I have tried 11 different GTD apps for my MacBook Pro ... the only one that works down in the trenches for my needs was (gasp) a Windows app (that I run via Parallels Workstation) - MyLifeOrganized (MLO).

I was running kGTD (and really liked it) prior to this [it just was "almost" stable/good enough and it was the "almost" that caused me to leave it as a trusted system].

Anway, MLO has a million features that make it excellent (the interface could sure use some work though). Such as - rapid entry inbox, ability to hide an outline branch in the to-do list (this is really a next action list), designation of task(s) as Projects, assignment of a task as a weekly/monthly/yearly goals (I use mainly the weekly goals feature because it elevates tasks in the next action view), ability to load templates (various built-in GTD templates that were quite helpful), ability to zoom-in ("hoist") on only designated sections, and many excellent Views. There are many, many other features that make it great so please take a look at it.

I would certainly rather work in a native Mac app and I have a feeling (based on my interaction with your other products) that OmniFocus will be it. So good luck with everything!

MyLifeOrganized is a copy of a Mac-only application called Life Balance. It can be found here: http://www.llamagraphics.com/LB/LifeBalanceTop.html

Llamagraphics had been making Life Balance for years before MLO was written. You'll be able to see the immediate resemblance from the screenshoots of both applications.

It should be noted that Life Balance is a terrible, disappointing application. Plus, they have the longest development cycle in the history of Earth. MLO took the Life Balance idea and made it into something modern, slick, and usable, albeit Windows only.

One problem with both applications is that there's really no tabular view. If you want to enter parameters like due date, priority, etc, they have to be entered on a parameter page which is way too busy with content.

Luckily, Omni is more committed than any other company to the simplicity and beauty of software that is uniquely Mac-centric, thus allaying my fears that we will get something clunky.

[dude]

Originally Posted by hornandsaxguy

Luckily, Omni is more committed than any other company to the simplicity and beauty of software that is uniquely Mac-centric, thus allaying my fears that we will get something clunky.

While I agree and own all the Omni Apps but dazzle, I have to say that OO is the most complicated Windows like app they have.

I would bet that OF is great though. I am ready for the beta.

[petro]

Yes, Life Balance used to be the best I could find. But as many have said, their support and development went downhill really quickly. Many people jump shipped to MyLifeOrganized (MLO), which took the best from Life Balance and ran with it.

I'm with many others in saying that I'd love a Mac app (as opposed to running Parallels 24x7), but I can't move to OmniFocus until support of prioritization is supported.

I know all the GTD purists don't like it. Fine. People work differently. Make it a choice. For instance, on MLO, priority is a slider bar. If you never move it, then it works just like OF currently does. That would satisfy everyone.

As an example of priority, I've got my entire life now organized in MLO.

Work
- Minor Routine Stuff
- Task 1
- Task 2
- Major Important Projects
- Task A which is very important?

Personal Stuff
- Personal Health
- Schedule doctor's appt

Evantual Prioritized List of Tasks
------------------------------------
Dr's Appt
Task A
Task 1
Task 2

I want to be able to give individual tasks, and parent tasks various levels of priority. I want to come in to the office in the morning, and work on the things most important to accomplishing my goals in life, without forgetting to go to the dentist.

I want a database that is "pre-prioritized" so I don't have to spend effort in the morning deciding what to focus on.

Until OF supports prioritization of events, I'm stuck running Windows. This is not a rant, and I know that future development is never something you should hold out for, but it seems there's many others in the forum with the same non GTD purist attitude who also want to get things done.

[jklymak]

I guess I don't see why "flags" can't be priorities: !,!!,!!!,!!!! kind of like mail. That wouldn't require much new interface, and people who just use binary flags could just use "nothing" or "!". Or maybe I'm missing the point of flags...

[Toadling]

Originally Posted by petro

I want a database that is "pre-prioritized" so I don't have to spend effort in the morning deciding what to focus on.

But you still have to do it yourself, whether you do it in the morning or the night before. The whole point of doing it on the spot, when you're making the decision of what to do next, is that your priorities are fresh, relevant, and accurate for that particular time, place, and situation. In fact, one could argue that's the only time priorities are ever truly accurate.

Originally Posted by petro

Until OF supports prioritization of events, I'm stuck running Windows. This is not a rant, and I know that future development is never something you should hold out for, but it seems there's many others in the forum with the same non GTD purist attitude who also want to get things done.

See this post from Ken.

You might want to read other portions of that thread as well for a variety of positions on prioritization.

-Dennis

[keone]

petro, okay, I've read through your post, in two different threads as it turns out, and looked at how you use priorities, and frankly I just don't get it. If you are using OF's contexts, perspectives, its sequential or parallel options, folders, start dates, due dates, and the Focus feature, why on earth do you need to have priorities too? If you've taken the time to set up your projects and contexts in concert with GTD guidelines, then when you turn to the context view, aren't all of those items listed in red in your Due Today perspective your "high priority" items, those tasks that you need to get done today? And the relative priority of your projects, isn't that controlled by you in terms of what start and due dates you use, or change, as you work through your day, along with how you organize your projects and customize your perspectives? And also, if you are diligent about using the GTD Weekly Review concept (and an OF Perspective), aren't you constantly evaluating the relative worth of all your projects, and making the appropriate changes, in order to keep your priorities in line with your short-term and long-term goals?

