So after using DoIt for awhile, I'm still a bit torn on it.
Things I like:
The layering of levels (context/goal/project/to-do)
The easy someday/waiting/scheduled designations
Cost (not gonna lie, the price is a factor for me)
Easy moving of items across projects, since I have several "stage bucket" projects.
Easy moving of things out of today and into tomorrow, for end of day review
Things I hate:
Tags are all but useless. If I can't control-click multiple tags, I can't filter. Which really limits things for me, because I definitely can and do want to filter for more than one tag on an action (like, say, "2014 book" and "comp")
Inability to have true sequential review as looking at "next" shows all next in a project
Editing a task is annoying and clunky, which means collecting items to process is longer than it should be
Color-coded priority isn't working for me to do clean reviews
I'm not sure where that leaves me right now. I poked at Zendone again, but I still can't stand the interface and the site I left is kinda run by jerks, apparently, even if they *do* keep it together.
Rob,
I agree with most of that. Nirvana also has many of the things you like, but Doit also has the extra Goal level above projects, which is something I appreciate a lot. And the Context grouping.
As for tags, I agree that Doit's tags are almost unusable. The main problem for me is that they are invisible (cannot inspect my tagging in the list) and that all the other task properties (contexts, goals etc) are not available for clicking in the tag filter - I certainly want to be able to "quick filter" my list, but if the filtering is limited to those few special (and invisible!) characteristics that I have defined special Tags for, then it is not of much use. I have suggested, as one possible solution, that projects and goals etc should be taggable and that those tags should be automatically inherited (like in Nirvana). Another solution would be to make the "advanced filter" more easily accessible with defaults for super-quick ad hoc filtering (e.g. not have to define a name for the search, not have to save it, not have to specify that you do not want to see completed tasks, not have to specify that you want the current list only etc etc),
As for the ctrl-clicking, it seems that you are asking for Boolean AND filtering. This is what Nirvana has, and what Doit used to have up until a few months ago. Then Doit changed it to Boolean OR, just like Zendone. Personally I would need Boolean NOT more than anything (to exclude irrelevant tasks). I can see no reason why an app could not have all three, e.g. ctrl-click meaning AND, shift-click meaning OR and alt-click meaning NOT. Piece of cake, it would seem, and very powerful to be able to combine, for example:
- show/include all tasks involving John or Peter or both (OR)
- but among those only include those that belong to Goal A (AND)
- and specifically also exclude those that are errands or phone calls (NOT)
As for priorities, I am sorry if maybe I have misled you. Using priorities as a review tool is my own brainchild, and I do like it a lot, and I use it and depend on it, but I must confess that most people do not seem to be too impressed. If you want to give it another try, then do like this: Forget about importance and urgency and all such possible aspects of priority. Just think about how often you want to see this task. Initially mark your tasks blue (Medium) unless you have a very clear opinion to the contrary. During your reviews (or absolutely anytime) just ask yourself this question: Do I want to see this task easily every single time I open my Next list from now on (even if I open that list dozens of times a day)? If so, then change it to red. If not, then ask yourself the question: Do I want to examine this task at least one a day (in a daily scan)? If so, then mark it blue (if it isn't blue already). If not, then ask yourself the question: Is it enough to examine/scan this task only once a week? Then mark it turquoise. In other words, when applying the priority, you consider only how often you want to see it, i.e. a "review frequency". You will probably find that those that you want to see very often "just happen" to be very important or very urgent - but be that as it may. My priority indication is an active and simple decision about how often I want to see the task, not an attempt to assess the importance or urgency per se. And therefore it works. If something is red, I look at it every time. If it is not red I look only once a day (blue) or once a week (turquoise) - plus whenever I stumble upon it incidentally, of course, e.g. while filtering or looking at a particular project etc etc.
I agree with most of that. Nirvana also has many of the things you like, but Doit also has the extra Goal level above projects, which is something I appreciate a lot. And the Context grouping.
As for tags, I agree that Doit's tags are almost unusable. The main problem for me is that they are invisible (cannot inspect my tagging in the list) and that all the other task properties (contexts, goals etc) are not available for clicking in the tag filter - I certainly want to be able to "quick filter" my list, but if the filtering is limited to those few special (and invisible!) characteristics that I have defined special Tags for, then it is not of much use. I have suggested, as one possible solution, that projects and goals etc should be taggable and that those tags should be automatically inherited (like in Nirvana). Another solution would be to make the "advanced filter" more easily accessible with defaults for super-quick ad hoc filtering (e.g. not have to define a name for the search, not have to save it, not have to specify that you do not want to see completed tasks, not have to specify that you want the current list only etc etc),
As for the ctrl-clicking, it seems that you are asking for Boolean AND filtering. This is what Nirvana has, and what Doit used to have up until a few months ago. Then Doit changed it to Boolean OR, just like Zendone. Personally I would need Boolean NOT more than anything (to exclude irrelevant tasks). I can see no reason why an app could not have all three, e.g. ctrl-click meaning AND, shift-click meaning OR and alt-click meaning NOT. Piece of cake, it would seem, and very powerful to be able to combine, for example:
- show/include all tasks involving John or Peter or both (OR)
- but among those only include those that belong to Goal A (AND)
- and specifically also exclude those that are errands or phone calls (NOT)
As for priorities, I am sorry if maybe I have misled you. Using priorities as a review tool is my own brainchild, and I do like it a lot, and I use it and depend on it, but I must confess that most people do not seem to be too impressed. If you want to give it another try, then do like this: Forget about importance and urgency and all such possible aspects of priority. Just think about how often you want to see this task. Initially mark your tasks blue (Medium) unless you have a very clear opinion to the contrary. During your reviews (or absolutely anytime) just ask yourself this question: Do I want to see this task easily every single time I open my Next list from now on (even if I open that list dozens of times a day)? If so, then change it to red. If not, then ask yourself the question: Do I want to examine this task at least one a day (in a daily scan)? If so, then mark it blue (if it isn't blue already). If not, then ask yourself the question: Is it enough to examine/scan this task only once a week? Then mark it turquoise. In other words, when applying the priority, you consider only how often you want to see it, i.e. a "review frequency". You will probably find that those that you want to see very often "just happen" to be very important or very urgent - but be that as it may. My priority indication is an active and simple decision about how often I want to see the task, not an attempt to assess the importance or urgency per se. And therefore it works. If something is red, I look at it every time. If it is not red I look only once a day (blue) or once a week (turquoise) - plus whenever I stumble upon it incidentally, of course, e.g. while filtering or looking at a particular project etc etc.
