Talk:Chandler (software)

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Computing, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of computers, computing, and information technology on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.ComputingWikipedia:WikiProject ComputingTemplate:WikiProject ComputingComputing articles
???	This article has not yet received a rating on the project's importance scale.
	This article is supported by WikiProject Software.

Vaporware[edit]

Is a product that's been in development for four years, and is probably going to be marginally useful in the next year, still considered "vaporware"? Is the category [[Category:Vaporware|Vaporware]] more incendiary and opinionated than neutral? mordel 2005-07-01 00:59:35 (UTC)

This is experimentally usable. OSAF does seem to be taking its own sweet time with it, but it is not vaporware. http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Chandler_%28PIM%29&action=edit&section=1

"Vaporware" is an inappropriate term just becaue it's a loaded and slang term. However, I have to say, I've wondered the same thing about Chandler. It feels like there has been so little process in its development considering how many people are working on it. --Calan 03:45, 8 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Updates[edit]

I changed the latest release date to reflect the bugfix release on 2/10/6

Why I'm not using Chandler[edit]

I've wanted to use Chandler for a long time and I've been following its (amazingly long) development process. What is stopping me from using it is, in a word, performance. It takes ungodly amounts of time to start up to the point of being unusable. The Chandler people are aware of this but making it highly performant is not an immediate priority. Whenning 09:04, 23 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Agreed, it takes forever on my iBook. iCal only takes a moment. I'm sure they've got their hearts in the right place but as yet Chandler isn't nearly usable, last I checked. DaveWF 09:49, 27 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Great, but what does that have to do with the article? Rstandefer 17:59, 15 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Performance optimization is almost always the last thing to be considered in non-mission critical software development. Take Firefox for example. The fact that you have access to code in development doesn't mean that the labels "Preview" or "Pre-release" don't have any meaning.Lunalot 20:50, 25 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Dreaming in Code[edit]

Chandler is the subject of a book being released January 15th. It's written by the founder of salon.com. Does someone want to add a quick mention in this entry? I expect this page will get quite a bit more traffic as this book nears release. The official site is here: http://www.dreamingincode.com PotatoeMasher 18:23, 2 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

There is a review of that book here: http://www.joelonsoftware.com/items/2007/01/21.html . might be useful. might not too. --203.6.205.22 04:34, 25 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

License[edit]

This page http://wiki.osafoundation.org/bin/view/Projects/ChandlerLicensingPlan says that the license will be Apache 2.0, not GPL. --203.6.205.22 04:34, 25 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Dead?[edit]

Official site seems to be down. --80.90.124.132 (talk) 07:41, 13 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Chandler is simply the best calendar app ever programmed[edit]

By Robert Abitbol. People who have found an object they could not understand will know what I'm talking about. They found an object that was an apparatus of some kind in a garage sale or somewhere else. They didn't have the slightest idea what this object did. They wanted to throw it in the garbage but somehow some interior voice told them they should not do it. They kept the object.

They persisted in trying to figure out what the object did and then a miracle happened overnight: They understood what the apparatus was all about and they were amazed at the way it worked. They said: This is a brilliant apparatus. Who could have designed such brilliant stuff!

Well this is what Chandler is all about: It is brilliant stuff.

It is simply brilliant but there are not many folks who know that it is brilliant because they did not take the time to understand it.

I am writing a book called: 'How to get perfectly organized with Chandler and the Chandler Companion and I'll give a very simple explanation at how to use Chandler.

I have adapted a software I've had programmed to work with Chandler as a companion.

I'll sell hundreds of thousand of copies of my book in a great number of languages.

Now let me say this. When I read the magic words Mitch Kapor in an article about Chandler, I knew right away that since Mitch Kapor is a genius, Chandler could only be brilliant.

I did not quite get it in the beginning but I tried and tried non-stop relentlessly (relentlessness is my trade-mark). I told myself: If Mitch Kapor designed, it it has to be totally brilliant and I have to find out why it is brilliant.

That day came (end of 2011). I found out that Chandler was a brilliant app, the best PIM ever designed.

The postulate Once a genius, always a genius applies to Mitch Kapor.

My suggestion is this. Go and download a copy of Chandler and try to understand it. Don't get discouraged. Try hard at it. In a week from now, I am 100% convinced you'll understand it and you'll agree with me: Chandler is simply the best PIM ever to have been programmed.

See what I wrote in the talk page for Mitch Kapor. Mitch is the Beatles of PIMs. No one has ever had better ideas than him for personal information managers.

If there are five apps I am allowed to bring on a remote island along with 3 girls, I'd definitely take three of Mitch Kapor's inventions: Lotus 123, Lotus Agenda and Chandler.

Thanks Mitch for brillant apps! — Preceding unsigned comment added by 132.204.243.254 (talk) 18:59, 31 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

As for the names of the three girls, well, this is a story for another day! :-) — Preceding unsigned comment added by 132.204.243.254 (talk) 19:03, 31 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on Chandler (software). Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 09:10, 19 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 3 external links on Chandler (software). Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 18:04, 2 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]