre...&threadid=2698 that I raised and presumed "nobody" likes , and until now, that "only" Kinook understood. I still firmly believe it's an idea with good merit. Regards the optional inclusion of Item Notes, not a bad idea. Perhaps export of either or both. In the case of either, the export of Item Text gives you class A document and Item Notes gives you class B document. If giving a talk, your speaking notes |vs| printed handout. Refining a system specification, draft design document |vs| work notes & ideas.

And, BTW, once the mechanism is in place, could be manipulated to export as HTML. (Perhaps seeing the term "HTML" might spark more interest.) Although, IMHO RTF is enough since there are heaps of editors around with which you can easily open RTF and save as HTML.

(PS: why is this in General Discussion and not in Suggestions?)

Last edited by zargron; 06-29-2007 at 12:26 AM.
Reply With Quote
  #5  
Old 06-30-2007, 07:50 PM
slangmgh slangmgh is online now
Registered User
 
Join Date: 07-04-2006
Posts: 34
Hope search for DBCS text will be added in the next release.
Reply With Quote
  #6  
Old 07-02-2007, 09:22 PM
xja xja is online now
Registered User
 
Join Date: 01-06-2005
Posts: 146
Can't believe that Filtering the Tree has dropped so far down the priority list. Seems so fundamental to the concept of UR. Every other feature seems like a bell or whistle by comparison.

Among other things, task management is so cumbersome without it. Time to abandon all hope and find another program for task management.
Reply With Quote
  #7  
Old 07-03-2007, 01:34 AM
zargron's Avatar
zargron zargron is online now
Registered User
 
Join Date: 05-16-2007
Location: Grassy Knoll
Posts: 149
Quote:
Originally posted by xja
Can't believe that Filtering the Tree has dropped so far down the priority list. Seems so fundamental to the concept of UR. Every other feature seems like a bell or whistle by comparison.
I took a look at some forum discussions on this topic from 2004/2005. I think I understand the request fairly well. I also like it and am sorry to find out you've been waiting so long. I'll take a more serious look at it in the next week or so and might consolidate the previous discussions into a new forum thread. Perhaps there'll be enough current interest to find it a place in the Road Map.
Quote:
... by xja
Among other things, task management is so cumbersome without it. Time to abandon all hope and find another program for task management.
I'm starting to use UR to good effect for Task Management. Would you like to start a new thread somewhere like User Tricks, Tips and Samples with say the top 3 hassles you are having specifically with task management? I'll try and contribute my sixpence worth and perhaps some other experienced UR users will help us both?
Reply With Quote
  #8  
Old 07-03-2007, 07:49 AM
janrif janrif is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: 07-08-2005
Location: Ridgefield CT USA
Posts: 852
Quote:
Originally posted by xja
[snip] task management is so cumbersome without it. Time to abandon all hope and find another program for task management. [/snip]
I use UR for task mgmnt via a modified GTD. There may be better programs but being able to include task mngmnt along w all the other stuff I do via URp is a definite plus in my book. It keeps everything in one place. That's my .02
Reply With Quote
  #9  
Old 07-03-2007, 08:44 PM
xja xja is online now
Registered User
 
Join Date: 01-06-2005
Posts: 146
I agree. All the "other stuff" is what has kept me using UR for task management. Unfortunately, lately I have had a lot more tasks to manage and it is to the point where the benefit of the other stuff is outweighed by the difficulty of managing tasks.

I have explained my reasoning for this ad infinitum on previous threads so won't reiterate yet again here or on another thread, but bottom line is tree filtering would give me the power to deal with large numbers of tasks with varying attributes... to be able to focus on different subsets of tasks and related info items while maintaining a hierachical view and without requiring spaghetti-like multilinks, which are too cumbersome to maintain.

I realize that UR is not a task manager and probably won't ever be as good at task management as a dedicated task management app. But this one feature would better allow me to keep all task management in UR and thus also enable me to keep it integrated with all the other great info management features.

