Filed under: Software, Productivity
Things public preview released
Things, the up-and-coming darling of the über-productive, due-date-defying, thing-doing GTD crowd has released a public preview today. And I, as your hyphen-wielding blogger, am duly excited.
A few of us here at TUAW have been playing with the private alpha of Things for a while. Things provides a unique and flexible way to handle tasks that can be refreshing for those who didn't quite get the whole GTD thing the first time around. Of course, you can adhere to strict GTD principles with it, but you can also forge a system that works for you using its tagging system and flexible project management tools. It even has some delegation capabilities that other GTD apps are lacking right now. Plus, it's downright pretty.
What Things is noticeably lacking at this point is a really great means of integrating with Mail and AppleScript support. Of course, if there were AppleScript support, Mail support would be a cinch. You can pop up the quick entry window with a hotkey and drag a Mail 3.1 message onto the notes section to create a link to that email; I'd just like to be able to incorporate Mail-Act-On or any faster means of getting my email-based tasks into my task manager.
Overall, this release from Cultured Code is very buzzworthy, both in the GTD community and for those on the periphery. If you're feeling like being productive, take it for a spin.
![TUAW [Cafepress]](http://www.blogsmithmedia.com/www.tuaw.com/media/tuaw-cafepress-promo.png)
Reader Comments (Page 1 of 2)
Pete Zich said 11:47AM on 1-04-2008
Wasn't this released with the last mupromo?
Reply
mentalsticks said 12:43PM on 1-04-2008
Nope, that was the non-public Alpha release.
AC said 11:47AM on 1-04-2008
You're my blue sky, you're my sunny day
Lord, you know it makes me high when you turn your love my way
Reply
Adam Teece said 12:04PM on 1-04-2008
I've been using the alpha for a while and it is pretty nice. But I think I will have to go with OmniFocus. Mainly because the structure of it is much more conducive to my workflow. That and it is made by OmniGroup which we all know makes amazing software.
Reply
Bryan Hughes said 12:28PM on 1-04-2008
Personally, I prefer OmniFocus compared to Things. Granted, neither product is a finished *ahem* product, but OmniGroup's history of developing polished, well-designed applications speaks for itself.
TUAW, why not do a comparison between the two GTD apps?
Reply
Brett Terpstra said 12:47PM on 1-04-2008
@Bryan: That is most definitely in the cards.
Reply
Dennis said 12:48PM on 1-04-2008
I also tried Things for a few days but ultimately decided to buy an OmniFocus license instead. Things has some nice features, but overall, I think OmniFocus is the better app for me. I find it more intuitive and easier to track a large number of projects.
Besides, the Omni Group has a long-standing track record of excellent applications. That's not to say Cultured Code isn't also good, but the Omni Gorup has already proven themselves many times over.
Reply
Zack Mahdavi said 8:49PM on 1-04-2008
As an FYI, Cultured Code announced pricing for Things. It will be $49, or $39 if you sign up for their newsletter by January 31st.
I've been using the alpha version of Things, and I really enjoy it. However, I don't think it's worth $40, as it seems like it's more of a $20 app. I will probably go back to iGTD instead.
Reply
look said 2:52PM on 1-04-2008
@ Zack
if Omnifocus worth $79.95 than Things worth $100...seriously, Things got so much more potential...
Reply
Alan said 1:40PM on 1-04-2008
OmniFocus has gotten a lot better recently, but I prefer Things. They're both good apps though.
OmniFocus literally forces you into David Allen's GTD framework. You can hide the start, end, and estimated time columns, but there's no way to hide the context column, so you're pretty much forced to use it. I find that approach somewhat annoying... if I've already ordered my tasks into hierarchies, why should I spend time assigning contexts as well? It just feels very heavyweight. Also, OmniFocus doesn't let you assign multiple contexts to an item (e.g. if something could be done at work OR home), which is another reason I don't like to use its contexts implementation.
Things is easier to get into and more lightweight, while also allowing you to craft a system you like. Want to use contexts? Great, you can. Don't want to? Fine. You can tag an item with multiple contexts (e.g. work or home) easily. It just seems a lot more well thought out from the ground-up. It also doesn't look like a spreadsheet, which makes OmniFocus intimidating if you enable two or three of the optional columns (start date, etc.).
There are still a few features missing from Things (e.g. repeating tasks which they've promised to add and hierarchies), but it's still in beta. Despite that, I think it's even now a better app than OmniFocus.
