Projects in the sense of ordered sets of actions are a necessary evil in a task manager, both essential and a trap.However, aside from date-based views, manual ordering is the principal sorting mechanism in Things, and it gets tedious in day-to-day use. It is almost essential in a crunch situation. It is something many people have wanted in Omnifocus, myself included. Manual re-ordering is a mixed blessing.It's not really designed for the intuitive-choice-in-the-moment that I think GTD promotes. This is not new: it was the philosophy of Things 1 and 2 as well. Things is designed around making a daily plan in the Today view and organizing tasks on that daily plan. By default, these tasks can be rearranged with drag and drop however you like. You do get a consolidated view of tasks due today as well as "starred" tasks in the Today view. I find this distracting, and it's very difficult to grasp a given context's next actions at one go. This means that if you filter on the tag "Home" you will see a list like this: Contexts can be implemented as tags, but tags can be used for other metadata as well, such as time and energy required. It's organization of tasks is based on Areas that contain tasks and projects projects in turn also contain tasks. Now, the not-so-good: Things 3 was designed with a particular approach to task management in mind, and it wasn't GTD. The developers have done an outstanding job of design. I think it makes Omnifocus look cluttered and a bit ugly. Other clever refinements, such as an "Evening" section of the Today view, and progress pies for projects. ![]() Most-requested features are included: time-based reminders and (on macs) multiple windows. ![]() This determines both location and type of item in an intuitive way.
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |