MindManager 9 problems – a positive response from Mindjet

In my last post I commented on some of the major problems with the latest version of the market-leading mind mapping program, MindManager, from Mindjet.

 To summarise, MindJet recently introduced MindManager 9 with a range of new features, many of which are worthwhile. However, key aspects of these changes appear to have been poorly implemented in the rush to market. In addition, some important features of the previous version which many users relied upon were dropped or reduced in functionality, potentially compromising the product’s fundamental role as a brainstorming tool.

When I put out a  request for responses from affected users on relevant forums I received strong feedback which I consolidated into a detailed MindManager map. I forwarded this to Mindjet with an open letter outlining the changes that users were demanding in upcoming service packs for the product – click here to see the map  (requires Flash), go to Biggerplate to download the map or click on this link to download the letter to Mindjet - as well as writing about it here.

I commented that it would be interesting to see if this modest exercise had any affect. I’m pleased to say that it has. On the Yahoo MindManager forum, Garrett Scott from Mindjet made the following response to my post:

Alex,

Thank you for taking the time to pull all these comments together and create
this letter. I have passed this to the highest levels of Mindjet and we are now
digesting your comments and feedback. A lot of the feedback you have included, I
have previously escalated and our Products and Engineering are already looking
at them.

I will tell you that the first service pack is due out the first week of October
so I can’t say that these fixes will be included. But our teams know how
important these issues are with you, our most dedicated power users, and are
formulating ways to address your comments.

We will only know how committed Mindjet really is to addressing these issues when the service packs start rolling out (and of course we’ll be using the map of MindManager issues which I compiled to keep tally of what they do in response to the problems we have identified). However this is a very positive beginning: potentially this exercise in “user power” can grow into a proper dialogue between Mindjet and its customers which can serve as a model for other companies that want to make major changes to their software (PC or web-based) which could potentially affect their existing user base.

At this stage I’d just like to say thanks to the Garrett and the people at Mindjet for listening.

When good software goes off the rails – how to fix MindManager 9

Some time ago I posted an article on my StrategyMatters blog about the virtues of mind mapping and subsequently on this blog about web-based mind mapping applications. I’ve been a little tardy in following this up with the article I foreshadowed on PC-based mind mapping tools with a web-based interface. That article will have to wait a little longer while I tackle some issues with the latest version of my favourite mind mapping program, MindManager.

While MindManager (MM) has a web-based incarnation, Catalyst, I have to confess that I use- and have become addicted to – the PC-based version. MM is the Rolls Royce of mind mappers- it’s big, it’s expensive, but it’s got everything and it does everything.  And I use it for everything, from brainstorming, to project planning to article outlining to – well, you name it.

The numbers back up Mindjet’s claim that MM is the market leader, with about 1.5 million users, roughly a third of the 4 million plus mind mapping market (though I’m not sure if these figures include the web-based applications).

A month or so ago Mindjet, who produce MM, released the latest version (MindManager 9) to much fanfare. I’m the first to admit it’s got some great features, including a new slide view which allows you to present the map in sections to an audience and interact with it at the same time, and a built-in Gantt view.

Unfortunately the changes have come at too high a cost for many users. Mindjet appears to have embarked on a strategy to attract new users by repositioning MM as an Outlook task and appointment manager. While there are many worthwhile aspects to these new features, key aspects appear to have been rushed to market and as a result they seem to have been poorly implemented.

Furthermore the new features seem to have compromised the product’s fundamental role as a brainstorming and product development tool from which tasks will eventually be exported and linked to Outlook, rather than the other way round.

The story from here on in is a bit technical for non-MM users, but it illustrates some of the difficulties that can occur when companies make a major change in direction in search of new market share which leaves their existing user base stranded. It’s even worse when some of these changes are not fully thought through.

A request for feedback on issues with the new version which I placed on key MM forums has elicited a strong response. Based on these I’ve prepared, appropriately enough, a detailed mind map in consultation with key members of the MM user community. I’ve forwarded this to Mindjet with an open letter seeking changes in the first and subsequent MM9 service packs.

It will be interesting to see if this small exercise in consumer protest has any affect. For those of you who are interested in this issue, click here to see the map  (requires Flash), go to Biggerplate to download the map or click on this link to download the letter to Mindjet – and if you are a concerned MindManager user, pass these links on, post comments on the Mindjet and Yahoo MM forums and write to Mindjet yourself.

Is this the (western) world’s oldest mind map?

I was watching the first episode of the BBC series Seven Ages of Britain (currently being screened in Australia on the ABC) in which the presenter, David Dimbleby, visits the Biblioteca Medicea Laurenziana in Florence to look at the Codex Amiatinus, the earliest surviving example of a complete (or nearly complete) Bible.

According to the program (and Wikipedia) it was produced in the Anglo-Saxon kingdom of Northumbria and was commissioned as a gift for the Pope in 692. The book is huge – it weighs over 35kg – with over a 1,000 pages of beautiful script in vulgate Latin and intricate illustrations, all laboriously completed by hand by the monks of the double monastery of Wearmouth-Jarrow.

As Dimbleby turned the pages he paused briefly to describe the manuscript’s contents page and I suddenly realised that we were looking at what appeared to be a very old mind map. I went to the ABC iView site to review the program and grabbed a snapshot of the page (all copyrights acknowledged, etc).

Codex Amiatinus

 

Strictly speaking it’s a knowledge or information map, rather than a mind map (I don’t imagine the monks were brainstorming the Bible). It’s a simple org-chart diagram – I’m assuming the two main branches are the Old and New Testaments and the sub-branches represent the key sections, but somebody with a better knowledge of the Bible’s structure can correct me!

I did a quick search of the web to see if there are any earlier examples of mind maps or similar diagrams. It appears that the concept of visually mapping information dates at least to the third Century, when the philosopher Porphyry of Tyros used a form of decision tree to represent the concept categories of Aristotle. However the only illustration I could find of these was from a later translation.

Obviously, non-European cultures have also made extensive use of illustration in various ways to represent complex information, from simple pictographs and drawings to the extremely complex diagrams of some Central and South American pre-Columbian civilisations. However, this page in the Codex Amiatinus may be one of the oldest extant knowledge maps in European culture. Even if it isn’t, it’s remarkable in terms of its simplicity and restraint. While it is clearly hand drawn, it almost has the regularity of a software-generated map, combined with the creative use of different line colours and icons (all undoubtedly highly symbolic).

The thing that struck me the most was how accessible it was; it’s easy to recognise, 1,300 years after it was drawn, that this is some form of contents page or publication guide – even if, like me, you are neither a regular church-goer nor a Latin scholar!