Specifically regarding those items that you've labeled as Task 1, Task 2 and Task A in your example, wouldn't you just arrange them sequentially in their respective projects by the most important to the least? Then when you are in the Due, Next Action perspective, you would see only those items that need to be done next (your high priority items). Once those are checked off your next priority items would appear, and so on. You could also look ahead to see what is due tomorrow, this week, etc., which to me seems like a priority system, without all of the additional tedium of numbers and letters. Hmm, is that a priority 1 or 2? Or is it 1a or 1b? Well, isn't it all just stuff that needs to get done in a certain order (priority), which OF helps you with by badge color, perspectives, dates, etc.?

Now, I've read all of the pro-prioritization arguments on this forum (most of them anyway), and there appears to be one common thread that runs through them. They are advocated by those who simply want to hang on to the way they've always done things, by those who have never really let go of their old habits (and don't want to), by those who have never completely embraced GTD, or even really tried it all the way through. (Some haven't even bothered to read David Allen's book.) And so in essence what you and those others want is for OF to conform to your old habits--habits that are just far too precious for you to even think about changing--rather than the other way around.

And I've also noticed that you and others have a fondness for the terms "GTD purists" vs "non-purists" as a means to bolster your arguments for OF "flexibility." That somehow those of us who believe in the GTD system, and use it effectively, are these rigid adherents who have drunk a bit too much of the David Allen kool-aid and are thus too blindly faithful to his ideas to entertain other non-GTD ideas.

Well. Okay.

It's been said elsewhere, but I will say it again: OmniFocus is a GTD-based organizational system. If GTD doesn't fit the way you like to run your life then don't use it. Stick with MyLifeOrganized or Life Balance or the myriad of other similar apps out there, and leave OF to those of us who prefer the GTD way of organization, you know, us "purists."

[cyleigh]

Originally Posted by keone

petro, okay, I've read through your post, in two different threads as it turns out, and looked at how you use priorities, and frankly I just don't get it. If you are using OF's contexts, perspectives, its sequential or parallel options, folders, start dates, due dates, and the Focus feature, why on earth do you need to have priorities too? If you've taken the time to set up your projects and contexts in concert with GTD guidelines, then when you turn to the context view, aren't all of those items listed in red in your Due Today perspective your "high priority" items, those tasks that you need to get done today? And the relative priority of your projects, isn't that controlled by you in terms of what start and due dates you use, or change, as you work through your day, along with how you organize your projects and customize your perspectives? And also, if you are diligent about using the GTD Weekly Review concept (and an OF Perspective), aren't you constantly evaluating the relative worth of all your projects, and making the appropriate changes, in order to keep your priorities in line with your short-term and long-term goals?

Specifically regarding those items that you've labeled as Task 1, Task 2 and Task A in your example, wouldn't you just arrange them sequentially in their respective projects by the most important to the least? Then when you are in the Due, Next Action perspective, you would see only those items that need to be done next (your high priority items). Once those are checked off your next priority items would appear, and so on. You could also look ahead to see what is due tomorrow, this week, etc., which to me seems like a priority system, without all of the additional tedium of numbers and letters. Hmm, is that a priority 1 or 2? Or is it 1a or 1b? Well, isn't it all just stuff that needs to get done in a certain order (priority), which OF helps you with by badge color, perspectives, dates, etc.?

Now, I've read all of the pro-prioritization arguments on this forum (most of them anyway), and there appears to be one common thread that runs through them. They are advocated by those who simply want to hang on to the way they've always done things, by those who have never really let go of their old habits (and don't want to), by those who have never completely embraced GTD, or even really tried it all the way through. (Some haven't even bothered to read David Allen's book.) And so in essence what you and those others want is for OF to conform to your old habits--habits that are just far too precious for you to even think about changing--rather than the other way around.

And I've also noticed that you and others have a fondness for the terms "GTD purists" vs "non-purists" as a means to bolster your arguments for OF "flexibility." That somehow those of us who believe in the GTD system, and use it effectively, are these rigid adherents who have drunk a bit too much of the David Allen kool-aid and are thus too blindly faithful to his ideas to entertain other non-GTD ideas.

Well. Okay.

It's been said elsewhere, but I will say it again: OmniFocus is a GTD-based organizational system. If GTD doesn't fit the way you like to run your life then don't use it. Stick with MyLifeOrganized or Life Balance or the myriad of other similar apps out there, and leave OF to those of us who prefer the GTD way of organization, you know, us "purists."

+2.

[Brian]

Ken's post on our plans for prioritization

We're bordering on flame war territory here, folks. Stand down please. :-)