Omnifocus

[michaela]

I'm new to this forum but have been looking for simple inexpensive tools to get started with GTD. I keep seeing reference to omnifocus. I did look at the app online but it seems awfully expensive for a list manager- the price is saw was $79- Is there a less expensive version of this that does pretty much the same? I thought I might try actionastic which seems like a simple interface and syncs with my ical and my ipod but the drag and drop feature on omnifocus appeals to me as a mac user. What tools do some of you use?

[lastgasp]

I've praised OmniFocus on these boards before. It's gotten even better since then. It's among the most powerful yet easy-to-use GTD applications available. (Believe me, I've tried nearly all of them available for the Mac...)

The new OmniFocus iPhone functionality makes it an easy win for anyone using Apple's OS and David Allen's GTD principles. I think OmniFocus offers a lot more than just "list management." I've been using OmniFocus since the alpha testing days, and I'm still uncovering features I didn't know it had.

I think OF has a trial period, too, so you don't have to pony up until you've had an opportunity to try it.

Tim

[nooozeguy]

Totally agreed that OmniFocus is the best Mac GTD app around.

I use it daily and love it!

I also have the iPhone version which is elegantly designed.

If you're looking for a price break, consider beta testing OmniFocus: http://tinyurl.com/344wbj.

-Josh

[mcogilvie]

I'm new to this forum but have been looking for simple inexpensive tools to get started with GTD.

I think Omnifocus is not the best tool for getting started with GTD. I have both the desktop and iPhone version, and it works as advertised. This is saying a lot, because it does have a ton of functionality inside. However, I don't use it, because using that functionality has a significant cost for me in time and energy. While it is possible to use Omnifocus and not use the outlining, flags, et cetera, there is no real reason to do so, because there are other apps around that are faster and easier. However, Omnifocus is by far the best "full-featured" program of its kind for the mac. It has a free trial period.

But is that what you really need? I think many successful, experienced people have found that simple tools with clean edges work better. Right now I am using a web tool, Toodledo, for my lists. It has many features I don't use. I don't use due dates, priorities, subtasks, or many other features. I use folders (for contexts), title and notes. That's it, and I am more productive than ever. Toodledo has free accounts, or you might try paper. In one of his books, DA quotes a proverb "the work will teach you how to do it." Easy and fast is better than complicated and hard.

[ZZamboni]

I use and highly recommend Things: http://culturedcode.com/things/

It is very nicely designed and implemented, much simpler than OmniFocus but not less powerful IMO, and although it is still in beta, I have used it daily for months and never had any big problems with it. They also have an iPhone version that synchronizes with the desktop.

[darlakbrown]

You could try iGTD. I used to use it and liked it. Now I'm on OmniFocus and not looking back. It's the best.

[michaela]

I use and highly recommend Things: http://culturedcode.com/things/

It is very nicely designed and implemented, much simpler than OmniFocus but not less powerful IMO, and although it is still in beta, I have used it daily for months and never had any big problems with it. They also have an iPhone version that synchronizes with the desktop.

Does this sync to imac ICAL and or an apple Ipod? I am looking at the moment at actionastic which seems to work with both. Just trying to compare what is out there. Thanks!

[mmurray]

I've heard people talk about Things but not checked it out before. I like this comment on their website

"The big picture. A Leopard style source list lets you easily focus without ever switching view modes or wrapping your head around filter criteria."

Omnifocus has different viewing modes and filters :-)

Michael

[der56]

does anyone have any suggestions for this set up? I'd love to keep using OmniFocus but the company I work for is on PC? Any way to sync the info?

[photodiva]

A former colleague who uses a PC just got an iPhone and he is using something called Nozbe. When he showed me how it looks on his iPhone, it looked pretty identical to Omnifocus - at least at first glance.

[mcogilvie]

does anyone have any suggestions for this set up? I'd love to keep using OmniFocus but the company I work for is on PC? Any way to sync the info?

I'd use a web-based tool for lists. I use Toodledo, and also like Remember the Milk. Nozbe is pricier, and less vanilla. Toodledo can be used for free, but for $15/year you get extra features like subtasks. This might appeal if you like the outlining in OmniFocus. I like outlines myself, but I keep them in notes instead.

[Lecter]

Even with a browser plug-in like Google Gears, I don't feel comfortable using a online-only web-only solution.

A native program will always be faster and more versatile than web-based one. With a speedkey and OmniFocus' Quick Entry feature, I can capture my inbox items while I am in any program, as inspiration strikes. And this can be completed before a web page is even loaded.

If Toodledo, RTM and Nozbe offered native clients (Mac, Windows, iPhone) in addition to web access, then I would consider them.

When using a native program with speedkeys, I feel like I am Captain and Commander of my system. With web-based systems, I feel like a web surfer.

Just my 2¢.

Jim

[mcogilvie]

A native program will always be faster and more versatile than web-based one. With a speedkey and OmniFocus' Quick Entry feature, I can capture my inbox items while I am in any program, as inspiration strikes. And this can be completed before a web page is even loaded.
..
When using a native program with speedkeys, I feel like I am Captain and Commander of my system. With web-based systems, I feel like a web surfer.


Interesting. One of the reasons I don't use Omnifocus is because I find it slow and a little awkward to move around in. Capture is fast because of the little utility program OmniGroup provides, but I think the time to load a web page compares very favorably with the time to load Omnifocus. Of course, I keep Toodledo in a browser tab all the time, just as I would keep Omnifocus open if I still used it. Another consideration is syncing. Omnifocus's sync works fine for me on multiple macs and an iphone, but it is slow. To each his own.

[Lecter]

Interesting. One of the reasons I don't use Omnifocus is because I find it slow and a little awkward to move around in. Capture is fast because of the little utility program OmniGroup provides, but I think the time to load a web page compares very favorably with the time to load Omnifocus. Of course, I keep Toodledo in a browser tab all the time, just as I would keep Omnifocus open if I still used it. Another consideration is syncing. Omnifocus's sync works fine for me on multiple macs and an iphone, but it is slow. To each his own.

I find OmniFocus to be as fast as can be (I never have to wait on OmniFocus, whereas I have had to wait for a web app to update). Web applications are tied to the speed of your internet connection and their compatibility with your web browser.

I love and use the Opera web browser (which is standards compliant), and many web applications (that are not standards compliant) don't work well in it. OmniFocus always works well for me, and I don't need Google Gears to access it if my internet connection is down.

And for programs that have a OmniFocus plug-in, capturing accurate, delineated data (populated into the fields with a link back to the original) is something no web application can lay claim to. Sure, web apps like Remember The Milk try hard with JavaScript and other APIs, but they pale in comparison with native applications.

For example, I just tried using RTM's Quick Add to add three e-mails (from web mail, as Quick Add doesn't work outside of a web browser) to RTM. Total time: forty seconds, and it added only selected text. In OmniFocus, it took under eight seconds to add three e-mails with the Clippings service speedkey, and each capture automatically transferred to OmniFocus with the message subject as the topic, the body of the e-mail as notes, and it included a link to the e-mail in Apple Mail. Results: less than a fourth of the time, with more data transferred, with a link to the source.

Keep in mind that I am not dismissing web apps like Toodledo, RTM and Nozbe. For web apps, they are amazing. But I find native programs faster, better integrated (with the operating system and other programs - not just a web browser), and more functional overall. Now if the web apps would create (well-designed) native applications that connected with their servers (or native applications added a reliable web interface to synchronized data), that would be very interesting, and worth heavy evaluation. EasyTask Manager is off to a good start in this regard and Appigo Todo (a native iPhone app) connects to Toodledo or RTM and syncs data. So, in the forthcoming months, I will keep an eye on them as they evolve.

Jim

[Oogiem]

Even with a browser plug-in like Google Gears, I don't feel comfortable using a online-only web-only solution.

Not to mention the inherent security and access issues with depending on a web based system you have no control over.

[mcogilvie]

I find OmniFocus to be as fast as can be (I never have to wait on OmniFocus, whereas I have had to wait for a web app to update). Web applications are tied to the speed of your internet connection and their compatibility with your web browser.

I love and use the Opera web browser (which is standards compliant), and many web applications (that are not standards compliant) don't work well in it. OmniFocus always works well for me, and I don't need Google Gears to access it if my internet connection is down.

And for programs that have a OmniFocus plug-in, capturing accurate, delineated data (populated into the fields with a link back to the original) is something no web application can lay claim to. Sure, web apps like Remember The Milk try hard with JavaScript and other APIs, but they pale in comparison with native applications.

For example, I just tried using RTM's Quick Add to add three e-mails (from web mail, as Quick Add doesn't work outside of a web browser) to RTM. Total time: forty seconds, and it added only selected text. In OmniFocus, it took under eight seconds to add three e-mails with the Clippings service speedkey, and each capture automatically transferred to OmniFocus with the message subject as the topic, the body of the e-mail as notes, and it included a link to the e-mail in Apple Mail. Results: less than a fourth of the time, with more data transferred, with a link to the source.


The Mail Clip-o-Tron 3000 (that's what they call it) in Omnifocus is nice, and it is fast. I get close to the same speed by forwarding the email to Toodledo, but not quite as fast. On the other hand, it's simple and robust, and works from anywhere. I'm not particularly concerned with issues of security, control, and access when comparing a good web-based system to a local program. I have back-up, it's just lists, and there is nothing very embarrassing to me or anyone else there.

