OmniFocus UI
 

I've been reading a bunch of comparisons between OF, Things, and Hit List. Everyone seems to agree that OF is the most powerful of the three, but also the most cumbersome and, well, least "shiny." It definitely takes a lot of time to figure out all the things you can do with OF, and to figure out how to fit those features into your workflow. Once you've got that figured out, it's pretty hard to beat OF. But I wonder if there is something that can be done to make this process less tedious? It seems a pretty big hurdle to ask people to spend a few hours "getting used to" a program before they understand how beneficial it is for them.

I'm not sure how much you can "dumb down" such powerful software; it is possible that the complexity necessarily increases with the number of features. But I figured this might be a good place to start throwing around ideas for how to simplify the UI to make it more intuitive, and most importantly, to make it *enjoyable* to use. As The David says, "the system needs to be fun and easy... otherwise you'll unconsciously resist emptying your inbasket."

I must admit that although I very much rely on OF to keep my life under control, I don't exactly get excited about using it. It would be great if we could change that!

@erasure I'm wondering how much time you've spent using another GTD or task management application. Though I'm a new user of OF for just a month, I do get exceited about using it and all its features. I used another web-based GTD heavily (120+ projects and over 2,100 tasks) for an entire year and after reading and drooling over OF's features finally bought a Macbook and OF just so I could use OF at work. Its been pure heaven since then for lots of reasons, not the least of which is that I own the data locally and have no more monthly fees to pay. Of course the 30 or so hours converting from one app to another was arduous, but it helped me learn many of the shortcuts in the application quickly. The iPhone app is incredible compared to the competition. My thoughts anyway, John

I don't think it needs to be dumb down but just better laid out. It has some powerfull stuff, it just not easy to see it.
That's why Microsoft change the UI for Office 2007 to the ribbion. People kept asking for features that Office already had. So they needed to rethink the UI.
I'm not saying the UI for OF is great but it's far from terrible. I'll be honest I don't see OF needing so much a big UI change but more shiny, honestly. Alot of the tools are kinda clear.

[QUOTE=erasure;57510]Everyone seems to agree that OF is the most powerful of the three, but also the most cumbersome and, well, least "shiny."[/QUOTE]

I agree that OmniFocus is more powerful and deeper than the competition. Because of that, you can spend more time "exploring." But you don't have to dig very deep to get significant benefit from the app. I was up and running with everything I [I]needed[/I] to know in a couple days.

I haven't tried Hit List, but I've personally found Things [I]far more[/I] cumbersome, especially when trying to manage over 2,200 actions and 180 projects. It was a mess.

But I'm sure there's room for improvement in OmniFocus. This has been discussed ad nauseam over the past year or two. And it's not a simple matter coming up with sweeping improvements to satisfy everyone. Take a look back through the archives to see what I mean.

What we have now is pretty damn good, IMHO. And the Omni Group has already stated that they plan to focus on a UI overhaul sometime in the near future. I'm not sure what that entails or if it'll come before a 2.0 release or if it will be targeted at Leopard only. I'm just not sure we need to hash this over again unless someone has something new to contribute.

-Dennis

Maybe the OmniFolks would be able to create pre-made templates that showed users how flexible it is?


I think it takes time for people to find their own personal setup... How would they like to set up their folders and projects? Maybe they'll use the Horizons of Focus (from the Runway to 50,000 feet). Maybe they'll set it up by Areas of Responsibilities (Family, Work, Professional Development, etc.). Or any number of set ups. I know I always find it interesting to see how some folks have set up their OF setup or even how they tweaked their iPhones. Whenever I meet someone new who happens to have any iPhone, we often compare different apps, different setups to see what we can learn from each other. I read the forums quite a bit to get ideas on how people have their OF setup.

So maybe providing some templates will give us an idea. I know that I will occassionally tweak something here or there in my OF setup that will make life easier for me....

I think I remembered that Things has an "Areas of Responsibility" frozen into their UI. That's an example of how some people like to use it. Some folks don't even use "Areas of Responsibility." Some do.

Speaking of the UI, reminded me of a question I meant to ask. Is there any way to sync perspectives across different machines? I use OF on my iMac at home and Macbook at work, and I would like to keep the same custom perspectives on each. Is there a way to save them with the db? John

There isn't a built-in mechanism to sync perspectives (or themes), but they implemented the feature in a way that makes it relatively easy to do it yourself. In your home directory, in the Library/Application Support/OmniFocus directory, you'll find a directory called Perspectives (and a corresponding one called Themes) that contains a file for each perspective (or theme) you have defined. You can simply copy those files to your other machine(s) with a USB thumb drive, Dropbox, MobileMe, or whatever preferred means you have for moving files from one machine to another. I think you might have to restart OmniFocus after installing or updating one to get the new version noticed.