My frustration comes from the fact that the more I have asked for this feature, the further down the priority list it has moved!
Reply With Quote
  #10  
Old 07-03-2007, 09:03 PM
zargron's Avatar
zargron zargron is online now
Registered User
 
Join Date: 05-16-2007
Location: Grassy Knoll
Posts: 149
Thanks for taking time out to respond xja. Thanks also for your long list of contributions to UR in the way of comments and suggestions in the forum. Good luck with where ever your task management challenge takes you.
Reply With Quote
  #11  
Old 07-04-2007, 08:41 AM
janrif janrif is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: 07-08-2005
Location: Ridgefield CT USA
Posts: 852
Quote:
Originally posted by xja
[snip] My frustration comes from the fact that the more I have asked for this feature, the further down the priority list it has moved!
Yes, it is near the bottom of the list but, in a positive vein, it does sey 'approximate priority' which always leaves room for change.

Maybe Kinook will see the greater use of tree filtering & move it up the list. Development time could be relatively short.... or long.... I don't know.

But what I do know is that it would be a shame for you to have to go to the trouble of migrating to another program only to discover that tree filtering has been implemented.

Maybe Kinook will respond to this thread, your frustration or a private post from you. Seems to me to be worth a try.

I can only speak from my experience of migrating from:
Lotus Agenda -> Ecco Pro -> Zoot -> ADM + Ariadne -> Ultra Recall.

While I am keeping my eye on MyInfo, if the UR roadmap is implemented on a reasonable schedule, I think I'll stay where I am for the foreseeable future because of the above.

If you, in fact, decide to go elsewhere, I hope you'll join the outliner/PIM list where we keep each other up to date on what's out there, what' s working & what's not.

Good luck.
Reply With Quote
  #12  
Old 07-05-2007, 07:22 AM
kinook kinook is online now
Administrator
 
Join Date: 03-06-2001
Location: Colorado
Posts: 6,034
xja,

We're doing our best to accommodate everyone's requests (it would help if every user didn't have a different pet feature :^), and we'll think about adjusting the priority of the filtered trees request.

The problem with this feature is that there haven't been that many requests for it and it's a lot of work. To optimize loading, the tree is currently loaded from the root down, only processing expanded nodes. Filtering will have to load bottom up, or at least process every single node to determine whether it and its parents should be shown in the tree. And performance will be impacted significantly, since every node must be processed and a query performed for each to filter properly.
Reply With Quote
  #13  
Old 07-05-2007, 07:56 AM
janrif janrif is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: 07-08-2005
Location: Ridgefield CT USA
Posts: 852
Quote:
Originally posted by kinook
p[snip] performance will be impacted significantly, since every node must be processed and a query performed for each to filter properly.
IMO, this is definitely an issue.

Currently, URp takes a while to load in on my system -- not too long, mind you -- just long enough.

To add significantly to that time frame would make me feel like I was using (god forbid) Outlook or an Adobe product -- something I try to avoid because it is such a PITA to start up.
Reply With Quote
  #14  
Old 07-05-2007, 08:10 AM
kinook kinook is online now
Administrator
 
Join Date: 03-06-2001
Location: Colorado
Posts: 6,034
Right--adding to the complexity is that the old behavior must continue to be used when not filtering to avoid unnecessarily impacting performance.
Reply With Quote
  #15  
Old 07-05-2007, 09:06 AM
Jon Polish Jon Polish is online now
Registered User
 
Join Date: 07-21-2006
Posts: 391
My plea is to not add features that would negatively impact on performance. UR is way too lethargic in my opinion. You have committed to improved performance for the next release (I cannot wait - when is it coming?), so why add a feature that will detract from your efforts?

Just my opinion though.

Jon
Reply With Quote
Reply


Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is Off
HTML code is Off



All times are GMT -5. The time now is 06:01 PM.


Copyright © 1999-2023 Kinook Software, Inc.