The reason I am not using Omnifocus (and I paid for it on both iPhone and mac, with not much regret) is that workflow wasn't working. Too much focus on the tool, not enough on getting things done. My lists filled with non-actionable items, because Omnifocus was too much like a filing cabinet for me. I would be interesting in hearing in detail about other people's usage of Omnifocus. I think it probably appeals to the maximalist (as opposed to minimalist) in all of us.

[Lecter]

I'm not particularly concerned with issues of security, control, and access

Security, control, access and speed all contribute to my workflow and in my confidence in the tool. When they are there, I truly feel like I am Captain and Commander of my system.

If you aren't concerned about security, control, and access - then we have core differences in our mental foundations (which are unlikely to be resolved in this forum discussion).

I took another look at Toodledo, and using it feels very sluggish compared to using a native program. It is very fast as a web application, but very slow as a native application. The keyboard shortcuts leave the shortcut as a entry in the field in Opera, which I need to delete, which is a extra step. The iPhone interface feels like I am navigating through 2G speeds (I was using Wifi). Toodledo hardly feels minimalist to me (comparatively, Remember the Milk actually does) - there are plethora of settings, layouts and configurations - which makes it easy to get distracted. I felt lost navigating Toodledo. Its interface feels inefficient to me. For example, it takes three clicks just to make a selection in a drop-down menu (one to activate the menu, one to drop it down, one to make the selection).

If one needs to use an inefficient tool in order to limit its use, I would argue that the issue is a matter of discipline rather than an issue with the tool itself. My car is a tool. I could tweak it endlessly, drive to random locations, or spend superfluous time at the auto store. Or I could use the tool to get me to my destination. It is discipline (not the maximal nature of the car) that gets me to where I want to go. It is my choice how to use the car (I could use a car as a filing cabinet - but it isn't the car's fault if I choose to use it inefficiently). It is the same way with OmniFocus.

[kewms]

This thread is reminding me why I use a paper system...

Synchronization issues: none. One notebook, small enough to carry everywhere.

Speed: Blazingly fast. Most tasks take less time than an electronic system would need to wake up. User interface completely intuitive.

Cost: trivial. Even expensive notebooks are cheaper than most software. Basic tools universally available.

Flexibility: semi-infinite. Paper and pens available in a vast range of shapes, colors and sizes. No constraints on either individual data fields or overall data organization.

Security and access: data remains secure and accessible indefinitely as long as physical possession of the notebook is maintained. No monthly fees, upgrade costs, or data format incompatibilities. Future proof relative to all known or potential advances in electronics technology. System remains fully functional regardless of connectivity or other location-based restrictions. System immune to all electronic perils, many physical perils.

Yes, I know that there are many good reasons to prefer an electronic system. But threads like this one seem to devote huge amounts of energy to dealing with problems that paper just doesn't have.

Katherine

[Lecter]

Hi Katherine,

Given that most electronic systems allow you to print your data, the electronic systems can reap the benefits of digital processing as well as the benefits of paper. Kind of a best of both worlds situation - where the weaknesses of both are minimized or eliminated.

I can see several issues with pen and paper:

Synchronization: paper has none - which is one of its primary weaknesses. Unless you make back up copies by hand (time-consuming) or electronically (photocopying makes the purported advantages of cost moot), you are relying on not losing or damaging your paper lists. Unless you have hand copied or photocopied your paper lists, if you lose them, your data is gone. With electronic systems, even if my computer is stolen or damaged, I can recover my data in seconds (in my particular case, off of MobileMe).
Costs are relative. If you are happy with cheap paper (such as a HipsterPDA index cards) and a cheap pen (such as Bic), then have at it. If you want a quality pen (such as Mont Blanc) and a quality notebook (such as a leather binder or some of the Levenger items), you can spend much more than on a inexpensive desktop or laptop. This also doesn't factor in the auxiliary uses of the multifunctional computer, which defers the expense (try editing video, sending e-mail or just reading this forum with only pen and paper at hand).
Flexibility: Computer systems are the clear winner here. Copy and paste, customizable fields, deletion, sorting, searches...I could go on and on.
Security and access: Paper has no security. If I pick up your notes, I have complete and utter access to them. If your notes are stolen or lost, you have zero access to them (without copies, which bring time and expense back to the discussion). On the other hand, I can password protect my electronic data and back it up for secure access in a few seconds. I never need to refill my ink in my pen, nor buy new paper or notebooks.


One of the major shortcomings I see in a paper-based system is how to sort by context, while maintaining sorting by project. For a computer program, this is trivially easy. I am interested in how you handle this with paper. Do you do double entry? If you don't do double entry, then how do you view your lists by context and also by project?

I don't think the discussion is based on issues that are solely related to electronic systems. If there was a flawless system, everyone would use it. When Mead releases the GTD paper system, I will take an honest evaluation of it.

I think that passionate discussions are great, as they encourage me to think about and refine my techniques when my inbox is empty and processed. I am not permanently tied to a particular system, I am just passionate about a system that makes my life so much better, and allows me to get things done with confidence and trust.

[kewms]

Given that most electronic systems allow you to print your data, the electronic systems can reap the benefits of digital processing as well as the benefits of paper. Kind of a best of both worlds situation - where the weaknesses of both are minimized or eliminated.

Except that as soon as you commit the data to paper, you lose synchronicity with the electronic version. That was the problem I had when I tried a paper-electronic hybrid. Unless there's a data entry step to bring notes on paper into the electronic system, the advantages of the electronic system are lost. But life is too short to do data entry (or scanning, or photocopying).


Synchronization: paper has none - which is one of its primary weaknesses. Unless you make back up copies by hand (time-consuming) or electronically (photocopying makes the purported advantages of cost moot), you are relying on not losing or damaging your paper lists. Unless you have hand copied or photocopied your paper lists, if you lose them, your data is gone. With electronic systems, even if my computer is stolen or damaged, I can recover my data in seconds (in my particular case, off of MobileMe).

True in theory. In practice, I've lost far more data to electronic perils than I have to misplaced or damaged paper.


Costs are relative. If you are happy with cheap paper (such as a HipsterPDA index cards) and a cheap pen (such as Bic), then have at it. If you want a quality pen (such as Mont Blanc) and a quality notebook (such as a leather binder or some of the Levenger items), you can spend much more than on a inexpensive desktop or laptop. This also doesn't factor in the auxiliary uses of the multifunctional computer, which defers the expense (try editing video, sending e-mail or just reading this forum with only pen and paper at hand).

If you spend as much on paper and pens as you would on a computer for video editing, you go to *way* better stationery stores than I do. Certainly the gap between a cheap pen and a pack of index cards and a $80 copy of OmniFocus has room for many attractive paper-based options. And if you're using a $500 Mont Blanc to write in a $200 leather-bound notebook, I'm guessing cost isn't a major consideration for your productivity system anyway.


Flexibility: Computer systems are the clear winner here. Copy and paste, customizable fields, deletion, sorting, searches...I could go on and on.

Infinitely flexible data entry can accommodate freehand sketches, flow diagrams, annotations as easily as structured data, rendering "customizable fields" irrelevant. Sorting by arbitrary criteria, including those made up on the spot. Searching by visual cues rather than merely alphanumeric contents. "Tagging" by color, shape, size as well as merely textual labels. I could go on and on, too. :-)



One of the major shortcomings I see in a paper-based system is how to sort by context, while maintaining sorting by project. For a computer program, this is trivially easy. I am interested in how you handle this with paper. Do you do double entry? If you don't do double entry, then how do you view your lists by context and also by project?

Honestly, I don't. For me, an explicit project-next action link doesn't add enough value to be worth the overhead to maintain. If the link isn't evident from the description, then the item isn't phrased clearly enough.

Katherine

[Lecter]

You only you lose synchronicity with the electronic version if you choose not to maintain it. That would be true of any system, paper and electronic or otherwise.

We have the reverse experience with losing things. Since paper is cheap and small, it is prone to being damaged or lost. I can't count the number of times that notepads have been misplaced. My friends have spilt their coffee on my papers numerous times. To them, it is just paper. They take extra care around my electronics. Electronic data is easy to replicate. Between my Drobo and MobileMe, I have never lost electronic data. And my data is backed-up hourly, something that would take notable effort and/or expense with any pure paper system.

As David Allen recommends, I use tools that I take pride in. I'm not rich, but I invest what I have in things that I love. I take pleasure in using them, whether it be as nice as a $900 Mont Blanc pen, or as low as a $200 desktop computer. Not surprisingly, I use my computers much more than a pen, and they give much more back to me. :)

Since you can attach files to items in OmniFocus, yes, it trumps paper by a mile (I'm being conservative here). Sketches, diagrams, annotations, mind maps, voice recordings, photos, live hyperlinks, mp3s, movies, you name it. Regardless of how good an artist is, paper isn't as fast as my iPhone capturing a photo in an instant. Maybe you can transcribe verbal dialog pretty fast, but OmniFocus can record every single sound (which could include music and sounds - which would prove extremely difficult to put on paper anywhere as efficiently). Draw anything on paper, and I can grab a photo of it in OmniFocus in my iPhone, and is automatically added to an item. That item, with the photo or voice recording, etc. is then automatically synced into my computer, where it can be used in other programs.

