I couldn't disagree more. I work as a one-person company and MS project would definitely be complete overkill.
This isn't a complex or unusual concept - but the requirement is not frequently articulated by users. I have also included implementation suggestions that respects the desire of everyone (myself included) not to turn MLO into MS Project. I suspect other users have similar projects scheduling needs, but perform a variety of work-arounds to make this type of scheduling work within their GTD systems. D. On Mar 6, 2:41 pm, pottster <kenwarren...@googlemail.com> wrote: > I think the problem here is that you are looking for functionality > which is beyond the scope of personal task management software such > as MLO. > > All the functionality you want (and more) has been available for a > long time in programs such as MS Project. I know Project is expensive > but there are also far cheaper alternatives. > > MLO is superb at handling small intra-day tasks (what GTD people call > "widget-cranking" tasks) with basic dependencies (start task A when > task B finishes, sub tasks in order) and recurring task patterns. > Although there is provision for "Projects" this is more in the GTD > sense of a related series of low level tasks in support of personal > goals. > > The scenarios you describe with variable and fixed lead times and > rescheduling calculations would, I suspect, be difficult to implement > and, more importantly, may have consequences for the speed/ > responsiveness of MLO. There are a number of development requests > pending which would enable a great product do even better what it > already does well. I think it would be a mistake to succumb to "scope > creep". > > Put another way, you could easily make Notepad a better text editor > but you wouldn't want to try and turn it into a tool for writing a > novel - you would use Word or similar. > > On Mar 6, 11:37 am, djsdjsdjs <googlegroups.servi...@sanoys.com> > wrote: > > > > > On Mar 5, 5:20 pm, nschm873 <nschm...@gmail.com> wrote: > > > > + 1 on relative dates... > > > > Note Ken's reference to "lag" for even more previous requests... > > > >http://groups.google.com/group/mylifeorganized/browse_thread/thread/8... > > > > On Fri, Mar 5, 2010 at 2:26 PM, djsdjsdjs > > > <googlegroups.servi...@sanoys.com>wrote: > > > This is actually different than the discussion of lag in that > > particular post in that: > > *) I want to see the due dates displayed in outline view and on my > > calendar, rather than have them depend on gaps recorded within the > > tasks. Otherwise I have to calculate in my head and mentally project > > the schedule. > > *) The task dates relationship is actually fixed, not floating with > > previous task completion - so even if I don't ship courseware by the > > right date, the class will still be held on the target date and I need > > to compensate with rush shipping. The concept of lag would loose this > > hard fact because if things get late, MLO would not be communicating - > > through missed due dates - that a bunch of other stuff is also getting > > crammed up. > > > So I think "T-Minus" task relationships are different to "Lag" in that > > the top level task dates are completely fixed and I would like MLO to > > be making that very evident. > > > D. -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "MyLifeOrganized" group. To post to this group, send email to mylifeorgani...@googlegroups.com. To unsubscribe from this group, send email to mylifeorganized+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/mylifeorganized?hl=en.
