Unread topics or posts


Unread posts




Search results for "Posted by brian.matson"


Posted: Sep 13, 2012

Thanks for the responses. Looks like the search continues for a manual solution that works for me. :^/

Posted: Sep 13, 2012

In frustration from waiting for a Task Manual Sort option, I decided to try the Trial Pro Version, to see if making present day Tasks into Subtasks would allow a workable sort solution.

My major issue is that, although on the iPhone App I can access the subtasks as manually ordered online, there doesn't seem to be a way to manually change sorting of them inside the phone app. Is there a way?

A secondary issue is that dragging Tasks individually to convert them to Subtasks gets tedious. Is there any way to convert multiple tasks at once?

Thanks for your help.


Posted: Sep 13, 2012

FYI reply was to Purveyor, i did not see Jake's posts before hand. I still think my points are worth considering to the Toodledo staff. I make them out of frustration that the discussion, IMO, seems to repeatedly get lost in how to make manual sort compatible with all the other features of the site. I think for those who would use it, full compatibility is unnecessary. But I have never seen that point made a part of the discussion.

I'll try the free version and see if subtasks can help me with my issue. If it works for me, I'll pay the $15, and assuming 2Do comes out with their desktop version with manual sort intact, I'll reevaluate whether 2Do is a better value moving forward.

Posted: Sep 13, 2012

Okay, well, for just for the record and for the last time, the issue is this: they say manual sort won't work because it's not compatible with all the other elegant and sophisticated sorting options (I'm not being sarcastic - I agree they are as described.) I suggest that it be made available in a limited capacity in which those other sorting options don't come into play for those who would find it useful, which obviously number in the many by their own admission as it is one of the most frequently requested features, as evidenced by many posts dating back literally years.

I don't have to be a software developer to know it is clearly possible for them to offer this. THEY ALREADY DO IT in subtasks. Is that not sorting in a limited capacity?? I don't know how you don't see that. Do you actually think it does not stand to reason that similar principles could fairly simply be applied in some fashion to the free version, regarding proper Tasks? If so, I'm not going argue this further, it's just a waste of time because you're too tied to your position to admit a simple truth.

If they are holding a manual sort option back from the free version so that those who want / need it badly enough will pay for it, that is their privilege, but of course that's not what they are saying all. Obviously they could if if they wanted to. The fact that I can't write out all the code to implement it doesn't disqualify the idea because you call it too "vague."

I'd say at this point there's plenty condescension to go around. Okay, guilty on my part, but go ahead and reread your own post. While you're at it, give yourself extra points for using high school grade sarcasm.

As for my not getting positive feedback, excuse me if I don't find that meaningful when there's only evidence of three people (including you and me) even following the post the end 2 of which were already engaged in validating Jakes contention that the option isn't presently feasible. Not exactly a Gallup Poll of Toodle Do users, would you not agree?

Posted: Sep 13, 2012


It's amazing, it's like you didn't even read my posts. I fully admitted the system has an incredible array of sorting options. My suggestion is to have a manual option that by nature disables other options as necessary, so that people who need it can use it this way. Hence the point about different levels of use and customization. It's not hard to understand it if you read it.

You have accidentally made my point: they won't offer this feature because they are so proud of their system that they don't want people using it in such a way that, although it may work better for them, represents a compromise in their eyes. If you don't get that, then it is you that "simply don't have a clue."

I don't think I have to pay for the system to have an opinion. That said, if your subtasks solution can be effective, I may consider trying the free trial to see. However, considering the method I woould theretocallissue to order my tasks is actually far simpler than this elaborate scheme of integrated sorting options, I don't see $15 annual as much of a value for processing information at that level.

As to your suggestion that I find another software, again, already covered. I talked about 2Do. I paid for it, because it was a one time charge for the IPhone/iPad software. As stated, the problem is they don't have a desktop version available yet. It's coming but they are not saying when.

In the meantime, spare me the smug condescension.


Posted: Sep 10, 2012

It's really quite simple. Take ANY sort order view. Optional Manual saves that sort order into a separate folder/context/whatever allowing manual sort, disabling any further sorting categories. Going forward you can add items to manual sort list by tagging.

What, I ask you, is so hard about that? You Toodledo guys are way over thinking this thing. Keep it simple and stop believing every option has to be perfectly integrated with every other one.

Posted: Sep 10, 2012

To Jake / Toodledo,

With all due respect, my mind is absolutely blown by the level of resistance you are showing to adding a manual sort option, when it is a deal breaker for so many people, which includes myself.

I've read repeated posts about how complicated it is in light of all your other sorting options, how inelegant it might be, etc. etc.

There's no way I, or any single user here can go toe to toe with you about what it would take to integrate it into your system and how it might affect other features. But I'm just going to speak in general terms.

I honestly think you need to examine if you are in fact just too close to your creation to see this issue with any sense of perspective. It may well be that a manual sort can not be "elegantly" functional when used in conjunction with all the other sorting categories you seem, IMO, incredibly defensive about preserving.

But what you seem to be sorely overlooking is the fact that for scads of people including myself, there are far more sorting options than we are ever going to use, short of totally transforming our productivity habits to David Allen levels of super organizational efficiency.

For many of us, we are unable to implement all these sorting features in a functional way. Believe me, I wish I could. But because I cannot, at my level or organizational skill, I absolutely need a manual sort function in some limited capacity (and not the severely limited sub-task non-solution.)

For me personally, the best use for this for me would be to have a Dated Page that combines items labled Due Today + Start Today + Defer to Today (I only Due today only, but this would accommodate those who use the others.) Then a manual sort would enable you to move things around conveniently as priorities and circumstances change throughout the day.

I have seen similar suggestions about implementing manual sort just for Starred Items. This would be fine too.

You are brilliant guys. Believe me, you can figure out an option for people use manual sort that need it. 2Do has it, and they have a pretty rich set of sorting options and customization. The problem with 2Do of course is that they don't have a desktop option. (A Mac OS version is coming, and I have to say, if it's good and you still don't have a manual sort option, I'll stick with only 2Do and not look back.)

If 2Do can do it, you guys can too. Yes, you have a lot more sorting functions, and a manual sort may not enable perfect implementation of all of these, but again, but why are you unable to accept that offering a manual sort function that perhaps limits other options, or functions in a limited capacity, is STILL the best, nay NECESSARY option for many of us out here?

I truly think your pride in your system and desire that it be used by everyone at its most detailed level of function is blinding you from the big picture, overlooking one of the most basic principals about the evolution of computer technology in general.

That principal is this: as thing evolve, they ideally become more user friendly and intuitive, so that everyone gets the maximum benefit of the technology AT WHATEVER LEVEL THEY ARE ABLE TO GRASP IT.

Customization and intuitive usability. Is there any better description for the appeal of Apple products across the entire spectrum of consumers, from the tech savvy to the technically challenged? They are not perfect in this regard, but by in large, intuitive, user friendly functionality does not inhibit greater detail and sophistication in the feature set of their products. The point is, they think it through to meet each user at their level.

I'm not trying to be rude or overly personal, but I think you need to get over the technical perfectionism of your egos and make this thing work. There are plenty of good suggestions in this an other threads about how you could do it, but you keep answering them with excuses, excuses, excuses.

You can do this. If you want to.

Brian Matson
impressed but dissatisfied user (for now)