With an electronic system, there isn't any overhead to sorting projects versus context. I find it truly useful. For example, I often need to enter items that have a Hardware Store context into many different projects. When I am at a hardware store, my iPhone's GPS detects the location, and automatically presents me with a list of items that I want to purchase at that location. No sorting through index cards, no double entries, no plastic tabs on worn pages in a notebook. It just works, things get done, and I enjoy the process with a trusted system. Win-win-win, no? :)

[kewms]

With an electronic system, there isn't any overhead to sorting projects versus context. I find it truly useful. For example, I often need to enter items that have a Hardware Store context into many different projects. When I am at a hardware store, my iPhone's GPS detects the location, and automatically presents me with a list of items that I want to purchase at that location. No sorting through index cards, no double entries, no plastic tabs on worn pages in a notebook. It just works, things get done, and I enjoy the process with a trusted system. Win-win-win, no? :)

There may not be any overhead to sorting by projects or contexts, but there *is* overhead to creating the explicit project-next action link in the first place.

On paper, I just create a master Hardware Store list, add to it as needed, and refer to it while I'm at the store. It just works, things get done, and my system doesn't get in the way.

*shrug* To each their own.

Katherine

[Lecter]

I think I see the overhead with paper in this instance (unless there is double entry, which is overhead in and of itself). The overhead is needing to clearly phrase the link to the project on each list that the project branches onto. In OmniFocus, the link is automatic, so that overhead isn't needed.

Your system would get in the way if you wanted to view all project actions together at once. Viewing by project (and seeing the status of all of the related actions in one view) is part of my weekly review, so your methodology wouldn't work for me.

I think this is one of the reasons why GTD is system agnostic, if it wasn't, it wouldn't meet everyone's needs. You need to use a system that meets your own personal needs.

[mcogilvie]

If you aren't concerned about security, control, and access - then we have core differences in our mental foundations (which are unlikely to be resolved in this forum discussion).
As it turns out, I know a bit about computer security, with over two decades of experience in many aspects of computing. I currently chair our department's computer committee. and supervise two full-time and two part-time staff members. I don't want to go into great detail about the issues, but typically both native applications and web apps are relatively insecure, particularly when native apps are used on more than one machine, with any kind of data transfer between machines. Web apps generally take hardware failure off the table, which is really more of an issue than security for most people. Of course, I don't do things things like put credit card numbers in next action lists, and I don't think anyone else should.



I took another look at Toodledo, and using it feels very sluggish compared to using a native program. It is very fast as a web application, but very slow as a native application. The keyboard shortcuts leave the shortcut as a entry in the field in Opera, which I need to delete, which is a extra step. The iPhone interface feels like I am navigating through 2G speeds (I was using Wifi). Toodledo hardly feels minimalist to me (comparatively, Remember the Milk actually does) - there are plethora of settings, layouts and configurations - which makes it easy to get distracted. I felt lost navigating Toodledo. Its interface feels inefficient to me. For example, it takes three clicks just to make a selection in a drop-down menu (one to activate the menu, one to drop it down, one to make the selection).

Perhaps I have a faster net connection and faster wifi, but I don't see much speed difference. For a new entry in Toodledo, hit 'n' for new, tab between fields, hit the first letter for a dropdown list ('w' for Waiting, 2nd 'w' to get Work), return to finish. It's a little faster for me than Omnifocus, I think, because I can hit tab without moving my hands, but I have to move my right hand to hit right-arrow in OmniFocus. I agree that Toodledo has a lot of flexibility. I think that is why I am curious about other people's use of OmniFocus: it has a lot of features, but I felt like I had to use a lot of them to get a working system.



If one needs to use an inefficient tool in order to limit its use, I would argue that the issue is a matter of discipline rather than an issue with the tool itself. My car is a tool. I could tweak it endlessly, drive to random locations, or spend superfluous time at the auto store. Or I could use the tool to get me to my destination. It is discipline (not the maximal nature of the car) that gets me to where I want to go. It is my choice how to use the car (I could use a car as a filing cabinet - but it isn't the car's fault if I choose to use it inefficiently). It is the same way with OmniFocus.
So tell us how you use Omnifocus, please. I really am interested, if it works well for you. By the way, are you related to the famous Lecter? :)

[mcogilvie]

There may not be any overhead to sorting by projects or contexts, but there *is* overhead to creating the explicit project-next action link in the first place.

On paper, I just create a master Hardware Store list, add to it as needed, and refer to it while I'm at the store. It just works, things get done, and my system doesn't get in the way.

*shrug* To each their own.

Katherine
I'm currently using a notation where the project and next action are tied.

Project needing next action (in projects list):
>project

Next action with single next action:
next action >project

Next action forked off from main project:
next action >>project

Next action for subproject:
next action >subproject >project

Almost everything is next action >project almost all the time. As stuff gets done, the next action and context change. I find it very fast, and helpful in maintaining focus. Project information rides along as a note, including possible future actions if I have any. I think this works pretty well for me, and could be implemented in many ways. Sort of minimalist to OmniFocus maximalist. YMMV, of course.

[mmurray]

mcogilvie: what do you do when you are not connected to the net ? Or is that so infrequent it doesn't matter ?

I've only just started on omnifocus because I just replaced by Palm TX with an iPhone. I would be interested in hearing how people are using omnifocus.

Thanks - Michael

[ext555]

I'm currently using Omni-Focus for GTD with Mac and iPhone .

it's a great program , rock-solid and omni group are very quick to fix any glitches that appear .

that being said , it might be more than I require . I find myself spending more time than I want to spend , creating and filtering and viewing lists .

To make it easier to use on iPhone I have my projects split into three main folders and then it drills down into sub folders from there , for example WORK and then a subfolder for each department , it's very easy to locate projects as needed and file away newly created projects .

If you are a fiddler and a tweaker like me , the desktop version of OF can be very dangerous ground , tweaking filters , and perspectives and formatting styles to create the " ultimate system " : (

Right now I'm considering converting to .txt files for all my lists if I can get " Text Guru " to handle them on the iPhone , or I may try an Evernote set up with one note for each context list [but that's not a true .txt file ]

Omni focus is well thought out program and if you have a heavy workload with detailed projects it's a great choice . They have a great example of some guy on their blog working on some mega project with hundreds of small sub-projects .

[mcogilvie]

mcogilvie: what do you do when you are not connected to the net ? Or is that so infrequent it doesn't matter ?

I've only just started on omnifocus because I just replaced by Palm TX with an iPhone. I would be interested in hearing how people are using omnifocus.

Thanks - Michael

There is a nice tool, Todo from Appigo, for the iPhone that syncs to either Toodledo or to Remember the Milk, providing off-line access everywhere. I use it to sync to Toodledo. I'm forced to use Toodledo folders for my contexts, rather than Toodledo's contexts (it has contexts and folders but Todo only uses folders). That's no hardship with me at present. Toodledo has just released their own native iPhone app with more features than Todo, but it has a few bugs for which fixes have been promised. iPhone Todo is $10, and iPhone Toodledo is $4, so neither is a big investment. I also use Appigo Notebook, which syncs with the Toodledo notebook feature. It's $5, and works well. I sync both Todo and Notebook a couple of times a day, over the air. I also use iCal and Contacts to complete the set of four traditional PDA apps.

I tried to use Omnifocus, but I found it hard to drive. I would also be interested in hearing how people are using it.

[mmurray]

I came to Omnifocus from using a Palm TX. I am finding it a little over featured at the moment in contrast to my previous bunch of lists in the Palm Tasks/ToDos. On the other hand not having the number of Contexts limited by a decision of Palm programmers from a decade ago to limit categories to 15 is nice!

One catch I am noticing is that with all the possible viewing options it is very easy to open up a Project and think you have no NA's whereas in reality you have left on some option like `Show only flagged'. That's OK when I know that Project has an NA and thus my `trusted system' is wrong. But that somehow seems contrary to the idea of a trusted system!

Michael

[ext555]

You definitely want to learn about and use " perspectives " in omni focus .
It will keep you from the " oops " of enabling wrong filters .
Omni Focus is very powerful and customizable but that power can bite you if it's not kept under control .

Perspectives are simply " custom views " of how you usually view your data .

[mmurray]

You definitely want to learn about and use " perspectives " in omni focus .
It will keep you from the " oops " of enabling wrong filters .
Omni Focus is very powerful and customizable but that power can bite you if it's not kept under control .

Perspectives are simply " custom views " of how you usually view your data .

Hi Paul

Thanks -- that's useful.

Regards - Michael

[mmurray]

Ah I just discovered that every time I make a perspective of my own it creates a corresponding icon I can drag in from the Customise Toolbar window. Very nice.

Michael

[ext555]

yes there's a lot of power under the hood, just use what you need and leave what you don't : )
I try to dumb down omni focus as much as I can to an organized workflow.
My favorite feature is the " stalled projects " view , it shows you all projects that currently do not have an Next Action available .

I don't have to look at the projects list very often , that one view shows me any that are " stuck " and I know all the rest are current and up to date in the flow.

[Gardener]

The reason I am not using Omnifocus (and I paid for it on both iPhone and mac, with not much regret) is that workflow wasn't working. Too much focus on the tool, not enough on getting things done. My lists filled with non-actionable items, because Omnifocus was too much like a filing cabinet for me. I would be interesting in hearing in detail about other people's usage of Omnifocus. I think it probably appeals to the maximalist (as opposed to minimalist) in all of us.

Hah! You invited detail! So I provide detail. Specifically about your complaint about non-actionable items cluttering up your lists.