There have been past requests for an automated sync facility of some sort to propagate such changes. If you want to add your voice to the chorus, use Help->Send Feedback or email [email]omnifocus@omnigroup.com[/email] to request it.

Thanks for all the comments.

I have not spent extensive time using other apps (although I did use Mori and iGTD for a while) because I very quickly discover that they do not do what I need them to do.

I have been using OF since it was in beta, so maybe some of the shiny-ness has simply worn off for me.

Dennis, I did a quick search in the forums for UI discussions and came up empty. I'd love to look at some of what's been discussed in the past if you know where some of those threads are.

Templates might help. And, actually, I think Ethan Schoonover and Don MacAllister's videos are probably good starting points.

I guess I was just a little disheartened to see so many people turning away from OF because they thought it was too complicated. But after going back and looking at those reviews again, I think ultimately OF is for a different audience than apps like Things. A lot of the "fiddly" features in OF allow for a level of control that really appeals to some people, while completely overwhelming other people. I'm probably somewhere in between; I never use the "estimated time" field and the only time I touch the inspector window is when I'm setting something to repeat.

But I do think there is some truth to the statement "If OmniFocus were a Microsoft product, Things would be the Apple equivalent. It’s simple, it’s easy to use, and it’s pretty to look at." If you look at the two GUIs, Things is clearly the more streamlined and "pretty" application. And there are lots of little things that are less intuitive in OF, like cmd-N opening a new window rather than a new task (why?), or having to grab the little dot in front of an item in order to move it around. I think I would rather double-click to edit an item, and leave single click for grabbing and moving. And the only reason I know about grabbing the dot is because it was listed as a change in one of the beta releases. Not intuitive.

This is exactly the type of thing that Macs typically do better than Windows: Fewer and more intuitive steps to an action. I think erifneerg might have hit it on the head — it's not extremely difficult to use, but it could use some sprucing up to make it pretty again and to clean up and simplify some of the things that have been added along the way. Here's hoping the upcoming overhaul will take care of that!

[QUOTE=erasure;57569]But I do think there is some truth to the statement "If OmniFocus were a Microsoft product, Things would be the Apple equivalent. It’s simple, it’s easy to use, and it’s pretty to look at."[/QUOTE]

I think a better analogy would be: Things is to OmniFocus as GarageBand is to [URL="http://www.apple.com/logicstudio/logicpro/"]Logic Pro[/URL] or iMovie is to [URL="http://www.apple.com/finalcutstudio/finalcutpro/"]Final Cut Pro[/URL].

On one hand, you've got a consumer-oriented app that's simple and "pretty" but lacks functionality. And on the other hand, you have a more sophisticated, pro-level app that is more robust and feature-rich but at the cost of greater complexity.

Both apps are well-designed, but they're targeted at different audiences. Some find a simpler app suffices, while others need something with more power.


[QUOTE=erasure;57569]And there are lots of little things that are less intuitive in OF, like cmd-N opening a new window rather than a new task (why?)...
[/QUOTE]

I don't agree at all. Using the Return key to create new items feels far more intuitive and perfectly natural. Leave the Command-N finger contortion for a less-frequently-used command like opening new windows.

Using OmniFocus feels almost like editing lines in a text document, like using your favorite word processor or text editor. It has all of the advantages of a database system under the hood but without the cumbersome, traditional database interface (i.e. having to create new records with Command-N, having to double-clicking fields for editing, inability to move the editing cursor directly between records, inability to delete lines with a simple backspace, etc). This is a huge selling point for OmniFocus.

[QUOTE=erasure;57569]...or having to grab the little dot in front of an item in order to move it around. I think I would rather double-click to edit an item, and leave single click for grabbing and moving. And the only reason I know about grabbing the dot is because it was listed as a change in one of the beta releases. Not intuitive.[/QUOTE]

Double-clicking an item to edit brings us right back to that awkward database or file system style interface that's so slow and inefficient. You need to think of your OmniFocus window as a simple text file.

And you don't need to grab the dot to drag rows -- just click anywhere on the row and drag. The dot (a.k.a "row handle") is a covenient way to grab the row, but it's not the only way. BTW, you can also use Control-Command-up/down arrow to move selected rows.

