Re: viewing more than one grid at a time
Submitted by jan_rifkinson on Fri, 2010-07-30 06:56.
Not taking a shot here but considering that this request is 2+ yrs old, maybe it's time to start looking at elements that are geared more towards gen'l user convenience like this, calendar, saving tab/grid positions, spell chk/word count & other such things & less time on some of the more esoteric elements that have been more in focus recently.
Of course I understand bugs always have priority but I'm thinking more about marketing, etc. something Pierre admits may not be his strong suit. EccoPro has a good fan base. If they can be satisfied that IQ can do what it does & MUCH MORE (which is already the case), it might make it easier to attract them to IQ en mass.
Then there's the writer group who research / write. It might be worthwhile to develop a broad list of users by category & see what might be missing to tempt / attract those people to IQ now in beta so they can easily be converted to licensees & word of mouth, viral advertisers on groups like the outline forum, etc. I mean, really, @ some point IQ has to leave the realm of hobby / love child & have some kind of business model even if it's zoot-like which seems to be working for Tom Davis.
Comments, any_everyone
Comments
First - apologies Jan if I seemed bit demanding in my request for a new thread... just thought it a was a good idea...
I think you have a good point. It would be very interesting to group requested features according to which group would favour them and also as you say "see what might be missing to tempt / attract those people"
There'll be a lot of overlap of course. I'm not good at defining groups, but here's a start ( there's got to be a better name than "People who simply want to save stuff from the web" !! )
- Writers
- Researchers
- People who simply want to save stuff from the web
- People who want to work with files and keeping track of their status / timekeeping / etc
- Business/Personal use as organiser (PIM / Calender)
as a member of group #4 I'd say tagging of some sort would be my main 'missing' feature request (I have been using wikilinks successfully lately but it IMO they not usable unless you're disciplined and keep a grid with a list of all the tags you're using i.e. not user friendly)
Re Writers - a recent comment from MarkyMark:
[quote=MarkyMark]BTW. I'm looking forward for the "Multi-item HTML editing" (0177, http://mantis.sqlnotes.net/view.php?id=177). With this you get a true outliner every writer (like me) is looking for. Together with the MSWord-IQ back-forth syncronization-feature (I cant remember where I have read about that), the full wiki-feature and the footnote-feature (which are not fully implemented yet, as far is I know?) IQ would be a writers/researchers dream (dont underestimate the strategic importance of these features 
).[/quote]
).[/quote][quote=Tom]
First - apologies Jan if I seemed bit demanding in my request for a new thread... just thought it a was a good idea... [huge snip] [/quote]
Not at all, Tom. You were right & thanks for your comment. I hope others -- besides the usual suspects -- will join in & contribute to the thread. I guess one could say this effort has an overlap w vote for your favorite option but I see this more as a marketing tool, i.e. what improvements / developments would attract the largest group(s).
Maybe "crimping" would be good for #3 ??
[I don't know what happened with this thread put it's got a really weird appearance]
First a few comments. But you can go straight to the summary if you want.
1- I'd be surprised if users didn't agree that bugs and features should be implemented/fixed strategically, with an 20/80 perspective.
What's called "esoteric" should be defined with examples. What's esoteric for someone could be fundamental for others (and many).
We shouldn't judge a bug as "esoteric" without really thinking about its general implications.
2- That said, I wonder why the board about High Priority Features and Bug Fixes remained mostly unused **.
Why not refresh it a bit and use that since it exists and could function?
If a writer, a PIM addict or a "gather all from the web" addict asks for a "search and replace" function, then it'll appear as something that's needed by the majority. Not so much if we have several sections with lots of duplication.
Something to consider : If the writers (which I am from time to time) constitute 1% of the users, BUT PIMers or others constitute the majority, it's those features asked by those PIMers that should be implemented... following the popularity contest logic. If, of course, it still fits within IQ's scope and vision.
3- we could also add a section in that board with different sections like "General PIM features", "IQ for writers", "IQ for...", like Tom suggested, and then let people say what they're missing more. But that won't tell how many users miss a feature or a big fix... One very vocal person might be very active about saying what she/he wants, while many will just pass and buy something else if they don't see their features implemented.
Having a board describing the best features for each IQ function would be good nevertheless. It would help to have a more global vision of what's needed. But this doesn't necessarily have anything to do with marketing etc.
4- And, as you said Jan, there was also that other IQ user website where people can vote for features... I haven't been there in a long while because I don't trust a system that can be tricked and bended. I mean, I could vote as many times I wanted ! And, from the number of active users here, it clearly appeared that some users repeatedly voted for their own features. I mean... How many are we, here, taking the time to suggest, debug, etc. ? A little bunch.
Summary, my opinion :
The best thing would be to implement a voting system here in the forum. A reliable system reflecting reality, not the will of a few obsessive individuals. A voting system that would also explain in details what the features/bugs to be fixed are. Because I'm pretty sure some stuff seem esoteric only because the implications aren't ovious.
OR,
use the High Priority Features and Bug Fixes, which takes a bit more time, etc. but is SIMPLE to use. Just enter your all time favorite bug/features there. It's easy enough to compile data afterward. I can already see some stuff there that's been repeated by a few users.
Now, what I also think is important : users should explain WHY this is a priority for them. Because, sometimes, implementing another feature will answer their need indirectly.
BUT. I also think that whatever the lists, etc., IQ will just make its way to V1 and will include all the features put in Mantis that are set to be in V1...
Sorry for that long post. I could of thought more about writing it, and make it shorter ... See you Monday as I'm out for the Weekend. :)
** I also started a thread about IQ's UI for filters, what to do, how to improve, etc. But nobody used it. Alas, if something needs to be improved, it's the filters UI.
[quote=Armando]
3- we could also add a section in that board with different sections like "General PIM features", "IQ for writers", "IQ for...", like Tom suggested, and then let people say what they're missing more. But that won't tell how many users miss a feature or a big fix... One very vocal person might be very active about saying what she/he wants, while many will just pass and buy something else if they don't see their features implemented.
Having a board describing the best features for each IQ function would be good nevertheless. It would help to have a more global vision of what's needed. But this doesn't necessarily have anything to do with marketing etc. [/quote]
By board, do you mean if users post how they use IQ - e.g. "IQ intro for writers" - these could be added to the manual and could spark a bit of debate & thought re what could be improvements - sounds good to me
(not sure though what exactly you mean by 'board' - forum or manual?)
PS Armando, your links arent working for me - try www.sqlnotes.net/drupal5/index.php for the form board "High Priority Features and Bug Fixes". Could it be that when you copy-paste a link (with text), as opposed to creating it, that the 'drupal5' part gets stripped-out/ lost
Re: viewing more than one grid at a time