I keep my non-actionable information in a separate "Info" folder structure in Omnifocus, so that those items don't clutter up the project folder space. I have a separate set of Contexts for these items, all set to On Hold so that the items don't show in my action lists. I occasionally also use these contexts for information items mixed into actual projects, if I want those items handy while viewing the project as a whole but don't want them popping up as actions. So if I'm viewing a project, I can filter by Remaining to see info and actions, and by Available to see just actions.

When filing items from the Inbox, and when doing my weekly review, I try to make sure that non-actionable items go to Info rather than Projects. In fact, items that could be considered either information or action, are often filed in Info.

For example, I have a backlog of things that I should read for work, but none of these items has a hard deadline. Each of these items could be considered an action, but I don't like that, because to me the list is really just a list of titles and the action is "Read something!". So I store the titles in an Omnifocus single action list named Work To Read, in the Info folder structure. Since all of these "actions" have an On Hold context, they're totally invisible to my action lists.

In the Project structure and action lists, this list of titles is represented by a single repeating action, "Activate something from Work To Read." This action comes up once a week. If I don't already have a Work To Read item that I'm working on, and if I think there's a chance that I will work on one this week, then I'll go look at the list in Info, pick an item, and give it an active Context instead of its usual On Hold context. That will make the title of the item pop up in my action lists. Then I check off the "Activate something..." item, it resets its date into next week, and so it vanishes for a week.

This is all much simpler to do than it is to explain. :) It's a method that I use often - a list of reference information in Info, and a "do something" action in the Projects area.

Another use of the Info structure: I have "Planning" lists in the Info folder structure, where I put ideas and plans that aren't yet ready to become actions. Those lists may or may not be represented in the Projects structure.

For example, if I'm working on a big feature for a project but the subsequent workload for that project is up in the air, the very last action for the feature may be a reminder to "Review (project name) Planning list." At that time, I'll go look at the list in Info, and I may promote it or some subset of its actions to a Project.

Since I review the Info section in the weekly review, that also provides an opportunity to promote information to actions. So a list of wild ideas for decorating my office may live in Info for a long time, but once in a while an item will be promoted to an action in Projects - "Order magazine sorter", say, or "Measure closet for file cabinet".

And if I want to make sure that I occasionally turn my attention to a list that's still just speculation and wild ideas, I'll, again, have a pointer in Projects to that list. So I have "Make preliminary list of Christmas gifts" in Projects, and the gift list itself is in Info. If I have a thought about a gift, that thought will flow from my mind to my Inbox to the Gifts info list. I don't want to forget that gift idea, but it's not yet ready to be an action.

Gardener

[mcogilvie]

Hah! You invited detail! So I provide detail. Specifically about your complaint about non-actionable items cluttering up your lists.

Thanks!



I keep my non-actionable information in a separate "Info" folder structure in Omnifocus, so that those items don't clutter up the project folder space. I have a separate set of Contexts for these items, all set to On Hold so that the items don't show in my action lists. I occasionally also use these contexts for information items mixed into actual projects, if I want those items handy while viewing the project as a whole but don't want them popping up as actions. So if I'm viewing a project, I can filter by Remaining to see info and actions, and by Available to see just actions.

So I think you are saying that projects (and their next actions) and information about those projects live in totally different folders. It's sounds like something I would have trouble keeping in sync.


In the Project structure and action lists, this list of titles is represented by a single repeating action, "Activate something from Work To Read." This action comes up once a week. If I don't already have a Work To Read item that I'm working on, and if I think there's a chance that I will work on one this week, then I'll go look at the list in Info, pick an item, and give it an active Context instead of its usual On Hold context. That will make the title of the item pop up in my action lists. Then I check off the "Activate something..." item, it resets its date into next week, and so it vanishes for a week.

This is all much simpler to do than it is to explain. :) It's a method that I use often - a list of reference information in Info, and a "do something" action in the Projects area.

Another use of the Info structure: I have "Planning" lists in the Info folder structure, where I put ideas and plans that aren't yet ready to become actions. Those lists may or may not be represented in the Projects structure.

For example, if I'm working on a big feature for a project but the subsequent workload for that project is up in the air, the very last action for the feature may be a reminder to "Review (project name) Planning list." At that time, I'll go look at the list in Info, and I may promote it or some subset of its actions to a Project.

These tricks remind me a lot of the things people figured out how to do with Lifebalance. I've used them in the past, but ultimately I found it a lot of work for not that much payoff. I find that I really like the spontaneity of reading something because it's at hand, I have the time, and I feel like it.


Since I review the Info section in the weekly review, that also provides an opportunity to promote information to actions. So a list of wild ideas for decorating my office may live in Info for a long time, but once in a while an item will be promoted to an action in Projects - "Order magazine sorter", say, or "Measure closet for file cabinet".

And if I want to make sure that I occasionally turn my attention to a list that's still just speculation and wild ideas, I'll, again, have a pointer in Projects to that list. So I have "Make preliminary list of Christmas gifts" in Projects, and the gift list itself is in Info. If I have a thought about a gift, that thought will flow from my mind to my Inbox to the Gifts info list. I don't want to forget that gift idea, but it's not yet ready to be an action.


I'm curious about your use of notes in Omnifocus. I would just put that kind of information in a note associated with the project. Granted, the iPhone version of Omnifocus makes getting to that information a little painful, but it is very accessible (and formattible) on the desktop. I'm guessing you use (mostly?) the desktop version, and use multiple windows to look at information and projects simultaneously? In any case, thanks for sharing your process.

[Gardener]

So I think you are saying that projects (and their next actions) and information about those projects live in totally different folders. It's sounds like something I would have trouble keeping in sync.

I have become puzzled. :) When you mentioned your lists being filled with non-actionable items, I assumed that you were referring to project support material. But it sounds like you want your project support material stored with your actions, so now I'm curious as to what kind of non-actionable items were causing a problem?

In my case, I definitely prefer the support material to be separate from the actions. I do like the support material handy, which is why I keep some of it in Omnifocus, but I prefer to keep it in the separate Info structure.

I suppose the "planning" stuff doesn't seem to fit this model, since many of the items in those planning lists look like actions and could turn into actions. But in my own mind, those items are purely speculative until I polish them up and move them into the Projects area.


These tricks remind me a lot of the things people figured out how to do with Lifebalance. I've used them in the past, but ultimately I found it a lot of work for not that much payoff. I find that I really like the spontaneity of reading something because it's at hand, I have the time, and I feel like it.


But you do have the time and you do feel like it. If that were true of me, I'd read the item too - it's not as if I think, "Hey, I want to read something" and then think "But I can't, because my Read action has a start date in the future." I'll read it if I want to and think to read it.

The issue comes up when I _don't_ have any impulse to read the thing, ever, and I realize that, oops, that document that my manager sent me four months ago is still unread, and so are sixteen others. Reading this stuff is seldom urgent, and it's usually boring, so without a little structural help, it never floats to the top of the priorities and never gets done.

That's a big part of what GTD does for me - getting non-urgent but nevertheless important tasks worked on, so that they don't slide until they become urgent or otherwise bite me.

I could, of course, have an action in my Projects area for each document/book/article/whatever that I want to read. But I prefer separating the backlog list from the backlog-clearing action, so that all the clutter of the list items is out of my Projects area.

It's generally flexible backlogs that I treat this way. If I had an item that I definitely needed to read by a given date, I would give it its own action and a due date.


I'm curious about your use of notes in Omnifocus. I would just put that kind of information in a note associated with the project. Granted, the iPhone version of Omnifocus makes getting to that information a little painful, but it is very accessible (and formattible) on the desktop. I'm guessing you use (mostly?) the desktop version, and use multiple windows to look at information and projects simultaneously? In any case, thanks for sharing your process.

I never put lists in notes - I create lists with an OmniFocus action for each list item, rather than entering the list in the Notes area. If the actions aren't really actions, I would, again, give them an On Hold context - usually my generic "List" context.

I mostly use notes to clarify actions, but the actions have already been cut into bite-sized pieces. So I wouldn't have an action "Shop for Christmas" with a list in a note - I'd have a project or action group "Shop for Christmas" with an action for each gift, and if I needed more detail for a gift I'd put that in the action's note.

In general, I want to see a separate action/item for every logically separate piece of information - where, of course, I'm defining "logically separate" for myself, so I realize that that doesn't necessarily tell you much. I don't want to ever miss the need to do something because I failed to look inside a note - the action name should either give me everything, or make it perfectly obvious that I need to look in the note.

Gardener

[Lecter]

I tried to use OmniFocus, but I found it hard to drive. I would also be interested in hearing how people are using it.Tools are tools, and driving them is user-based. For example, when examining Toodledo, I spent more time tweaking it than getting things done with it. Is that the tool's fault? Maybe if it has some major design flaws, but that is another topic.

You should use the tool(s) that facilitate getting things done for you. For me, that is OmniFocus. It could be pen and paper, or a online web app, but I have found that I get more things done in shorter periods of time when working with OmniFocus. It works for me, it is definitively faster and it gives me a feeling of being Captain and Commander of my system (which I feel is utterly important when selecting a tool).

I have OmniFocus set up with the following areas:


Inbox
General
Mind
Body
Spirit
Home
Office
Car
Objects
Monthly
Quarterly
Annually
Lifestyle
Incubate
Done


I have OmniFocus set to start up when my Mac boots. It is running all of the time (it doesn't drain system resources on my G5 with 2GB of RAM). I have a Quicksilver speedkey set to invoke OmniFocus when I type F5. It is always a single keystroke away.