-Dennis

[QUOTE=Toadling;57610]I think a better analogy would be: Things is to OmniFocus as GarageBand is to [URL="http://www.apple.com/logicstudio/logicpro/"]Logic Pro[/URL] or iMovie is to [URL="http://www.apple.com/finalcutstudio/finalcutpro/"]Final Cut Pro[/URL].
[/quote]
Thanks, that's a big relief, Dennis! I was starting to feel really bad about liking a Microsoft application so much :-)

Very good points, Dennis. I think the discrepancies actually come down to the fact that we've already learned these less efficient behaviors in other, less efficient apps, and when we come upon something like OF that actually streamlines those little tasks, we find it unintuitive and new. Just goes to show that what we're used to isn't necessarily the best way to do it!

I do have a hard time with the row dragging, though. Sometimes I can drag from any point in the row, but other times it goes into editing mode and I end up highlighting the text instead of dragging the row. I can't figure out what causes it to highlight vs drag.

I've commented once or twice how OF isn't necessarily the prettiest app visually, but that's compensated 1000x over by its power and flexibility.

The discussion about UI makes me a little nervous because I'd hate to see anything done for surface beauty that compromises what's really important -- that is, how incredibly well OF works. Remember, beauty is only surface deep.

That said, if I was to make a serious cosmetic request, I would probably ask for a wider array of Perspective icons. A few are nice. The blue generic one is actually pretty good and is what I use most (that is, too much). Most of the Perspective icons are plain or ugly little black & white images that I just don't find attractive nor very useful as accurate symbols for what my Perspectives are showing me.

I use Perspectives heavily and have icons lined up along the top for those I use the most. It would be nice to have some more variety and color up there.

[QUOTE=RCL;57693]I use Perspectives heavily and have icons lined up along the top for those I use the most. It would be nice to have some more variety and color up there.[/QUOTE]

You do know that you can use your own icons or even images for perspectives, right? Check out any icon site on the web and pick whatever you like. Many are free.

-Dennis

I'm going to chime in about the look of Omnifocus. I know it's not a web app (duh) but my anaology is it feels like web 1.0 - and I agree that Things and The Hit List feel like web 2.0 !

You don't have to lose functionality at all to do this. But what does need looking at is the 'fun factor'

Years ago I wrote a database app in Filemaker because we couldn't find anything off the shelf to do what we wanted. One of the problems was that the off the shelf software we could find was horribly dull.

I created a fairly complex filemaker database which focused on ease of use and fun as much as functionality. It was basically a sales call database. You could write quick notes on clients. You could set yourself targets for the day. You could see if you could beat your record. You could turn noises on and off. It looked 'cool'. When you used it, it made you feel good. It had all kinds of reminders, bells and whistles and fun stuff you could turn on or off.

We were making 300 calls a day each using that system and even though it was hard work, the 'feel' of the system made it much less arduous. Having a UI that makes you feel good has a huge effect on your workflow and efficiency.

Apple knows it or they wouldn't bother making things the way they make them. And if it didn't matter, we wouldn't have Things and The Hit List being created and being taken to heart by so many.

If a UI designer from Apple started working on the OF UI I can't imagine any of us complaining, no matter how much we bang on about the fact that OF is more powerful than the other apps.

OF actually IS more powerful than the other apps. However, we want it all. We want to feel cool when we use it, and have some bells and whistles. Let's face it, to do lists aren't exactly great fun. Anything Omni can do to make the experience a happier more productive one would be warmly received.

I mean Omni have YEARS of experience making this stuff, and they are going to lose customers to these young guns with their cool interfaces. That's ridiculous. They should have it all. And if they think they don't have the UI talent inhouse, they should hire it in.

The problem with making the UI look "fun" is that one person's fun is another's horribly distracting.

One of the most important features of OmniFu is that the boring (and minimally changeable) interface makes sure we actually do our listed work, instead of spending endless hours tweaking the interface. [Optima or Gil Sans? Can I make the background match my desktop?]

Some people use keyboard shortcuts exclusively, others prefer the mouse. A UI optimized for key commands is hard to use with a mouse, and vice versa.

It's one thing for a database designer (BTDT) to develop an attractive database for a single function for a small group. But Omni has to create a UI that works for tens of thousands of people, many of whom live in the program.

I think they did a good job.

