I think the issue you face is the high ratio of the hourly cost of a
programmer to the overall cost of the software. If you are asking for a
"side project" you are talking about either a consultant or paying an
existing programmer overtime. So lets say $50.00/hour.
So if you could get people to
Plze!!
I enjoy a good discussion but, really, just THINK about what you're
suggesting.
A few(!) questions...
How much do you think people would have to "chip in"?
Enough to engage another developer? on a contract/permanant basis?
Enough to suspend current development and re-prioritize?
Where
All,
A short rebuttal to Ken then further explanation of my first thread:
Ken, I'm sure Andrey is motivated by BOTH money and the desire to make
excellent software. There is nothing distasteful or wrong with wanting
to receive compensation for work. My suggestion does not compromise
either. In fa
I just wanna add a double-plus-good for relative dates in the
template system.
I am not going to pay for any feature extra. This idea sounds
hilarious to me after just paying my bucks for my Standard Edition 2
weeks ago.
On Apr 1, 2:22 pm, chuckdevee wrote:
> Just to throw my tuppence ha'penny
Just to throw my tuppence ha'penny worth into this discussion. I
really don't think we should get distracted with the issue of a small
group of users paying for their own preferred developments. I mean,
come on, it's just not going to happen is it? !! Product development
just isn't driven by this
To: qhamel
Nice one! Appeal to the money-grabbing instincts of the Developer's
evil twin sister "Audrey".
But seriously, this suggestion is wrong on so many levels.
If money IS the motivation then, in the current recession, there are
two types of company doing well. Those selling small amounts o
At 06:13 PM 3/30/2010, you wrote:
Since this might be outside Audrey's product roadmapwould all on
this thread be willing to chip in $xx amount for Audrey to add the
feature or we could ask him what he would do if for and see if we
could rally others to join in to bring the cost down.
Only
Since this might be outside Audrey's product roadmapwould all on
this thread be willing to chip in $xx amount for Audrey to add the
feature or we could ask him what he would do if for and see if we
could rally others to join in to bring the cost down.
Audrey what do you think? I'm in the softw
Thanks for sharing. I'm going to try this approach.
Phil.
>
> My work around is simply to add a T-minus tag to the name of each
> subtask. "Print Courseware [T-5]" If I copy or move an event date, I
> redo the dates using these tags. This way I can use start times for
> their intended purpose
I owe a couple replies:
*scope creep*
pottster, I completely understand scope creep and what it can do to
software. However, I have submitted literally hundreds of software
ideas to open source and commercial software initiatives. It is a
purposeful focus for me to be exceptionally aware of the
Forgot to mention that if something like this technique was used you would
need to be a little creative with your ToDo views to actually see it.
That is why I thought something like this should be incorporated into a
broader solution of having a Goal date and Due Date. That way "relative"
relatio
Hey djsdjsdjs, the T-minus technique you are talking about is actually a
pretty popular tool in time management. If you search the Internet on
"Backward Planning" you should see a number of references to it.
And I would have no problem if Andrey were to add functionality to support
such a popula
> I use MS Project quite a lot and it just doesn't work for this near
> term planning.
I forgot to mention Richard, try the MS Project 2010 Beta it's light
years better - they finally got it right!
On Mar 7, 12:54 pm, Richard C wrote:
> I am with djsdjsdjs on this one. To my mind there is a si
Load balancing and date driven scheduling are two very different
things Richard.
In terms of functionality to help manage personal workload over time
(load balancing), I think this would be a very natural and desirable
development from where MLO is now.
As for the calendar view, I think that one'
For clarity, let me explain in more detail what I think the risk is
here.
I have been involved in many projects big and small, from IT to
construction to outsourcing. I have also spent a lot of time in
manufacturing planning and scheduling. Project scheduling (which is
what you're getting into), e
I am with djsdjsdjs on this one. To my mind there is a significant
gap in the market between the MS Project project planning tool and
something that allows an individual to plan/sketch out their work
over the next few weeks to a) put in place reminders to do things and
b) get some sense of whet
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 everyo
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 als
On Mar 5, 5:20 pm, nschm873 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
> wrote:
>
This is actually different than
I thought of a name for this functionality. "T-Minus Due Dates" -
The metaphor being that it is similar to the countdown for a rocket
blast-off - all configured dates/times are "relative to the top level
task dates/times"
I thought of an even simpler way of implementing this that also
increases
+ 1 on relative dates...
Note Ken's reference to "lag" for even more previous requests...
http://groups.google.com/group/mylifeorganized/browse_thread/thread/89a06dbb1e589621/d9229bf2682d88ab?lnk=gst&q=interval#d9229bf2682d88ab
On Fri, Mar 5, 2010 at 2:26 PM, djsdjsdjs
wrote:
>
> I agree. I ha
I agree. I have pitched to several task management software makers
and they just don't seem to get the value. In many of their cases
there would be significant rework of logic, UI and user familiarity -
but MLO is almost there already with the great way it can duplicate an
entire task hierarchy.
+1
I think this has come up before. However, this would take MLO to a
whole new level if Andrey can make it happen.
On Mar 4, 8:55 am, djsdjsdjs wrote:
> I conduct online courses that include shipped paper courseware. These
> "Projects" (in MLO speak) have the same sequence with the same
> int
23 matches
Mail list logo