I gather actionable items into OmniFocus using the Clippings service speedkey, which gathers pertinent data simultaneously (for example, while in Mail, typing the speedkey instantly captures the e-mail into OmniFocus' Inbox, with the subject as the title, and a link back to the e-mail in the notes - this is faster than I could do these steps with any web application - the speedkey literally takes a second to do all of this). For new projects, I use the Quick Entry speedkey.

Three times a day, I process my inbox items. I use speedkeys to move them into areas. This is also the point where I make decisions about the validity of the project. If I don't commit to the project at this time, it is deleted. If I have doubt (which is rare), I send it to Incubate.

Once a day (generally at the end of the day), I organize the next actions and contexts for projects. I add start and due dates (if needed), and set actions as sequential or parallel.

When there aren't any projects taking my active focus, I review the lists in OmniFocus, and choose next actions to do based on my active context(s).

When projects are finished, I move them to Done (I prefer to move them, rather than just hide them).

Once a week (currently on Wednesdays, but I am evaluating changing that), I use the Review perspective and mark each item as reviewed. This provides me a record of when I last reviewed something. This helps me review items on a regular basis while leaving monthly, quarterly and annual items to their respective review periods.

On the road, I use OmniFocus with my MacBook Pro, which is synchronized through MobileMe.

When my computers aren't accessible, I use OmniFocus on my iPhone, which is synchronized to MobileMe. I will often capture audio or photos directly into OmniFocus on the iPhone, to facilitate rapid inbox items.

When running errands, I utilize OmniFocus and GPS on the iPhone to identify my location and instantly access my contextualized lists. For example, GPS detects that I am at the grocery store, and it presents me with my grocery list (items with a context of Grocery Store).

If any of the single systems fail (power/battery gone, hardware failure, theft, etc.), I go to the other. Since things are synchronized, there is no risk of losing my data.

As a further back up (in case of hardware failure or batteries running down), I carry a stack of 3x5 index cards (ala the HipsterPDA). I find that I rarely use them, but they take little room, and are nice to have as a resource.

For pure research gathering (not actionable items), I use Evernote. I like that it has native clients (Mac, Windows, iPhone) in addition to a synchronized web interface.

MobileMe keeps my OmniFocus data, calendar and contacts synchronized. It is stable now, and it just works.

The above works smoothly for me, and gives me complete confidence. I have trust and pride in the system. There isn't any double-entry, specialized phrasing/descriptions or unnecessary upkeep. There was a period where I did tweak OmniFocus, but that passed, and now it is a tool that facilitates getting things done. I think that is the case with all tools. You need to work with them until the familiarity threshold allows you to truly trust/work the tool. For me, it was about a month. I feel it was well worth it.

On a web application side-note - about a week ago, our internet connection was out for half a day (IT blamed it on fiber being cut as the telco laid new lines). If I was using a web only application, I would have been at a complete loss. Another concern is service terms and reliability. Take a moment to read this article, (http://www.nytimes.com/2008/10/05/business/05digi.html?_r=2&adxnnl=1&oref=slogin&partner=rssuserland&emc=rss&adxnnlx=1223158153-9bfsase3BjWppUidBikh5Q&oref=slogin) and then ask Toodledo about TOS and uptime guarantees. Just some food for thought.

Jim

[mcogilvie]

I have become puzzled. :) When you mentioned your lists being filled with non-actionable items, I assumed that you were referring to project support material. But it sounds like you want your project support material stored with your actions, so now I'm curious as to what kind of non-actionable items were causing a problem?

I like outlines, but outlines pretty much inherently contain things which are not next actions: future actions, "tasks" which are larger than next actions, subprojects, possible actions, information, considerations, et cetera. Now I keep small amounts of that material in a note attached to the project. I use a simple text-based outline style.


But you do have the time and you do feel like it. If that were true of me, I'd read the item too - it's not as if I think, "Hey, I want to read something" and then think "But I can't, because my Read action has a start date in the future." I'll read it if I want to and think to read it.

The issue comes up when I _don't_ have any impulse to read the thing, ever, and I realize that, oops, that document that my manager sent me four months ago is still unread, and so are sixteen others. Reading this stuff is seldom urgent, and it's usually boring, so without a little structural help, it never floats to the top of the priorities and never gets done.

That's a big part of what GTD does for me - getting non-urgent but nevertheless important tasks worked on, so that they don't slide until they become urgent or otherwise bite me.

I could, of course, have an action in my Projects area for each document/book/article/whatever that I want to read. But I prefer separating the backlog list from the backlog-clearing action, so that all the clutter of the list items is out of my Projects area.

It's generally flexible backlogs that I treat this way. If I had an item that I definitely needed to read by a given date, I would give it its own action and a due date.

I have kind of the opposite problem. I have zillions of exciting, stimulating things to read. I don't have to read everything, but I need to make a lot of judgement calls: read the abstract, skim, read parts, read in detail, et cetera. I could easily spend 40 hours a week or more "handling" my reading. It's crucial that it not appear in my project and next actions lists.



I never put lists in notes - I create lists with an OmniFocus action for each list item, rather than entering the list in the Notes area. If the actions aren't really actions, I would, again, give them an On Hold context - usually my generic "List" context.

I mostly use notes to clarify actions, but the actions have already been cut into bite-sized pieces. So I wouldn't have an action "Shop for Christmas" with a list in a note - I'd have a project or action group "Shop for Christmas" with an action for each gift, and if I needed more detail for a gift I'd put that in the action's note.

In general, I want to see a separate action/item for every logically separate piece of information - where, of course, I'm defining "logically separate" for myself, so I realize that that doesn't necessarily tell you much. I don't want to ever miss the need to do something because I failed to look inside a note - the action name should either give me everything, or make it perfectly obvious that I need to look in the note.

If I do that, I end up with lists like:

present for wife-
present for son-
present for daughter-
present for dad-
present for mom-

which are tasks or subprojects and therefore non-actionable,
so I put that stuff in a note. Next actions look like

@ agenda: ask wife re sat shopping

which will lead to progress on most of these items. :)

[Gardener]

I like outlines, but outlines pretty much inherently contain things which are not next actions: future actions, "tasks" which are larger than next actions, subprojects, possible actions, information, considerations, et cetera. Now I keep small amounts of that material in a note attached to the project. I use a simple text-based outline style.


I guess that even though the outline capability is there, I don't use it as an outline in that way in my Projects area. I have an outlined folder structure that leads to my projects, and then each project is usually just a linear list of actions.

I may occasionally have an action group, but it's still just actions - and if I find myself making a large action group or several action groups, that's usually a signal that it's time to break the project up into multiple projects. On the rare occasions that I really do want a non-actionable "action" there, like maybe a phone number that I'm sick of looking up, I'll give it one of my On Hold contexts so that it doesn't appear in an action view.

The other information that you mention - possible actions, information, considerations - tends to be of two types. If it's theoretical or not directly relating to an action, it'll go in the Info area.

If it's directly related to an action that I actually plan on doing, it may be in the action note, or it might cause the action to be cut into even smaller bites. So, for example, if I have an action, "Prepare Widget Lab for demo" and I find myself needing a list of actions for preparing the Widget lab, I won't put those in a note - I'll instead replace that one action with those several actions.

On the question of reading, I kind of understand and kind of don't. I understand that an activity that you want to spend time on, and need to keep under control, is completely different from an activity that you have to force yourself to get done. But I tend to have a lot of actions for both kinds of activities.

On your example gift list, I don't see the items as non-actionable, because to me they would mean "Figure out what to give wife as a Christmas present", "Figure out what to give son as a Christmas present", and so on. And I think that "figure out" tasks are actionable - they can easily expand into subprojects or break out into full projects, but they're still actionable.

So I might have:

Project: Get Christmas Gifts
Action: Joe (which translates to "figure out Joe's Christmas gift".)
Sub-action: Look at ThinkGeek website, list likely items.
Next Sub-action: Look at Wind & Weather, list likely items.
Next Sub-action: Try to choose gift from list of likely items.
Next Sub-action: Make list of other gift sources, if no gift chosen

Now, all this elaborate structure reflects the fact that Joe is hard to buy for and I need something to lead me into the frustrating process of finding his gift. And it suggests that it's time to create a new project called "Choose Joe's Christmas gift" instead of burying this in the subproject level.

If Sally, on the other hand, is really easy to buy for, I may just have a single action "Choose and buy Sally's Christmas gift" or even, if the choosing happened in my mind as I was typing the action for Sally "Have _Joy Of Cooking_ shipped to Sally." So I don't create all these bite-sized pieces with everything, I just create them when I feel that I need them to attack the task.

Gardener

[mcogilvie]

Tools are tools, and driving them is user-based. For example, when examining Toodledo, I spent more time tweaking it than getting things done with it. Is that the tool's fault? Maybe if it has some major design flaws, but that is another topic.

I think one has to be careful of the following fallacy: if my tool doesn't work for you, it's your fault, but if your tool doesn't work for me, it the tool's fault. There are many, many todo list applications available, and some of them are even relatively bug-free. :) I prefer Toodledo to Remember the Milk for small, subtle interface reasons, but they both work.



You should use the tool(s) that facilitate getting things done for you. For me, that is OmniFocus. It could be pen and paper, or a online web app, but I have found that I get more things done in shorter periods of time when working with OmniFocus. It works for me, it is definitively faster and it gives me a feeling of being Captain and Commander of my system (which I feel is utterly important when selecting a tool).

