Activation Scheduling feature request:

[t.s.lim]

Hi,

 

How about allowing multiple "Schedule" activation of a macro?

I mean something like I can schedule my macro to run

 

1. Monthly

and/or

2. When the system has been idle for x minutes

 

(i.e. if it is a AND, I can have a monthly macro to run only when my system is idle, the possibility is unlimited... and hence flexible)

 

I wish MEP to be more flexible with its time-scheduling features and the easiest way I can see is to allow multiple time-schedules (those that currently provided by MEP) whose condition are joined with a Boolean "AND" or "OR".

[paul]

I wish MEP to be more flexible with its time-scheduling features and the easiest way I can see is to allow multiple time-schedules (those that currently provided by MEP) whose condition are joined with a Boolean "AND" or "OR".

Easiest for you perhaps? Certainly not easiest for Insight, and entirely unnecessary. Simply create 2 scheduled macros according to your criteria above, then have the body of logic in a 3rd macro that is run by either of the other 2 macros. I wish you'd stop making facile requests for features that are unnecessary, and which appear to be of interest only to yourself.

 

In any case, this isn't the place for requests for new features - Insight provides an alternative method for this, if you could only take the time to discover.

[t.s.lim]

Hi,

 

 

 

Easiest for you perhaps? Certainly not easiest for Insight,and entirely unnecessary.

 

 

How do you know?

 

 

 

 

 

Simply create 2 scheduled macros according to your criteria above, then have the body of logic in a 3rd macro that is run by either of the other 2 macros. I wish you'd stop making facile requests for features that are unnecessary,

 

 

In my example, I want to run a monthly schedule macro only when my system is idle. (The AND case). The trick you have suggested won't work and even if it work, I think creating 3 macros to schedule a single task is not the answer, that way is unnecessarily troublesome, inefficient and unwise.

 

 

 

 

 

In any case, this isn't the place for requests for new features - Insight provides an alternative method for this, if you could only take the time to discover.

 

Just point me to the place where the forum rule says I should not make any feature request here and I will shut up and leave.

 

 

 

 

 

 

[paul]

Just point me to the place where the forum rule says I should not make any feature request here and I will shut up and leave.

Request a feature

[t.s.lim]

Request a feature

 

That link never says I shouldn't post suggestion here.

 

 

I hereby, would like to invit any moderator to clarify this point: Can I, as a registered user of MEP post my request of new feature here instead of using that link.

 

Btw, I have never come across such a hostile forum where user can openly demands others to stop suggesting something simply because it is not his interest, wtfk!

 

 

[Cory]

That link never says I shouldn't post suggestion here.

It does say you should use the feature request forum and coming from a moderator I take that to also mean you should not do the opposite. I think the reasoning here is that there is no point posting a feature request here to users who can not implement such a feature request for you. And if your sole goal is to bash MEP then you're the hostile one. But the one thing I do find constructive is when a user is anticipating making a feature request to ISS, and states so, and asks the community for input and is willing to listen to that input. Then makes a feature request based on that input. Well that's a different matter and I encourage that. And personally I think a few more scheduling options would be useful. Quarterly would be nice for instance.

[Samrae]

It looks to me like you can post what you want on this forum but if you want to be sure Insight sees it you need to submit it directly to them. Paul is blunt or even hostile to many forum users, not just you. Don't take it personally. He is often helpful if you can overlook his tone.

[t.s.lim]

 

It does say you should use the feature request forum and coming from a moderator I take that to also mean you should not do the opposite. I think the reasoning here is that there is no point posting a feature request here to users who can not implement such a feature request for you. And if your sole goal is to bash MEP then you're the hostile one.

 

 

Common sense tells, if my goal is to bash MEP, I won't be so stupid to register MEP in the first place.

 

 

 

 

 

But the one thing I do find constructive is when a user is anticipating making a feature request to ISS, and states so, and asks the community for input and is willing to listen to that input. Then makes a feature request based on that input. Well that's a different matter and I encourage that. And personally I think a few more scheduling options would be useful. Quarterly would be nice for instance.

 

 

 

Base on my personal experience, a "Suggestion" forum (I wonder why there isn't one here) is always the best place to quickly find out how rich/lack of a utility features (particularly when one need to evaluate and choose one among several competitive products). And how well the response of the author (or a representative from the developer) to user suggestions is a good indicator of how much they care about user needs (which I think is the major factor determining the future of a product). I often find it mush more interesting to read discussion in user suggestion forum than a bug report forum.