[QUOTE=LizPf;57828]The problem with making the UI look "fun" is that one person's fun is another's horribly distracting.[/QUOTE]

For me, THL is an example of this, as is NoteTaker, NoteBook and Tags. I've never liked the UI of applications that take an electronic medium and make it look like a physical paper medium. I can see the appeal of this design for some, perhaps many, but it's not for me.

@LizPf

It seems like throughout this thread you are simply reiterating that OmniFocus couldn't be better and it's look and feel are perfect.

I use it for its functionality over the others we have mentioned. However, I think OF has a lot to learn from the other products. They are getting attention for a reason.

I would love to see OF develop into something we all like to use EVEN MORE. And actually, I have spent more time trying to tweak the interface of OF than any of the other apps mentioned simply because although I like its functionality, I find it a bit clunky, and nothing like as pleasing to the eye as all the other software I use.

I wish OF looked more like Things and The Hit List, but was still the OF we all use. But you think it's perfect. May as well tell them to stop development now then.

I think it's the best, but to stay the best it needs to lead. If I was OF I would be looking at The Hit List and thinking that was some serious competition right there.

While the Things UI is initially quite "pretty," the usability of the program as a whole suffers.

It is a very "clicky" interface, and you need to use the mouse pretty much constantly. After using it for a few weeks, I was just "moused out." It's much easier in OF to get stuff done with the keyboard. In general while OF isn't as "sexy" out of the box, it is possible to get it operate much as you want -- including defining contexts as Today, Someday, Next, etc., if that's your preference. You just can't have multiple contexts (er, "tags") on a particular task :-)

Very frustrating about things is the inability to see all tasks at once. You can use Areas to give visibility to things in Next, Scheduled, and Someday, and maybe subdivide the areas up by sorting based on tags, but there's really a lot you need to do there as well.

[QUOTE=Toadling;57695]You do know that you can use your own icons or even images for perspectives, right?

-Dennis[/QUOTE]

I guess I do now. Thanks! I'll experiment.

Pretty?
 

I know that taste is relatively subjective (relatively), but I don't get the OF ugly, Things Pretty - I'll grant you that Hit List has a pretty slick UI, but Things? Maybe it's just me the whole brushed aluminum thing strikes me as cocoa amateur hour. I think that Omnifocus has a very up to date, and very usable UI. There are still things I'm working out with weekly review, but I don't think that has anything to do with OF. Now that the bugs are worked out of the iphone app OF and iOF makes for a great trusted system, and I like its UI.

I 100% agree with the comparison of Web 1.0 and 2.0 and OF and things/hit list.

My #1 issue by a huge long shot with OF is simply the inspector window. I hate them. I would like to see the option of more of the inspector fields in the main window.

[QUOTE=indygreg;57933]I 100% agree with the comparison of Web 1.0 and 2.0 and OF and things/hit list.

My #1 issue by a huge long shot with OF is simply the inspector window. I hate them. I would like to see the option of more of the inspector fields in the main window.[/QUOTE]

Thanks for the concrete feedback! Did you have a particular field in mind?

What peeves me the most visually is the complete lack of any aid for the eye to distinguish rows and columns in the main window. Imho THL does this beautifully without being obtrusive while OF has a strong text desert attitude.
I love the the theme customization in OF, but if it has to go for that (or strongly cut back), I wouldn't hesitate for a second.

[QUOTE=Schlaefer;57953]What peeves me the most visually is the complete lack of any aid for the eye to distinguish rows and columns in the main window.[/QUOTE]

That's not entirely true. There is some indication: on mouseover of the row, OmniFocus displays a bullet at the beginning of the row so you can tell which one you're hovering over regardless of where your cursor is on the row. Various column inputs are highlighted on mouseover as well. Selecting the row also puts a nice bubble around it.

[QUOTE=Schlaefer;57953]Imho THL does this beautifully without being obtrusive...[/QUOTE]

I'm not as fond of THL's approach. The "lined paper" look that pretends to be a realworld object is just silly and annoying, IMHO. It's one of the reasons I immediately lost interest in THL. OmniFocus' UI may not be perfect, but I strongly prefer its clean, simple appearance. It allows me to focus only on the content without a lot of superflous visual distraction.

In THL's defense, however, I think the Things interface is even worse; it's much too heavy, dark, and cluttered.

-Dennis

[QUOTE=Toadling;57965]That's not entirely true. There is some indication: on mouseover of the row, OmniFocus displays a bullet at the beginning of the row so you can tell which one you're hovering over regardless of where your cursor is on the row. Various column inputs are highlighted on mouseover as well. Selecting the row also puts a nice bubble around it.
[/QUOTE]

This is a actual picture of a project: [url]http://img.skitch.com/20090404-g474esahg9ccc7erbx1pih4ctu.png[/url]

The green area is ok, but for the red areas it is hard to see without looking twice which action has which context far on the right. And 'mousing over' all the time doesn't cut it. It's just 'interface grind' eating the 'fun'.

