3 ms·

The only implementation I have found worthwhile is paper, and to a certain extent, plain markdown/org files in Dropbox. Everything else, like OmniFocus and what

The only implementation I have found worthwhile is paper, and to a certain extent, plain markdown/org files in Dropbox. Everything else, like OmniFocus and whatnot has had severe issues with the flexibility inherently required.

PeOe 9y ago
May I recommend http://zenkit.com http://zenkit.com It´s really easy to use, offers tons of different views on your data and grows with your product. Disclaimer: I work at Zenkit.
Jtsummers 9y ago
Out of curiosity, what are your issues with OmniFocus? I have some issues with it (primarily that it's hard to share information from it with other people), but otherwise I find it to be a fantastic personal tool for GTD (I'd use it for work, but my office is all Windows). That said, I do like paper and org-mode at least as much. I definitely find paper best for writing down my intentions and clarifying them before I enter them into OmniFocus.
- Azareus 9y ago
  I currently still use Omnifocus for part of my system because it is still pretty great, and has excellent cross-device support, but my gripes are: - The context support is weak. It ideally would be replaced by a tagging system, but I doubt that's coming at this point. - No support for making sequentially dependent tasks -- I can't mark task A to be doable as soon as task B completes. (I guess I could, if I do a lot of sub-projects with sequential dependency) - In addition to this, subprojects are janky. They're just kinda awful to use, from the awkward indentation to the fact that the side-bar projects view is not actually a full tree, and just works with folders. This would need to be changed to also expand/be usable for sub-projects, not just for folders and top-level projects. - The system maintenance tools are lacking. One of the core tenets of GTD is to make sure that every project always has a next step, and OmniFocus has no support for this whatsoever, aside from manual review. I realise that paper also doesn't do this, but it seems like something a digital solution should have. - No sharing information, as you said, aside from exporting things as TaskPaper. - Support for deferments, but not for Tickler files, which are one of the handiest things about a paper-based system. - Reference and storage, per nature of OmniFocus, has to be completely separated, which adds jank. I realise this is massive scope-bloat, so it's probably not fair to complain about. Things I really like and will probably keep even after I drop OmniFocus: - The dedicated mail drop. I think even after I move away from OF, this is going to be something I keep. - The "due" list view. OmniFocus pushes you towards using this a lot, even if it's not completely in the spirit. - The good integration between my laptop and phone is going to be hard to live without again. I hope this shed some light on my gripes and issues with OmniFocus. :)

PeOe 9y ago

May I recommend http://zenkit.com http://zenkit.com It´s really easy to use, offers tons of different views on your data and grows with your product. Disclaimer: I work at Zenkit.

Jtsummers 9y ago

Out of curiosity, what are your issues with OmniFocus? I have some issues with it (primarily that it's hard to share information from it with other people), but otherwise I find it to be a fantastic personal tool for GTD (I'd use it for work, but my office is all Windows). That said, I do like paper and org-mode at least as much. I definitely find paper best for writing down my intentions and clarifying them before I enter them into OmniFocus.

Azareus 9y ago
I currently still use Omnifocus for part of my system because it is still pretty great, and has excellent cross-device support, but my gripes are: - The context support is weak. It ideally would be replaced by a tagging system, but I doubt that's coming at this point. - No support for making sequentially dependent tasks -- I can't mark task A to be doable as soon as task B completes. (I guess I could, if I do a lot of sub-projects with sequential dependency) - In addition to this, subprojects are janky. They're just kinda awful to use, from the awkward indentation to the fact that the side-bar projects view is not actually a full tree, and just works with folders. This would need to be changed to also expand/be usable for sub-projects, not just for folders and top-level projects. - The system maintenance tools are lacking. One of the core tenets of GTD is to make sure that every project always has a next step, and OmniFocus has no support for this whatsoever, aside from manual review. I realise that paper also doesn't do this, but it seems like something a digital solution should have. - No sharing information, as you said, aside from exporting things as TaskPaper. - Support for deferments, but not for Tickler files, which are one of the handiest things about a paper-based system. - Reference and storage, per nature of OmniFocus, has to be completely separated, which adds jank. I realise this is massive scope-bloat, so it's probably not fair to complain about. Things I really like and will probably keep even after I drop OmniFocus: - The dedicated mail drop. I think even after I move away from OF, this is going to be something I keep. - The "due" list view. OmniFocus pushes you towards using this a lot, even if it's not completely in the spirit. - The good integration between my laptop and phone is going to be hard to live without again. I hope this shed some light on my gripes and issues with OmniFocus. :)