I find that I prefer the incredible lightness of almost not being aware of my lists at all, of dancing in my work from next action to next action.



I have OmniFocus set up with the following areas:


Inbox
General
Mind
Body
Spirit
Home
Office
Car
Objects
Monthly
Quarterly
Annually
Lifestyle
Incubate
Done


I have OmniFocus set to start up when my Mac boots. It is running all of the time (it doesn't drain system resources on my G5 with 2GB of RAM). I have a Quicksilver speedkey set to invoke OmniFocus when I type F5. It is always a single keystroke away.

I gather actionable items into OmniFocus using the Clippings service speedkey, which gathers pertinent data simultaneously (for example, while in Mail, typing the speedkey instantly captures the e-mail into OmniFocus' Inbox, with the subject as the title, and a link back to the e-mail in the notes - this is faster than I could do these steps with any web application - the speedkey literally takes a second to do all of this). For new projects, I use the Quick Entry speedkey.

Three times a day, I process my inbox items. I use speedkeys to move them into areas. This is also the point where I make decisions about the validity of the project. If I don't commit to the project at this time, it is deleted. If I have doubt (which is rare), I send it to Incubate.

Once a day (generally at the end of the day), I organize the next actions and contexts for projects. I add start and due dates (if needed), and set actions as sequential or parallel.

When there aren't any projects taking my active focus, I review the lists in OmniFocus, and choose next actions to do based on my active context(s).

When projects are finished, I move them to Done (I prefer to move them, rather than just hide them).

Once a week (currently on Wednesdays, but I am evaluating changing that), I use the Review perspective and mark each item as reviewed. This provides me a record of when I last reviewed something. This helps me review items on a regular basis while leaving monthly, quarterly and annual items to their respective review periods.

You seem very disciplined in your approach.



On the road, I use OmniFocus with my MacBook Pro, which is synchronized through MobileMe.

When my computers aren't accessible, I use OmniFocus on my iPhone, which is synchronized to MobileMe. I will often capture audio or photos directly into OmniFocus on the iPhone, to facilitate rapid inbox items.

I know Omnifocus on the iPhone can do that. Do the photos and audio show up on the desktop?



When running errands, I utilize OmniFocus and GPS on the iPhone to identify my location and instantly access my contextualized lists. For example, GPS detects that I am at the grocery store, and it presents me with my grocery list (items with a context of Grocery Store).

I use a grocery list on the refrigerator, accessible to the whole family (well, not to Ginger, the dog). I shop at two "normal" grocery stores, one close to home and the other on the way home from work, as well as Trader Joe's and Whole Foods (on the way to my parents). It might be possible to get Omnifocus to handle this with nested contexts, but it would require some thought for sure.



If any of the single systems fail (power/battery gone, hardware failure, theft, etc.), I go to the other. Since things are synchronized, there is no risk of losing my data.

As a further back up (in case of hardware failure or batteries running down), I carry a stack of 3x5 index cards (ala the HipsterPDA). I find that I rarely use them, but they take little room, and are nice to have as a resource.

How often does that happen?


For pure research gathering (not actionable items), I use Evernote. I like that it has native clients (Mac, Windows, iPhone) in addition to a synchronized web interface.

I'd use Evernote more, but the iPhone app doesn't work without a good connection to the net.


MobileMe keeps my OmniFocus data, calendar and contacts synchronized. It is stable now, and it just works.

The above works smoothly for me, and gives me complete confidence. I have trust and pride in the system. There isn't any double-entry, specialized phrasing/descriptions or unnecessary upkeep. There was a period where I did tweak OmniFocus, but that passed, and now it is a tool that facilitates getting things done. I think that is the case with all tools. You need to work with them until the familiarity threshold allows you to truly trust/work the tool. For me, it was about a month. I feel it was well worth it.

I agree completely that the Omni folks have done a good job of producing a reliable tool. I suppose one of the prices for that reliability is the rather long sync times, on the desktop but particularly on the iPhone. Every so often the desktop tells you it needs to restart the application, thank you very much. The start-up time on the iPhone is long too.


On a web application side-note - about a week ago, our internet connection was out for half a day (IT blamed it on fiber being cut as the telco laid new lines). If I was using a web only application, I would have been at a complete loss. Another concern is service terms and reliability. Take a moment to read this article, (http://www.nytimes.com/2008/10/05/business/05digi.html?_r=2&adxnnl=1&oref=slogin&partner=rssuserland&emc=rss&adxnnlx=1223158153-9bfsase3BjWppUidBikh5Q&oref=slogin) and then ask Toodledo about TOS and uptime guarantees. Just some food for thought.

I don't really see your use of Mobile Me (which I use too) to sync OmniFocus as being very different from my use of Toodledo. After all, it was Apple that had the problems in the .Mac to Mobile Me transition. I have a local copy of my lists on my iPhone, back-ups via export, and any interruption of service (and I have very few problems) would be minor. If I lost everything, my lists would regrow themselves, anyway.

[mmurray]

There is an update of OmniFocus for the iPhone to 1.1. It allows a direct sync to a mac instead of going via mobileme. It also launches a lot more quickly. Release notes at

http://forums.omnigroup.com/showthread.php?t=10395

Michael

[mcogilvie]

There is an update of OmniFocus for the iPhone to 1.1. It allows a direct sync to a mac instead of going via mobileme. It also launches a lot more quickly. Release notes at

http://forums.omnigroup.com/showthread.php?t=10395

Michael

I make it launching for me in about 7 seconds, whereas the previous version took 11. Omnigroup has made it possible to use the inbox while loading, which is a time-saver.

[Mark Jantzen]

I did a couple things in Omni Focus that really opened up my GTD system.

I struggled with the "Miscellaneous" folder for single action items. I didn't like that structure. After some trial and error a few tricks really opened up the system for me.

I created Someday/Maybe and Might Buy as contexts. Then I created my top level folders in line with the Horizons of Focus. From there I could use OF projects for not only 10,000 Foot GTD Projects but also for 20,000 Foot Areas of Focus and Responsibility and so on.

As I process and organize I force myself to not let any action items go into Miscellaneous. As a result I've got a complete set of 20,000 Foot lists and actually started building 30,000 Foot and higher.

For example, under folder 20,000 Foot folder:
(Bills & Finances\Credit Cards sub-folders)

- Discover Card (OF project)
- Redeem Discover Card Cash Back (Someday/Maybe context)

So in Contexts view I've got a complete Someday/Maybe list and if I switch over to Projects view I can do my Weekly Review with project items serving as links to action items, checklist items and ways to tie Someday/Maybe into smaller chunks to review.

Hope this makes sense,
Mark

[Avrum Borenton]

or I may try an Evernote set up with one note for each context list [but that's not a true .txt file ]

Less than 45 secs ago, I posted to this forum about how I use Evernote and GTD:
http://forum.evernote.com/phpbb/viewtopic.php?f=30&t=8043


Omni focus is well thought out program and if you have a heavy workload with detailed projects it's a great choice . They have a great example of some guy on their blog working on some mega project with hundreds of small sub-projects .

From Omnifocus to Daylite... it was all overkill for me. It's a minor miracle how Evernote has become my 1 Stop Shop for organizing my life.

[Lecter]

I think one has to be careful of the following fallacy: if my tool doesn't work for you, it's your fault, but if your tool doesn't work for me, it the tool's fault.

If a tool doesn't work for a particular user, isn't it partially the fault of the tool? Maybe it needs to be more intuitive or functional or inviting? If a tool doesn't meet my needs/habits/desires, then it probably isn't a good match. Certainly, users need to be a bit flexible when adapting a tool to their use, but I draw a line when I would have to make foundational changes to my workflows.


I know Omnifocus on the iPhone can do that. Do the photos and audio show up on the desktop?

Yes, they do, as attachments - which is really cool.


How often does that happen?

Once in the last three months. The cards have other uses, so I still carry them around, as they take up little room and are inexpensive.


I'd use Evernote more, but the iPhone app doesn't work without a good connection to the net.

The new version does work offline. :)

That said, this is a odd comment given that Toodledo doesn't work on computers without a good connection to the net. So you were concerned about connectivity with Evernote, but not with Toodledo on the desktop?


I agree completely that the Omni folks have done a good job of producing a reliable tool. I suppose one of the prices for that reliability is the rather long sync times, on the desktop but particularly on the iPhone. Every so often the desktop tells you it needs to restart the application, thank you very much. The start-up time on the iPhone is long too.

The older version of OmniFocus started up within six seconds on my iPhone. The new version opens up in three seconds (and I can enter a new inbox item within one second of the app opening). We must have different definitions of long. The desktop application opens as fast as any other application on my Mac. Comparatively, opening Safari and loading Toodledo takes longer (than loading OmniFocus) on both my Mac and my iPhone.


I don't really see your use of Mobile Me (which I use too) to sync OmniFocus as being very different from my use of Toodledo. After all, it was Apple that had the problems in the .Mac to Mobile Me transition. I have a local copy of my lists on my iPhone, back-ups via export, and any interruption of service (and I have very few problems) would be minor. If I lost everything, my lists would regrow themselves, anyway.

Well, the big difference is that you need to make a back-up via export. OmniFocus does back-ups and syncs automatically. If your net connection is out, how do you use that export on the desktop? Do you import it into a program? If so, then you would have to keep the desktop and web applications synced through manual imports and exports - which adds extra technical maintenance to the system. This would be alleviated through automation if Toodledo had a native desktop application. This is another reason why I prefer to use native applications as opposed to web applications.