I'm also totally in love with the the alternating column colors in THL. In OF it's just 'text in space': [url]http://img.skitch.com/20090404-gsjeusrgccgcnx95wkk23yui6u.png[/url]


[QUOTE=Toadling;57965]
I'm not as fond of THL's approach. The "lined paper" look that pretends to be a realworld object is just silly and annoying, IMHO. It's one of the reasons I immediately lost interest in THL. OmniFocus' UI may not be perfect, but I strongly prefer its clean, simple appearance. It allows me to focus only on the content without a lot of superflous visual distraction.
[/QUOTE]

While I have to admit that I like the particular look of THL, it's imho not about the 'lined paper' look itself, but information laid out in a spreadsheet. And row and column indicators definitely would help.

PS: While I was writing this I opened up THL and I want to mention to things I discovered: a) why do I have to resize columns (e.g. dates) in OF? If it is visible it should be the right width to show a complete date and b) when you throw a file (I tried to import something to compare) onto the THL icon in the Dock it makes a new action in the inbox with a "Look into <file>" action. Simple and brilliant (see -> fun).

OF is more powerful, but OF should steal a few things from the competition - they did too. I don't care for an original app, but for the best app. ;)

@whpalmer4 - thanks for the explanation. This will help a great deal and I did add a request for perspective syncing. John

[QUOTE=Ken Case;57939]Thanks for the concrete feedback! Did you have a particular field in mind?[/QUOTE]

I was just wrong .. . .I can add the fields from the inspector to the main screen . . . start date, due, time, etc.

I bought OF a long time ago, but switched to Things (also paid for it) becuase of the visual aspect and the tagging. But I hated no nesting and I have given up on that product as it has stalled too much. I used Thinking rock for a while as I had to switch to a PC for a brief period of time (and I use them at work a good deal). But I just needed so much more and I wanted a better app. Then I saw hit list and it has huge potential, but I do not want to wait for it to get where it needs to be, if it ever hits there. I am guessing like things it is basically a person or two in their spare time and the iphone will sidetrack them for months.

so I am back to OF. i think it is the most powerful . . . but again I think it could look a lot better. I dearly want tags. Also I dearly want the ability to do inline /tags and @contexts like the hit list has.

Sorry . . . got off track . . . I never really put in the few hours that I think OF needs to really see what it can do and how to make it all work best.

Watching the screencasts will help you with getting back on track.

There was a time when I was on the fence and choosing between Things and OmniFocus.

Things was the media darling with its "simplicity." But the maturity of OmniFocus was what won me over. I couldn't wait for Things to add all the features that were in OmniFocus. So I decided to invest some time in watching the screencasts. It's well worth it.

[QUOTE=Ken Case;57939]Thanks for the concrete feedback! Did you have a particular field in mind?[/QUOTE]On the subject of the Inspector panel, would it be possible to add a option to show the Inspector panel as a drawer (that is attached to the side of main OF window)? If the option is set, it would be a drawer, and if not, it could remain as the panel it currently is. I often move the main window around, and it is annoying to have to move the Inspector panel independently. Comparatively, I [I]love[/I] how the Utility Drawer works in OmniOutliner.

On the topic of particular fields, I'd love the option to hide the flag column. I think that it is great that the visibility of the Context, Estimate, Start Date, Due Date and Completion Date columns can be toggled. The visibility of the Flag column should be optional as well.

[QUOTE=Ken Case;57939]Thanks for the concrete feedback! Did you have a particular field in mind?[/QUOTE]

I know myself and at least a few others find ourselves only using the inspector for the repeat feature; not sure how all those repeat options could be implemented inside the main window in a simple way, though.

@Schlaefer

I'm with you on hating the 'text in space' problem. How the heck you're meant to easily see which action is flagged when the flag column is all the way over to the right I'll never know.

This annoyed me straight away about OF so I went to move the flag column to be to the left of the action - a much better place for it to be imho. Of course, OF won't let you move columns.

Also another thumbs down for having to resize columns. OF continuously messes up my columns so that text wraps around and creates extra lines / spaces between my actions. Messy and annoying.

Give us a choice to have lines going across.
Give us the choice to re-order columns.
Make the columns have dynamic width so they can expand to hold the content instead of creating a new line.

