Forums / Ideas

yasuaki.okamoto

I think it's better that priority can be from -1 to 3 and 0 as default.
Because sometime I specify a task to lower priority than default.

Posted 2 years ago

I very much think 1-5 or 1-6 would be good. Keep the 0.

Posted 2 years ago

Why stop at 1-5. Why not have as many as you want (A1, A2, A3, B1, B2, C1, C2 ...)

Posted 1 year ago

I only need on more call "on fire"

Posted 1 year ago

mde1959

Yes please! I am surprised that such a great tool as RTM has only 1-3. Very restricting, and I can't see that this is a big issue to resolve...

Posted 1 year ago

cadetblue

Limiting priorities values to few units is highly uneffective. Priorities are a way to sort tasks competing for resources and to order them (competing for attention). I believe that that priorities should have any possible integer value: a 2-bytes value would be practical and useful

Posted 1 year ago

rdseabrook

I agree. I need to know what is my top priority NOW. Having more than one Priority 1 tasks doesn't help me to decide what to do next.

Posted 1 year ago

I'm a huge fan of ABC123(456....) A is your "On FIRE!" C is your "nice to get this done" and 123456789 helps you order them within those categories.

You could also set deadlines for each item when it should transition from being a "C" item to a "B" item to an "A" item.

That and an android tablet version would convert me off of paper tasking forever.

Posted 1 year ago

More priority levels please! I used ListPro for an iPAQ (PocketPC), and that offered 1 through 9. Although -1, 0, 1, 2 ...9 would be even better.
Problem for the developer might be to do with how the original software was structured for the storage of priority data (2 bits?), so a change may be difficult to accommodate...

Posted 1 year ago

I would really like this. It's hard to create your own methods when you are limited to 3 priorities. I would really like more flexibility in this area.

Posted 1 year ago

crystal.odenkirk

I have taken to tagging all my items with a number that corresponds to their actual priority on a 1-10 scale. You can then use smart lists to create a list of each priority. Not as simple as having more priorities, but it works.

This could be something that you have an option in the settings to say how many priorities you want in your lists? Then the people who want 5 get 5, I get my ten, puckarocca could have 30... :D

Posted 1 year ago

jcrumley

I think there are multiple feature requests related to more priority granularity. Personally I am going through voting "yes" to all of them :). Some even have copied comments underneath. Since I am using an iPad I am not even going to attempt that and just vote!

It would ideal to have abc-numeric prioritizations or at least more tnumeric priority levels. Check out how many of your users have multiple high priority items - if it's lots then you need more granularity. I would even pay more for it :)

Posted 1 year ago

jmc127

Definitely need more priorities.

Posted 1 year ago

One option is to make the priority just an arbitrary number, or even a floating-point number. Then people could decide whether they want to use 0 to 3, -5 to 5, 1 to 10 or whatever. With floating-point priorities you have all the granularity you can ever desire. For example, if you have a long list of priority 3 tasks and a few of them are more important but not quite as urgent as priority 2, you can select them to stand out by giving them priority 3.5.

The only problem is to decide how to assign colors to the priorities. This could be a user setting -- choose the lowest priority and the highest priority and a color scheme (blue to yellow to red for example), and the tasks would be colored accordingly.

If this gets too big to implement, just having, for example, 5 priority levels instead of 3 would help a lot, thanks :)

Posted 1 year ago

2090170

Sometimes I have a hard time prioritizing my tasks and I turn to the method of assigning and effort (e) and reward (r) per task. The ratio of e:r gives me a good way to set priorities w/o being biased. The lower the e:r ratio the more important the task or in other words: the higher the priority. With only 3 levels of priorities I have no way to sort a task that has an e:r of let's say 3:5 (on a 1 - 5 scale). Custom values for priorities would be very helpful.

Posted 11 months ago

I like being able to check the task and enter the number and use priority to group things. Would Love more than 1, 2, 3 - I bet it would be easy to take it to 5 or 10 - some of the other enhancements are nice but might be too difficult to get implimented - add the additional priorities and then work on that - LOL :)

Posted 11 months ago

gotardo

It would be a good feature in order to group tasks by color.

Posted 11 months ago

I'd love to see this too!

Posted 16 weeks ago

The priority could be 1-3 for "Free" users and have more priority levels for "Pro" users.

As I don't use the mobiles apps, I see no advantages to switch to Pro at the moment (except supporting RTM).

Posted 14 weeks ago