Reply
Ethan Schoonover said 2:18PM on 1-04-2008
We at Omni are very excited to see the personal task management market continue to grow with new entrants like Things. When I first built Kinkless out of Applescript and duct tape, there were very few "modern" (or GTDable) task management applications. That's definitely changed and everyone interested in personal task management benefits (well, everyone on a Mac, at least ;).
We'll have a pretty nice trial-period policy for OmniFocus once it launches and I encourage anyone interested to try it and compare with the other applications out there and then choose the one that fits best for them. This isn't some way of slyly trying to say "hey, *we're* really the best for you". I really believe that everyone has different needs and they may want a different application to meet those.
That being said, we've worked very hard to make sure that OmniFocus fits a lot of different life/work styles. If there's something you'd like to see in OmniFocus, please drop by our forums: http://forums.omnigroup.com/
(As an aside it is possible to use as either a GTD app or a non-GTD app and I'll be posting more information and videos about this soon.)
OmniFocus has a lot of power under the hood that we'll be making use of as we continue active development of the app. While I don't want to get into specifics here, we'll keep you posted with our plans for new features as we develop them.
Come visit us at Macworld this year and either I or one of the other Omni folks will be happy to demo OmniFocus and explore how it can fit your life/workstyle.
Alan said 2:39PM on 1-04-2008
Ethan, even though I prefer Things, I appreciate your work. A lot of these applications definitely draw some inspiration from your early work (iGTD moreso than Things) and having alternatives is always great.
I do think though that more time should have been spent at the beginning of OmniFocus' development thinking about how to make it a more general tool. It still has a very strong Kinkless flavor and a lot of those decisions seem heavily "baked in" to the interface and how the program works at this point. A lot of OmniFocus feels pretty ad-hoc, like it has evolved by having bits duct-taped on rather than being thought out cleanly from the beginning... "singletons" being the best example of this, but you just have to look at the changelists every time a new version comes out to see that small ad-hoc behaviors are being changed quite frequently.
Maybe I have high standards, but I am very familiar with the old Windows task manager Ecco, which used a very simple, fully orthogonal data model but allowed for all the functionality of OmniFocus. Things has that kind of clean architecture. It has a data model that's at once simple, powerful, and fully orthogonal.
Your claim that it's possible to use OmniFocus as a non-GTD tool is true, but only painfully. For instance it is impossible to turn off the contexts column, impossible to turn off having the context dumped to iCal when syncing with iCal, impossible to turn off "next actions", etc. In a way this is kind of unfortunate, as OmniFocus could make a great hierarchical task manager in its own right, with a nice date engine (start, end dates, recurring tasks). There's no need for all the GTD baggage for those who don't want it.
I do commend you for having the best recurring task engine of any OS X app right now, but it still isn't perfect. There is no way, for instance, to make a task (e.g. a rent payment) recur on the last day of every month.
zx said 1:53PM on 1-04-2008
Things is definitely a better app than Omnifocus. it's just more clever and cleaner.
also, the design makes Omnifocus looks like some app from the 90's
zx
Reply
Dave Barnes said 2:16PM on 1-04-2008
I went to the Things website and immediately eliminated Things from consideration.
Why?
No user forum.
I refuse to buy software from companies that don't have a user forum. Fora are just too useful for getting general help and solving nasty problems.
Reply
Arlo said 2:26PM on 1-04-2008
Given that iGTD simply isn't working on Leopard for me, time to switch, maybe...
Reply
ron said 2:36PM on 1-04-2008
Things makes me smile:) i love the flawless design and the super smart interface. it's exactly what you want from a To-Do manager.
*Omni is a great company! but they can't keep up with the new generation. very bad interface design and an old fashion way of thinking.
Reply
Stephen Lang said 4:00PM on 1-04-2008
For those looking for cheaper yet still elegant solutions, Actiontastic is very nice (and free). I used that for awhile, then switched to TaskPaper, which I find best for my use due to its simple text file format.
But yeah, there are a million and one apps now out there, which is a great thing. Many are great apps that will simply appeal to different types of users.
Reply
Aaron Miller said 4:10PM on 1-04-2008
Whoever gets the best integration with the iPhone going will win in my book. I am out and about a lot. Not having a good way to add and manage tasks on my iPhone is killing me.
Reply
Josh said 10:00PM on 1-04-2008
I'll go with Anxiety. It is free, simple, and light as all get-up.
Reply
roz said 5:53PM on 1-04-2008
Omnifocus is very yucky to my tastes. This however seems like the first app that of this breed that seems worth using.
Reply