On 2010-01-24, at 11:06 , Thomas Worrall wrote: > > I'm in on the side of hating too much configurability. When I'm being > a user, often I want the developers to make my choices for me: that's > what they're paid for, damnit! > > Take OmniFocus. Incredibly powerful program, and it adapts to pretty > much any workflow. This makes it really hard to get into. My problem, > the problem for which I bought it, was that I didn't have a task > management workflow. So I would have much preferred Omni's devs to say > "In our app you do it this way. Learn this process, and things will be > easier."
Having paid for OmniFocus, TaskPaper, Things, The Hit List (in that order), I feel your pain. I'm currently on Things, but the limitations on the project structure (can't postpone a single task, etc) is really annoying. The Hit List was really awesome, and a good balance between the total free form of OmniFocus, and the rigidness of Things. I don't really remember why I left it. Maybe because I was in on the first public beta, and decided to wait for more polish. So, about everything else you said that I snipped, it boils down to the same old: small core, great plugins. Which can mean a thousand different things. I believe we should indeed provide a default workflow, and it should be the same old dumb IMAP folders workflow. You get your mail just like in any other mail program. As for the crazy stuff in plugins, you get it as needed. Promoters of distinct workflows will hopefully show up with meta-bundles of plugins describing how to work with email just like they do. _______________________________________________ [email protected] mailing list List help: http://lists.ranchero.com/listinfo.cgi/email-init-ranchero.com
