Two to do apps – a battle to the death. Okay, so not really. But I have been a long time Omnifocus user, and have been trying Things out for the last 3 or 4 months, and thought it might be useful to share the experience. The conclusion? I love Omnifocus, but I am moving to Things…
I have a pretty complex job – a lot of moving parts, and a lot of things to keep on top of. As such, a simple paper based, or single list, solution has always groaned a little under the strain. I also use GTD, so use contexts a fair bit. As such, Omnifocus looked to be the idea solution.
And it has server me well. Very well in fact. But it always felt like I was having to work to use it – my to do list felt like something I was having to do. Pro’s and con’s of Omnifocus I would say are as follows:
Good stuff:
- Very, very powerful – can manage anything you throw at it;
- Pure GTD implementation meaning you don’t have to fudge anything to get it to work;
- Great developer support and continued development;
- Good community and plenty of ninja tricks out there; and
- Excellent synching options across computers and mobile devices.
Bad stuff
- It is an very utilitarian design. You might even say ugly. And that matters when it comes to using it hundreds of times a day;
- It is not intuitive – pick it up cold and you’ll get frustrated pretty quickly; and
- It’s power is also a problem as you can sometimes struggle to just get something in it. I want to clear my inbox, but to do so I need to give it a context, a flag (so I know to do it today), and a folder. I don’t want to make choices, I just want it out the way.
So having heard good things about the ‘other’ Mac to do app, I downloaded Things to give it a test drive. It has learnt a lot from Omnifocus’s dedication to detail, but without trying to cover all bases. That probably warrants more discussion – Things feels much more of an Apple app, where as Omnifocus is more of a PC app. The former doesn’t give you carte blanche, but is beautifully designed and intuitive to use; where as the latter gives you every option under the sun, but is dour looking and you’d better read the manual before you start. My view on Things would be:
Good stuff:
- Lovely looking app – pure and without distraction;
- Very intuitive use – you can pick it up and get to work;
- Simple and quick to get things in and out of it; and
- Has more than enough complexity if you want to drill down that far.
Bad stuff:
- Synching between computer and mobile devices is wifi only. An iCloud solution is in the works, but has been ‘in the works’ for a while. This is a bit of biggy;
- Not a perfect GTD solution – they have (rightly) made some compromises to keep the usability up. As such I tend to fudge my way with tags for contexts; and
- Not enough keyboard shortcuts (but solvable using Keyboard Maestro).
Conclusion
Omnifocus could do anything I ever wanted it to do. But that meant I threw stuff in that shouldn’t be there (eg. books I want to read, present ideas for friends and family). Things can do 50% of what Omnifocus can do, but it is the 50% that I use 99% of the time. I would love to give everything a context and a folder, but most of my to do items just want throwing quickly into the ‘today’ pile, and then get done and hour later – not worth classifying. This, Things copes with wonderfully.
Yes Things won’t give me a ‘phone calls’ context, and most importantly it won’t give me a ‘waiting for’ context – but using tags is a pretty good work around.
If Things can get their synching sorted then it wins for my use hands-down. That said, I am moving now. In reality, Omnifocus’s complexity and ugliness meant it had become an ‘object of mass’ in my productivity system – Things is able to much better just sit in the background out the way and let me get on with my work.
