[Design] What's the 'pony in the product'?
andre_mueninghoff at fastmail.fm
Thu Dec 27 11:06:36 PST 2007
I, and I would suspect many others, really appreciate your valuable
insights in this thread about how to position Chandler. I am not quite
following what you've written about Chandler and its suitability for use
with the religion of GTD (love the analogy) and wanted to offer some
thoughts. Echoing one of your comments, perhaps I also have a profound
misunderstanding of GTD or Chandler (or both). You mention a LifeBalance
application, and I'm assuming you mean the Life Balance app by
Llamagraphics. Having used the Life Balance application for many years,
I don't understand how either the Chandler app or the Life Balance app
actively discourages (or encourages, for that matter) turning stuff into
action according to the precepts of GTD any more than or less than a 3X5
Might it be that a kind of philosophy/religion of Chandler Triage is
what is diametrically opposed to the philosophy/religion of GTD as
compared to the product of Chandler? Assuming even a religion of
Chandler Triage that has influenced the design of the Chandler product,
for me, to date, the religion of Chandler Triage is separable from the
product of Chandler. It may be that as I use Chandler with GTD that I
would be graded as failing to apply Chandler Triage. However, similarly,
when I use Life Balance with GTD, I fail at making any use of the
application's namesake, that is, at using the Balance tab to balance my
efforts across the top-level-items (LB-speak) in my Life Balance outline.
When I was using only Life Balance for day-to-day GTD, the most
significant selling point for me was that my information was accessible
from the tools I predominantly used then, Windows-based PCs and a Palm,
not the innovative tools intended to aid the balancing of one's efforts
across different arenas of life. I like and use (in my own way perhaps)
the Chandler triage features, but the current, most significant selling
point for me for Chandler is the CalDAV-based workflows for sharing of
items regardless of kind, that is, not only calendar items, with or
without the rites of Chandler Triage, or GTD for that matter.
Phillip J. Eby wrote:
> Except we are not actually *addressing* that problem, because Chandler
> actively *discourages* turning "stuff" into action. This is the place
> where it diametrically opposes the GTD philosophy, which states that
> the only way to actually get things done is to convert your "stuff"
> into actions that are concrete.
More information about the Design