Hugh Pile
9/25/2007 10:16 pm
Yes, I did, a while ago.
It may be useful to you if you buy into its philosophy.
Which means:
- allowing the software to timetable the "soft-landscaped" parts of your working day i.e. those that don't involve diary appointments
- having a schedule mostly composed of brief or medium-sized tasks, up to 90 minutes say, rather than day, week or month-long commitments (such as writing a book)
If you accept this way of working, I imagine it would provide and interesting alternative to other prioritising systems, such as GTD.
Beyond this: pluses: useful alarm systems, a record of what you've done and what it's cost, a comprehensive formwork for recording the attributes of each task, a forecast of workloads in days ahead. Minuses: rudimentary project outlining, an old-fashioned and occasionally confusing user interface, perhaps an obsessively fussy approach?
It may be useful to you if you buy into its philosophy.
Which means:
- allowing the software to timetable the "soft-landscaped" parts of your working day i.e. those that don't involve diary appointments
- having a schedule mostly composed of brief or medium-sized tasks, up to 90 minutes say, rather than day, week or month-long commitments (such as writing a book)
If you accept this way of working, I imagine it would provide and interesting alternative to other prioritising systems, such as GTD.
Beyond this: pluses: useful alarm systems, a record of what you've done and what it's cost, a comprehensive formwork for recording the attributes of each task, a forecast of workloads in days ahead. Minuses: rudimentary project outlining, an old-fashioned and occasionally confusing user interface, perhaps an obsessively fussy approach?