[madamelic]

I love tools like this but I am currently in a cycle where I question why a tool has to operate like this.

These text-driven tools always come across like "programming the space shuttle to drive down the street for ice cream". Like, do we really need... all of this. It's beautiful and neat but does it solve the problem in a user friendly way?

Sometimes it seems like there is a lost art to simple but deep products. Many of these replacements tools are starting to seem more about demonstrating how nerdy you are by over-complicating the solution in a novel one-off way.

A great example of this, in my opinion, is Taskwarrior's sync in both 2.0 and 3.0. Just use auto-discovery of peers using a shared secret key then negotiate the connection seamlessly. I don't want to do SSL setup so I can have my tasks on two computers.

[squigz]

> Many of these replacements tools are starting to seem more about demonstrating how nerdy you are by over-complicating the solution in a novel one-off way.

This is a really pessimistic view on a tool that has been developed since the 80s.

Some people just enjoy the power tools like this - and the CLI in general - offer. You don't need "all of this"? Well then don't use it! That's sort of the beauty of it - it can cover basic needs and much more complicated needs.

That said, I think more users would use more powerful software if they gave it a shot. Unfortunately, many users get intimidated by slightly-user-unfriendly UX and instead go use software where they have little choices. So instead of adapting software to their workflow, they adapt their workflow to the software.

[skydhash]

The nice aspect of these text driven tools is in the name. Being text driven means they are nearly universal. There's nothing more versatile than text on a computer. When I think on anything that operate on text, it feels more like having a set of workflow that act on my data, that the computer doing (and someone else) doing obscure incantation.

> I don't want to do SSL setup so I can have my tasks on two computers.

I use to think that way, then I found that I never use two computers at the same time. At most it would be using one to remote on another, or using one to do stuff I can't do on another (like browsing the web when installing an OS). So I just use my laptop as my main computer. I have some files on my home server and mostly use my phone for HN reading and communication. If I really want to sync something, I just share files using sftp/smb/http/....

[jrm4]

For me it's not "overcomplication," it's strong interoperability with a workflow I like, specifically one that was kind of complicated to write once, but afterwards operates in a way such that I don't have to think at all.

I've been using this for years, so perhaps today there may be some voice or AI driven way to do this but -- first I add weekly events. And for one off events, I have a bash script that's like "whats the event?" then "what's the date/time" using standard linux date formatting, and returns an error and loops if wrong. (So e.g. "tomorrow" works, or "monday 4pm"

Then for retrieval, I can have it do notify prompts, and/or be a part of my bash prompt, and also throw up a nice HTML calendar.

[skydhash]

Most of these tools are something you set once, write some scripts if it's a CLI, then forget about until someone tries to make a breaking change. Then you switch to the fork that maintains the old feature set.

[jrm4]

I mean, exactly. AFAIK, Remind hasn't changed in years and neither has my workflow.

(relatedly literally writing this from Openbox; sometimes software is actually just finished)