By the way, did you ever ask Toodledo about TOS and uptime guarantees? A brief look brought the following, which doesn't exactly reassure me:



Use of our web site is at all times "at your own risk."

The web site makes no warranties about the accuracy or reliability of the material, services, text, graphics, and/or links.

The web site does not warrant that the web site will operate error-free or that this web site or its server are free of computer viruses or other harmful items. If your use of our web site or the material on this site results in the need for servicing or replacing equipment or data, the web site is not responsible for those costs.

[mcogilvie]

The new version (of Evernote) does work offline. :)

That said, this is a odd comment given that Toodledo doesn't work on computers without a good connection to the net. So you were concerned about connectivity with Evernote, but not with Toodledo on the desktop?


The difference is that the iPhone apps Appigo Todo, Toodledo, and Remember the Milk all have local copies of the data. Evernote does not, so you need a net connection to use it. Evernote does permit local storage of "starred" items, but it is clunky.



The older version of OmniFocus started up within six seconds on my iPhone. The new version opens up in three seconds (and I can enter a new inbox item within one second of the app opening). We must have different definitions of long. The desktop application opens as fast as any other application on my Mac. Comparatively, opening Safari and loading Toodledo takes longer (than loading OmniFocus) on both my Mac and my iPhone.


Or maybe I have a more complicated outline. Omnifocus used to open in about 11 seconds for me, and now opens in about 4 seconds, and syncs in anywhere from about 6-8 seconds to 35 seconds, depending on the changes. That is a substantial improvement, and I think it is now usable. But sync times are still way longer than Appigo Todo, Toodledo, or RTM.



Well, the big difference is that you need to make a back-up via export. OmniFocus does back-ups and syncs automatically. If your net connection is out, how do you use that export on the desktop? Do you import it into a program? If so, then you would have to keep the desktop and web applications synced through manual imports and exports - which adds extra technical maintenance to the system. This would be alleviated through automation if Toodledo had a native desktop application. This is another reason why I prefer to use native applications as opposed to web applications.

By the way, did you ever ask Toodledo about TOS and uptime guarantees? A brief look brought the following, which doesn't exactly reassure me.

Omnifocus is indeed zealous about back-up, I suppose in part because it had some rocky times in beta. If you are concerned about webware terms of service, how do you react to software EULA's? It's the same issue, and the fact is, a good data center must have a significantly better uptime than most end users do. Furthermore, if I use Omnifocus at home and at work, I am relying on some kind of net service to sync them, unless I am going to go back to hand-carrying a copy of my data around. The automatic backups are not all that useful if the disk crashes (the most likely problem) or the app dies (who wants to parse XML to find out the next action). I'm not denying that a local app might make you feel safer, but I don't think it is a significant advantage. Suppose there is a nuclear detonation nearby, and an electromagnetic pulse (EMP) fries most electronics. No problem for me- I whip out paper, and start making a next action list:
1) put head between knees.
2) kiss my anatomy goodbye. :)

[Lecter]

Evernote does permit local storage of "starred" items, but it is clunky.Touching a star once is clunky? Seems like we have differing opinions on what is clunky.

Local storage of active, synced data in Toodledo on a Mac or Windows desktop would be a better example of clunky. :???:


But sync times are still way longer than Appigo Todo, Toodledo, or RTM. In my experience, OmniFocus loads live and cached data faster on my 3G iPhone than Appigo Todo and Toodledo (I haven't paid for RTM, so I can't compare it). Maybe you have faulty hardware? Maybe your phone has run out of available space?


If you are concerned about webware terms of service, how do you react to software EULA's? It's the same issue, and the fact is, a good data center must have a significantly better uptime than most end users do.To be frank, I am comfortable with OmniGroup's software EULA's. It isn't the same issue, as one is a service, and the other is a locally operated tool. That said, I am not sure the EULA topic is being given due consideration, since you have yet to respond to the items I quoted from Toodledo's legalese in an earlier post.

In my experience, my Drobo has had more reliability than than a Fortune 500 company's services that I deal with (which is supported by a staff of seventy-five). Do you know what Toodledo runs on? Or how many people develop or support it? Or is ignorance bliss? :)

Your premise that automatic backups are not all that useful if the disk crashes or the app dies... is much stronger argument against web-based services (showing web-based services have greater weaknesses) when you have no control over a web-based service. For my data to completely vanish, my hard drives (including a Drobo RAID), MacBook Pro, iPhone and .Mac service would all have to simultaneously fail. Pretty improbable, even with a nuclear detonation nearby (since if it is nearby, .Mac wouldn't be hit).

Since Toodledo doesn't guarantee their service with warranties about the accuracy or reliability of its software or hardware (or the error-free operation thereof), you are up the proverbial creek if they fail in any of several areas. If you are willing to accept those risks, I wish you luck.


Suppose there is a nuclear detonation nearby, and an electromagnetic pulse (EMP) fries most electronics. No problem for me- I whip out paper, and start making a next action list:If you need to make a next action list for that occasion, there are bigger issues afoot here. ;)

[BigEvil]

after using many of the different apps out there and using Omnifocus from Beta until now(even KGTD with OOP) I'd have to say it's by far the best solution. Don't worry about launch times etc, leave it open. On mac's use spaces and assign Omnifocus its own space. The system resources are minimal and really worth having it open at all times to be able to enter and reference quickly.

[Casper TFG]

whoops please delete...

[Casper TFG]

Hi folks,

Omnifocus fan here..

I am trying to rally support for an updated iPhone app version to be able to import email info in the same way as the desktop version (details here http://forums.omnigroup.com/showthread.php?t=11986 )

The new 'hook's that iPhone 3.0 software (out this summer) has, may make this finally possible.

If you would like that too - please send a request into the support ninjas at Omnifocus.. And we stand more of a chance of getting it!

(My reason for wanting it is 80% of my tasks are derived from email text and I am 'away from the office' a lot.. So I feel I need the same data entry functionality on the iPhone as on the desktop!)

OK - lobby over.. back to trying to learn from you good folks...

I am in my early stages with Omnifocus, but I have a power user chum (v handy for advice) and he echo's whats been said above re perspectives and taking a while to get the whole set up tweaked just the way you want / need it.. (TIP: this involves dragging your custom designed 'perspective' icons into the tool bar for easy 'one click' access)

I am 100% dedicated to making it work.. I have blown so much of my time on futzing around with apps that don't like to play ball / or sync together its not funny any more.. :( Omnifocus seems like 'home'. I plan to stay a while so I don't mind doing the building work on it. Besides, using it on Mac & iPhone satisfies the one trusted system ethos.. And I am an "office in the back pocket" type of guy..

[Lecter]

I'm not sure if anyone still cares about this thread, but I saw an article today about Toodledo, and since it was passionately discussed in this thread, I felt this momentary catasrophy should be noted.

Toodledo Is In Troubledo (http://www.techcrunch.com/2009/06/11/toodledo-is-in-troubledo/)

More details are here, (http://www.toodledo.com/forums/1/2182/0/and-were-back-from-a-very-prolonged-outage.html) in which the admin apoligizes and offers users a small token of appreciation for having to put up with the sixteen hours of downtime.

Events like this further reinforce why I believe its best to not leave your data solely in the hands of the "cloud" — which is what cloud applications are designed to do.

[mcogilvie]

I'm not sure if anyone still cares about this thread, but I saw an article today about Toodledo, and since it was passionately discussed in this thread, I felt this momentary catasrophy should be noted.
....
Events like this further reinforce why I believe its best to not leave your data solely in the hands of the "cloud" — which is what cloud applications are designed to do.

This is the kind of problem any application that syncs via the web can have. This includes Omnifocus. Apps like Things that do a local network sync between phone and computer are safer that way. However, Things can go bad if you are moving the database between computers. As it happens, the Toodledo outage was no problem for me, because I have a local copy of my data with me at all times on my iPhone.

[Oogiem]

This is the kind of problem any application that syncs via the web can have. This includes Omnifocus. Apps like Things that do a local network sync between phone and computer are safer that way.

Omnifocus synchs via a cable and local network. At least that's how I synch it to my smartphone. I use a Palm Treo and synch OF to it.

[mcogilvie]

Omnifocus synchs via a cable and local network. At least that's how I synch it to my smartphone. I use a Palm Treo and synch OF to it.

You must be syncing Omnifocus with iCal on your local machine, and then syncing ical with your smartphone. The OF mac to OF iPhone direct sync typically uses a webdav server, which is most often Mobile Me. OF also supports some other sync methods over a local network, which are useful for people who sync at one location. If you want to sync 2 machines in different places, or sync a portable device on the go, sync via a server somewhere on the web is the way to go, and not just for OF. Sorry if I oversimplified things in trying to explain why I think local data store+cloud sync is the best way to go. The disagreement that Lecter and I have is not really over this point, which broadly speaking we agree on. Our disagreement rather reflects a natural human tendency to believe that one's own spouse, house, car, and GTD implementation reflects a superior choice. I thinks it's also why goats butt heads, but I would defer to an expert. :)

[Oogiem]

You must be syncing Omnifocus with iCal on your local machine, and then syncing ical with your smartphone. ...

I thinks it's also why goats butt heads, but I would defer to an expert. :)

Yes I am.