For me these are basics and should have been in there from the word go.

[QUOTE=BevvyB;58017]Make the columns have dynamic width so they can expand to hold the content instead of creating a new line.
[/QUOTE]
Those of us with small screens and large context names wouldn't appreciate this unless it was possible to disable it! There are times when auto-sizing would be nice (I personally think that date columns ought to always have it) but most of the time I prefer hand-tuning the column widths and saving them in a perspective.

@whpalmer4

I'm sure it would be easy to have an option somewhere of just how big a field column can be before it starts a new line

[QUOTE=erasure;58007]I know myself and at least a few others find ourselves only using the inspector for the repeat feature; not sure how all those repeat options could be implemented inside the main window in a simple way, though.[/QUOTE]

We have an icon for repeating actions now. I'd like to see a click on that icon pop up a small window with repeat options. For keyboard-only use, tabbing into the icon column and pressing the space bar would bring up the window.

[QUOTE=BevvyB;58026]@whpalmer4

I'm sure it would be easy to have an option somewhere of just how big a field column can be before it starts a new line[/QUOTE]

That is true, but what makes you think the same number would be the right one for each and every view? My column widths are very different in my windows that have dates showing!

I just think there is something that could be done to make columns more easy to handle in general. I find myself fiddling with columns TOO MUCH.

My biggest gripe is in project view, where I'm not able to change the size of the context column AT ALL because that's the one column that won't let you move it. In project view, my context names do horrible stuff like move the last letter of the context name to the next line like so:

Productio
n

All I want to be able to do is make the context column width a little wider, but in project view you can't do that. Drives me mad.

Hmmm. I can make the context column wider in project view. I'm on 1.6.

Hmm weird, when I click into the context area, the context column name appears above it, when I click out it vanishes

I have just managed to change it's width. Must be a bug though I guess.

[QUOTE=BevvyB;58033]Hmm weird, when I click into the context area, the context column name appears above it, when I click out it vanishes

I have just managed to change it's width. Must be a bug though I guess.[/QUOTE]

It's a usability bug, if it's a bug at all. Project mode shows both projects (which don't display a context) and actions (which do). The column headings change based on which row is selected.

I _never_ have to fiddle with columns in OF. I just set them like I want, save a snapshot of the perspective, and they work. OF really works best with custom perspectives. That's part of what makes it hard to approach, but provides a lot of power once you get used to it.

[QUOTE=curt.clifton;58039]OF really works best with custom perspectives. That's part of what makes it hard to approach, but provides a lot of power once you get used to it.[/QUOTE]

I agree. I do ALL my work in custom perspectives. I put quite a bit of effort into them, but now they each provide exactly what I want. I love it.

I've only seen screenshots of the competition so I have limited direct knowledge, but I would be surprised if any others are as flexible in this way as OF.

[QUOTE=RCL;58196]I agree. I do ALL my work in custom perspectives. I put quite a bit of effort into them, but now they each provide exactly what I want. I love it.[/QUOTE]Hey RCL,

If you are comfortable sharing your custom perspectives, I'd love to see your setup.

Just more Keyboard shortcuts
 

Well, this is my first post... I've been using omnifocus for a cuple of moths and I love it. I have a lot of custom perspectives with keyboard shortcuts (Planning, Next action, Today, Actions, Waiting, Someday...) and I prefer it to any other system.
However, please please please. Put more Keyboard shortcuts! I think that they simplify life so much, and you don't need a complete UI overhaul to do them. Just a shortcut to go directly to the search-box would be really useful, and another to be able to get from one action to its project parent would be incredible too.
Today I tried THL and I really loved its Keyboard shortcuts. If you could implement something like that it would make OF much more productive i think.

[QUOTE=Alfonso24;58993]Just a shortcut to go directly to the search-box would be really useful...[/QUOTE]

How about Command-Option-F, as is used in most OS X apps?


[QUOTE=Alfonso24;58993]...and another to be able to get from one action to its project parent would be incredible too.[/QUOTE]

Only thing I have to offer here is: with an action selected, hit the left arrow key to move focus to the containing parent and collapse it.

As for adding other keyboard shortcuts, have you tried Leopard's built-in preferences under System Preferences -> Keyboard & Mouse -> Keyboard Shortcuts? You can add application-specific keyboard shortcuts to any menu item. For example, I set Shift-Command-D to OmniFocus' Perspectives -> Revert to Default View menu option.

-Dennis