Forum Discussion
COMMENTS SECTION replaced with NOTES SECTION - do you think it`s bad decision of Microsoft as well ?
Hi !
I have read post by TonyYoung :
For assigned tasks, To-Do needs to add a Comments section similar to Conversations in Teams or Comments in any Office app. That way, those involved can see who left what comment or @mention teammates with questions. The Notes field is ineffective in a collaborative environment.
I would like to express my support for the thesis presented above by the user TonyYoung.
I fully agree with the above and believe that the fact that the Comments section have been replaced with Notes section is a very serious difficulty and limitation of functionality for Microsoft TO DO.
The fact of placing Comments Section in Planner does not result in such efficiency, because Planner itself has some disadvantages in simple task collaboration.
The fact is, that I often hear that as a result of removing the Comments section, people responsible for Work Flow in Corporations are looking for a new solution, unfortunately from outside of the Microsoft products family.
Personally, I can point out, that if Microsoft does not restore the Comments section, I will be forced as CEO also to look for another Work Flow solution.
Maybe if I can gather a larger list of support for above thesis, one of the Product Managers will note this fact and manage to identify a problem?
A clear question should be answered by Microsoft members of development team of TO DO and a logical answer to the question should be presented for below question:
For what the Notes section is needed in TO DO, that anyone can edit and change without being able to restore or view the history change?
It seems to me that there is no logical answer to that question.
If you agree with me, and you would like Microsoft to restore the Comments section instead of the editable Notes section - please give Like or write a comment, and maybe I will be able to catch the attention of Product Manager to point the problem.
Thanks for the opinion in this matter !
JAKUB.