![omnifocus 3 single action list omnifocus 3 single action list](https://cdn.shopify.com/s/files/1/0465/7148/7392/products/KTI-Pump3qt5_7799523d-a4f7-4c88-87af-f35325ebf23b_1024x1024.jpg)
I guess it always boils down to personal preference. I guess it may be a foothold for some people, but I prefer the versatility to build my system however I see fit. But I don’t really structure my stuff like that. I could, if I wanted to, replicate this in OmniFocus. While it might be nice to some, I don’t really work this way. In fact, Things forces a default methodology upon you: Today/Upcoming/Anytime/etc. Mind you, nothing is more than 3 levels deep in my setup (Folder / Project/List > Task > Subtasks but I find it flexible to organise how I want to.įlexibility. I’ve said it before: Things only has a limited hierarchy, while OmniFocus allows you to structure things better. And I believe reviewing really sets OmniFocus apart from the rest. You’d just go over the tasks, whereas OmniFocus allows you to create intervals for reviewing and presents you with a dedicated process. You could do this in Things, but it wouldn’t be a formal process. There’s not really a workaround in Things. I don’t want nor need to see a task I cannot start without finishing the previous one. I find that the default parallel tasks view in Things clutters up the view.
![omnifocus 3 single action list omnifocus 3 single action list](https://i9.skinnerinc.com/unsafe/750/1206750.jpg)
Just adding my thoughts here, and I’m not strictly referring to GTD.