Forum Posts Feed
UltraRecall on BDJ - Jan/28/2009
< Next Topic | Back to topic list | Previous Topic >
Posted by Jan Rifkinson
Jan 22, 2009 at 04:28 PM
Daly, I’m not sure anything has changed (one can only hope) but I am bemused by the flock of people who have run to the Bits de Jour website to post their support for Kinook & UltraRecall after I posted my review there (and here).
As heart warming as all that outpouring of love may be, It doesn’t change the fact that Kinook stated / then amended their announcement that there would be no further development of UltraRecall. And it doesn’t change the fact that when I questioned this change in language, they removed me from their forum. Both these facts are unfortunate.
However, Kinook is not alone. I’ve personally experienced this development issue with Agenda, Ecco, Ariadne & ADM. In fact, I would give Kinook more credit than the other 4 because—at least—they issued a statement of intent to their customers (as badly worded as it may have been). And I wish them every success. Further development of UltraRecall would only make my daily life easier but I think new customers have a right to know what was said & what wasn’t said before they commit their time & data to the product. Perhaps Kyle Alons has provided the real roadmap. Like I said, the proof is in the pudding & we shall see if UltraRecall is developed further.
None of this takes away from the fact that UltraRecall is a fine program that works. And as stated, if it works for one as is, nothing else is necessary or required of the developer except what they have stated & have done: correcting bugs & making sure compatibility issues are resolved. They also support the product & answer questions—as techie as they may be. User friendly is not a hallmark of Kinook’s communications nor are their help files but that’s another story.
—
Jan Rifkinson
Ridgefield CT USA
Posted by dg
Jan 28, 2009 at 11:30 PM
I tried to get into UR a while back, but the learning curve was too steep and I didn’t have the time. I even asked on their forum for examples of how others used the program but got little back except pointing to the examples that come with the program. What I was looking for was war stories and practical examples from others on how they were using UR daily and how it did/didn’t meet their needs before I would be willing to invest a lot of my hard-to-come-by time in building a personal system around the program. Without being able to see how others had incorporated it into their work flow, I wasn’t willing to risk trying to learn it.
Long story short…a dearth of practical work flow examples kept me from trying to learn the program. Small obstacle…but a fatal one.
Hugh wrote:
>I used to use UR. It’s very sad to read of the current tangle. I thought that by the
>standards of the time, only a few years ago, it was a very good programme indeed - if one
>could work out how to use it to its fullest effect. I was surprised by the extent to which
>I could not really understand parts of the help files. I thought perhaps it was just me.
>The words were there, but they seemed to communicate much less than the developers
>clearly intended. I always thought that if they bought two weeks of the time of a
>freelance experienced in wriitng help files and tutorials, they could have
>transformed the picture.
Posted by dg
Jan 28, 2009 at 11:31 PM
I tried to get into UR a while back, but the learning curve was too steep and I didn’t have the time. I even asked on their forum for examples of how others used the program but got little back except pointing to the examples that come with the program. What I was looking for was war stories and practical examples from others on how they were using UR daily and how it did/didn’t meet their needs before I would be willing to invest a lot of my hard-to-come-by time in building a personal system around the program. Without being able to see how others had incorporated it into their work flow, I wasn’t willing to risk trying to learn it.
Long story short…a dearth of practical work flow examples kept me from trying to learn the program. Small obstacle…but a fatal one.
Hugh wrote:
>I used to use UR. It’s very sad to read of the current tangle. I thought that by the
>standards of the time, only a few years ago, it was a very good programme indeed - if one
>could work out how to use it to its fullest effect. I was surprised by the extent to which
>I could not really understand parts of the help files. I thought perhaps it was just me.
>The words were there, but they seemed to communicate much less than the developers
>clearly intended. I always thought that if they bought two weeks of the time of a
>freelance experienced in wriitng help files and tutorials, they could have
>transformed the picture.
Posted by dg
Jan 28, 2009 at 11:32 PM
sorry for the double post…my bad
Posted by quant
Jan 30, 2009 at 12:23 AM
>Long story short…a dearth of practical work flow
>examples kept me from trying to learn the program. Small obstacle…but a fatal one.
i haven’t seen a program that does that in my life ... what you see is usually some small examples from different parts, but how they are put to gotether is ultimately up to the user. This is especially true with UR and it offers a lot of flexibility, for good or bad ... and the examples they provide are quite good, even a simple GTD one with all the items/tasks/predefined searches etc.
maybe if you tried one such program in your hard-to-find free time, maybe you’d find out how much more free time you’d have after that ... there is no free lunch ... no risk ... no reward