[Indyprint]

Welcome! The forum has lots of discussion posts from folks who have switched from Things. They may provide a further starting point for collecting information.

Thanks so much for you reply! It's very helpful, though it leads me to ask follow up questions...

This is a design difference based on the philosophy of how the tool is to be used. Priorities on tasks are not part of the OF approach because they are not really supposed to be part of a "true" GTD method. Suggestions are continually being posted on the forum on how to incorporate them in to OF, in addition to requests to include them in OF. In the meantime, with OF, you will either have to change your approach to scheduling based on priorities or make yourself comfortable with one of the alternative methods.

Ok, I'm open to changing my approach, but would am trying to understand how triaging tasks would work. In my work, I have separate Projects, and then I prioritize the tasks, and attack the work in terms of high, medium, and low priority -- obviously focusing on the high priority for the current day. How would OF approach this differently?

Again, this is a design choice in OF based on the philosophy of implementation, and a large number of postings are here requesting changes or suggesting alternative ways to handle it. My approach is to consider as a start that a single Context for a task can be set by answering the question: "I absolutely cannot complete this task without being HERE", where HERE is either a location or a frame of mind. Outside of this question, all other "contexts" are supplemental. For example, I carry my cell phone with me all the time, so I have no need for a "cell phone" context (because needing a cell to do a task is not a restrictive issue).

Thanks for the explanation, but I'm still not clear on how best to utilize Contexts. It seems like they help one focus on a particular action (e.g., Email) or place (Office versus Home). That seems like how Things uses Area of Interest. Is there another way in which Contexts should be radically reconsidered? Are there some templates that I should look at to better consider how best to utilizes OF's approach? Thanks!

The general consensus is, DUE dates should be assigned when they are defined by a deadline external to the task. They are not assigned based on when one "wants" to do the task. Start dates are assigned with a bit more flexibility by comparison.

Hmmm. Ok, well I'm willing to consider that approach, but it would useful to see some sort of template to see how it could play out in practice. The thing is...sometimes I don't have due dates, but just a sense of the order of projects based on priorities. Take home maintenance: I don't have due dates for all the things I have to do around my home, and to create due dates for my errands would be contrived (and even cumbersome to set up). Setting up priorities for such tasks seems a simpler approach for those tasks. So, how would one approach the organization of those tasks in OF?

I sync exclusively via WiFi locally between my iPod and Mac. You can set up your Mac to be a WiFi domain, and then set up your iPhone/iPad to sync to that domain.

But I would still need a WiFi server to do this, correct? I work in remote places where I don't have access to WiFi at times, so is there another solution?

In OF, you can view your Completed tasks / projects to get an equivalent set of information. The Archive feature of OF also allows you to put your completed tasks/projects in storage.

Gotcha. Is there a way to mark or view select tasks w/ notes (i.e., notes that log how a task was competed)?

Hope this gives you some useful feedback.

It was incredibly helpful, and I thank you very much for all of your valuable input...

--
JJW[/QUOTE]