Actually goats and sheep butt heads as part of determining rank in the flock or herd. It's a way to show dominance and prove yourself the top animal and thus worthy of the best food, place to lie down, etc. :-)

[mcogilvie]

Actually goats and sheep butt heads as part of determining rank in the flock or herd. It's a way to show dominance and prove yourself the top animal and thus worthy of the best food, place to lie down, etc. :-)

Explains a lot about people too, alas.

[Lecter]

My main points have been based on keeping your data backed-up in as many secure places as possible, with as much automation of the back-ups as possible. A side (but pertinent) point, was that a native program (like OmniFocus or Things or Hit List) are much better than a web application (like Toodledoo). There are customizable keyboard speedkeys and AppleScripts that native applications have that make all web applications pale in comparison.

Regarding the back-up situation, I think the native application situation with OmniFocus is vastly superior to Toodledo's. With my OmniFocus set-up, my data is automatically backed-up to five different locations (my RAID hard drives [plus a Drobo RAID with Time Machine], MacBook Pro, iPhone and .Mac service) that I can control and protect. .Mac has additional back-ups and procedures to keep data safe (in my three years of use, my data has never been lost on .Mac).

Conversely, with Toodledoo, data is stored primarily on their servers (with an option to sync with their iPhone app). Toodledoo does offer export functionality, but it is manual. This is tedious compared to OmniFocus' automation.

For example, each time I want to locally backup Toodledoo data, I need to:


Open a web browser
Visit Toodledoo
Log in to Toodledoo
Click on Import/Export/Sync
Click on More Details for the export format that I want
Click on Download XYZ file
Choose location to save file
Click on save


That is a lot of steps. Compare it to OmniFocus:


Open OmniFocus and let it sync and back-up automatically
There are no more steps!


With Toodledoo's eight steps, I suspect that most users do not do daily (or even regular) local backups. The extra steps will discourage them. If the Toodledoo servers fail (or are unavailable for another sixteen hours or longer), you are forced to use a completely different program. Do Toodledoo users have a program set up, ready for such circumstances? Or will they end up manually editing a CVS file, losing functionality? If you don't have a manual local back-up, you are out of luck. If you don't have a recent back-up, you are out of luck with the subsequent data. Sure, the Toodledoo iPhone app has synced data. But it doesn't have the ability to export that data without access to the Toodledoo sever, so your data is isolated to it.

With no additional effort or steps, my data is iteratively backed-up to six local hard disks (two RAID in my Mac, four in the Drobo), my iPhone (and its iTunes backup), my MacBook, and .Mac. The likelihood of my up to date data being unavailable for any length of time is virtually nonexistent.

If Toodledoo ever goes out of business, its desktop functionality is dead immediately. If OmniGroup ever goes away, OmniFocus is still fully usable. One situation leaves the user high and dry, the other is infinitely better.

Regarding superior choices - if one isn't thrilled with their choices, I could see why they wouldn't discuss and defend them in a discussion forum. I share my solutions because I am proud of them, and because they may help others, or at least make them think. When I see contrary statements, I find it invigorating to enter into a congenial debate, as both sides may get something out of the discussion. In this case, if mcogilvie isn't getting anything out of our sporadic conversation, then I am misinterpreting our conversation. This isn't about rank or dominance, its about communication of ideas and solutions.

Regarding human nature, I prefer to think of humans as humans, rather than reducing them to barnyard animals. :D

[mcogilvie]

Regarding human nature, I prefer to think of humans as humans, rather than reducing them to barnyard animals. :D

My wife is a biologist, and once was a TA for Ed Wilson, who wrote the text "Sociobiology." My perspective on human behavior may be different. ;)

I admire the seriousness with which you back up your data. I use .mac too, with local copies of my iDisk in multiple locations and use Time Machine as well. A Drobo would be overkill for me, I think, and I have had both good and bad experiences with RAID on departmental servers.

However, I think that risk of data loss is not really the point. My project and next action lists are not the most valuable data I have. If I lost my lists, they would regenerate fairly quickly. The story has been told several times of an incident where David Allen lost all the data in his palm. He picked up a demo paper planner he had with him, and got to work. I find Omnifocus a bit cumbersome and inflexible, and like the lighter, faster feel of Toodledo. If there is eventually an option to use Google Gears or something similar with Toodledo, I will use it. In the meantime, I'm not worried about my lists disappearing.

p.s. You can back up your Toodledo data automatically by setting up ical to pull it in without all the steps you list.

[Lecter]

However, I think that risk of data loss is not really the point.I've been thinking about this, and I think the point has settled (IMHO) into the following: This is all based on the user fully trusting their system (and each individual has different definitions of trust).

For some, no back-up (or very infrequent back-ups) are adequate. I think that this may be the case for people who have never lost any data.

Having lost a fair quantity of data in my distant past (and having to painstakingly rebuild it over an extended time), I built my current back-up system based on stability, redundancy, efficiency and automatic maintenance as core concerns. It has proven robust, which has provided a solid foundation of trust for me (not just for my GTD data, but also for my photos, music, videos, etc.).

Conversely, I have a friend that uses pen and paper for his data. He has no back-up at all.

If I was in his situation, I would be constantly monitoring the location of the notebook.

Quite frankly, I prefer the and efficiency and redundancy of my system.

That said, we are both happy. We trust our individual systems enough to not lose any sleep at night over them. :)


p.s. You can back up your Toodledo data automatically by setting up ical to pull it in without all the steps you list.Aside from iCal not supporting all of the fields that I would personally want to keep synchronized, the following description from Toodledoo worries me (aka, causes immediate lack of trust in Toodledoo's system):


In order to do this, we need to publish your tasks without password protection. This means that it might be possible for someone besides you to read your tasks. Keep the following URL a secret if you don't want that to happen.

[mcogilvie]

Aside from iCal not supporting all of the fields that I would personally want to keep synchronized, the following description from Toodledoo worries me (aka, causes immediate lack of trust in Toodledoo's system):

The url's are long random strings, and the chances of someone happening upon a valid url are very, very small. I'm not saying its ideal, but it's acceptable. One should never put information like credit card numbers in one's lists, whether paper or electronic.

[Lecter]

The url's are long random strings, and the chances of someone happening upon a valid url are very, very small. I'm not saying its ideal, but it's acceptable. One should never put information like credit card numbers in one's lists, whether paper or electronic.Are the URLs secure (HTTPS) or could a packet sniffer grab info as it passes over the same subnet?

I agree about credit card numbers, but I'd prefer all of my data to be safe over such a connection.

[kewms]

I agree with Lecter. Data that's going to be stored in the cloud needs password protection. A company that's unwilling or unable to follow standard best practices in this regard is not a company that I'm going to trust with any of my data.

(No, I wouldn't put credit card numbers in my lists. But what about email addresses and phone numbers? Confidential details of specific projects? Client information? If I have to worry about whether it's okay to put a particular piece of data in my system, I've got the wrong system.)

Katherine

[mcogilvie]

I agree with Lecter. Data that's going to be stored in the cloud needs password protection. A company that's unwilling or unable to follow standard best practices in this regard is not a company that I'm going to trust with any of my data.

Sorry, Katherine, you misunderstand, and thus malign Toodledo. A Toodledo account is password protected, of course. The unprotected nature of the ical feed is because most ical clients do not support password protection. So many sites that provide ical feeds use a randomly generated url to provide some privacy, but it's not anything that will keep out the NSA. Toodledo is completely and appropriately explicit about the issue, and the default is for the ical feed to be turned off. Purely optional.

I would bet that omnifocus doesn't use strong encryption with Mobile Me end to end. If it doesn't, it's insecure too. That makes Things "better", I guess, unless someone is eavesdropping on your local network. Real security is real hard.

[kewms]

Sorry, Katherine, you misunderstand, and thus malign Toodledo. A Toodledo account is password protected, of course. The unprotected nature of the ical feed is because most ical clients do not support password protection. So many sites that provide ical feeds use a randomly generated url to provide some privacy, but it's not anything that will keep out the NSA. Toodledo is completely and appropriately explicit about the issue, and the default is for the ical feed to be turned off. Purely optional.

Ah. Yes, I did misunderstand. Thanks for the clarification.

Katherine

[Lecter]

I would bet that omnifocus doesn't use strong encryption with Mobile Me end to end.You would lose that bet then.

OmniFocus uses secured connections to MobileMe and WebDAV.

http://forums.omnigroup.com/showthread.php?t=12731

In case it was overlooked, I'll ask this again:

Are the [Toodledoo ical] URLs secure (HTTPS) or could a packet sniffer grab info as it passes over the same subnet?

[mcogilvie]

You would lose that bet then.

OmniFocus uses secured connections to MobileMe and WebDAV.

http://forums.omnigroup.com/showthread.php?t=12731

In case it was overlooked, I'll ask this again:

Are the [Toodledoo ical] URLs secure (HTTPS) or could a packet sniffer grab info as it passes over the same subnet?

https is an option for pro subscribers ($15/year), so the security in that case is the same. As for the ical feeds, they are nothing more than an export option that I realized one could in principle use for an automatic archive. I don't use them myself. The format of those feeds is webcal, an unofficial standard. I don't believe any webcal url's are encrypted, but I am not an expert. Note that Google calendar is not encrypted by default, but will use https. If the decision about which GTD tool to use ever came down to back-ups and security, omnifocus might be everyone's choice, but I don't think thats the case for most people.