Forum Posts Feed
What are the note taking/task managing features you dont like or think they are useless?
< Next Topic | Back to topic list | Previous Topic >
Posted by Lothar Scholz
Apr 8, 2019 at 02:17 AM
Learning from failures is giving a different perspective then learning from praise.
And most of the general comparison topics are focused on whats good or bad in the programs.
But what is the advise for software developers where they should not spend a lot of time?
Features are implemented and advisertised often just to fill the “me too” table column.
Are they just to hard to use from the current state of UX/usage design or did you just never found a real usecase for them.
Posted by Luhmann
Apr 8, 2019 at 03:02 AM
I think how useful a feature is depends less on the feature and more on the implementation and how well integrated it is into the app. Tagging in Ulysses is useless for me because it is hidden in its own window (after the update!) and not central to organizing one’s data. Tagging in Bear, however, is wonderfully well thought out and is central to how I use that app. Having said that, there are some features I have never found useful in any app:
1. Mind Mapping
I love outlines, but despite having tried dozens of mind mapping apps, I’ve never found them useful for me. Maybe because my outlines are so text-heavy? I think it only works if you have short entries…
2. Contexts
GTD apps like the idea of contexts, but my work doesn’t have a clear context. I could be at home, in my office, or at a café and be doing pretty much the same thing. Location alerts are sometimes useful however. For instance, to remind myself to pick something up when I’m in the office.
3. Check lists
Checklists just remain stuck inside another task. What if an item on your list turns into its own project with its own sub-tasks? Todoist, 2Do, and Taskcade can handle this, but in apps with only checklists, your items are stuck where they are!
4. Estimated time
Seems like an absurd thing to include in a task manager. You can tag items as “quick” or “major project” but trying to narrow it down to a given time frame seems like a fool’s errand - and also a waste of time. I do like having “durations” however - which is how 2Do calculates a “start date” based on the “due date” without having to enter a given due date.
5. Grammar check
The grammar rules included in any contemporary computer - whether apple, or the service grammarly, are laughable and no good writer should keep these features turned on. Only useful for second-language learners I think.
Lothar Scholz wrote:
Learning from failures is giving a different perspective then learning
>from praise.
>And most of the general comparison topics are focused on whats good or
>bad in the programs.
>
>But what is the advise for software developers where they should not
>spend a lot of time?
>Features are implemented and advisertised often just to fill the “me
>too” table column.
>
>Are they just to hard to use from the current state of UX/usage design
>or did you just never found a real usecase for them.
>
Posted by satis
Apr 8, 2019 at 09:50 AM
Luhmann wrote:
>1. Mind Mapping
>I love outlines, but despite having tried dozens of mind mapping apps,
>I’ve never found them useful for me. Maybe because my outlines are so
>text-heavy? I think it only works if you have short entries…
>
One of the things I liked most about Tree for Mac (a horizontal outliner) was its ability to look similar to a one-direction mindmap while easily handling text-heavy nodes. You can see examples of this in this old article:
https://mac.appstorm.net/quick-look/productivity-quick-look/tree-a-new-dimension-in-outlining/
Most of a mindmap’s benefits for me can be found in a good outliner.
I know people who say mindmaps get even better when using an iPad with the ability to use a pencil (to ad lines/nodes, or write directly on the screen) and the ability to move nodes around with a finger, but to me that just means taking one’s hands from the keyboard, possibly picking up a pointing device, then having to put it down to get back to the keyboard. For me negates many the benefits; when I use a mindmap it’s because I want a frictionless place to quickly start to dump ideas and lists, and for me that means keeping my keys on a keyboard.
Also, the candy colors and rounded sans serif fonts the apps tend to use (or have as styles) don’t appeal to me, and it can be difficult or impossible, depending on the app, to create one’s own style. (Actually, that’s a complaint I have with OmniOutliner as well.)
Posted by Stephen Zeoli
Apr 8, 2019 at 11:03 AM
Luhmann wrote:
>3. Check lists
Checklists just remain stuck inside another task. What if an item on your list turns into its own project with its own sub-tasks? Todoist, 2Do, and Taskcade can handle this, but in apps with only checklists, your items are stuck where they are!
I agree with your main point about checkboxes. However, there are definite times I find having them in the notes useful. Case in point: If I am slowly working my way through a book, reading a chapter or two, then taking a break to read something else, I like having a note summarizing what I’ve read and the checkbox list of chapters, so I can see my progress. This, of course, isn’t vital. I can track my progress other ways, but I find the checkbox approach a bit motivational.
Steve Z
Posted by Hugh
Apr 8, 2019 at 11:17 AM
A nit-pick, and an endorsement.:
Luhmann wrote:
>4. Estimated time
>Seems like an absurd thing to include in a task manager. You can tag
>items as “quick” or “major project” but trying to narrow it down to a
>given time frame seems like a fool’s errand - and also a waste of time.
>I do like having “durations” however - which is how 2Do calculates a
>“start date” based on the “due date” without having to enter a given due
>date.
>
One arrangement when “estimated time”/“duration” is useful is - if you’re into what’s been called “hyper-scheduling” - when dragging and dropping Omnifocus 3 tasks into Fantastical 2: Fantastical 2 schedules the task according to what OF 3 calls its “estimated duration” (Ha!).
>5. Grammar check
>The grammar rules included in any contemporary computer - whether apple,
>or the service grammarly, are laughable and no good writer should keep
>these features turned on. Only useful for second-language learners I
>think.
>
>
Absolutely - although I’d add for English at least, for grammar apps and grammar features in other apps the trend is in the direction of slow improvement. Although such apps and features remain broadly inadequate and liable to lead the user astray (in my view), they’re a whole lot less bad than they were even fifteen years ago.