Comments on: Big New Release @ RescueTime

By: dan lundmark

dan lundmark — Sat, 01 Nov 2008 19:15:07 +0000

Great work – I considered many of these questions myself in blog posts a couple years ago while designing the Blossom productivity app, check it out http://mydreamapp.com/contestants/view/danlundmark/ I did not use the term filters, instead I used Profiles that you could select based on what you’re doing at the time (Work, Home, Client Project, etc). This is important since some people use the same website or app for both ‘work’ and ‘play’ depending on time of day, or even moment by moment (lunch break).

By: Tom

Tom — Tue, 14 Oct 2008 16:55:26 +0000

Being that you can rate your own tasks by productiveness, the scores are totally meaningless as is the comparison… am I right? Tell me if I am wrong…

If I rate work as 2, and personal as -2, and someone else rates work as 2 and personal as -1, then their score is incomparable to mine… no?

I think there should be ‘shared’ tags (like work and personal), and the system could match you up against similar people (i.e. ALL of my tasks are marked either work or personal).

By: Felipe Veiga "Dent VII"

Felipe Veiga "Dent VII" — Mon, 13 Oct 2008 21:25:40 +0000

Awesome.
I would suggest the ranking tool to be not only a comparison with other users but also with yourself from the past (like “ghost” races in racing games).
Anyway, keep up the good job and congratulations!

Thanks a lot guys!

By: Schoonzie

Schoonzie — Mon, 13 Oct 2008 05:09:38 +0000

Filters are awesome.

I had previously set up the client to only record during work hours, but I couldn’t stop it recording on the weekends, so now it records everything and I can just filter by weekdays.

Thanks guys!

By: Donnie Berkholz

Donnie Berkholz — Sun, 12 Oct 2008 21:14:31 +0000

Now how do I create filter-based goals? For example, I want to spend a certain amount of night/weekend time on a side project. Currently, I can only choose between “day” or “weekday.”

By: John Cook

John Cook — Fri, 10 Oct 2008 16:13:37 +0000

Clarification and Apologies on the last post: Upon rereading the comments by Tony Wright I noticed that the new efficiency measure is absolute (not relative), which addresses my biggest concern. Thanks, and sorry for presuming otherwise.

However, I still do not know how it is calculated (presumably the productivity score * time in program / total computer time?). I would also appreciate a productivity score, since for me a certain level of productivity is my daily goal. And if you can allow users to write their own productivity algorithm, that would be the best of all (since my productivity in different programs are not simple multiples of each other, and there are diminishing returns over usage to some programs, such as gmail). Lastly, I presume that programs are still coded as the average of the productivity of their tags? I think it would be easier if the tags were additive.
Thanks!

By: John Cook

John Cook — Fri, 10 Oct 2008 05:15:29 +0000

The new efficiency measure is meaningless. I do not know the base population, their coding routines, nor are they an unchanging group. RescueTime may continue to woo users who like pretty graphics, but the power users will migrate elsewhere unless RT either allows the user to access their own data or provides sufficient flexibility (and sensibility) in the summary and visualization of the data.

The ideal for RescueTime should be to provide the user with data in a flexible variety of formats. Simple users can take the one-size meaningless “efficiency” measure. Or, if the user understands math and can build their own productivity and efficiency algorithm, then they should be allowed to do this (and then share their algorithms with others). A simple example: Code the productivity of programs/websites on a many-valued scale (say from 0 to 100). To assess daily or weekly or monthly productivity: multiply productivity per program by the time spent active in that program. Walla. A measure of productivity that is constant across time, has an absolute underlying referent and so can give rise to meaningful productivity ratios (twice the score means twice as productive),
and can be further refined to suit the user. A measure of efficiency: productivity / time. Time can be either active computer time or total work-day time or whatever the user wants.

By: Balaji Dutt

Balaji Dutt — Thu, 09 Oct 2008 05:27:01 +0000

Hey Tony!

Just took a look at the new features – the one I love the most is the filters (especially since it makes my score look a lot better )

Wishlist for Filters – could you add the ability to set time in 1/2 hour increments (for example, 6:30 PM instead of 6:00PM) and could we define a lunch-hour as well – I often catch up on feeds during that time and don’t want it to distort my stats.

By: Australian Outback

Australian Outback — Thu, 09 Oct 2008 03:11:43 +0000

This is just bloody awesome, i’ve always loved your work. You just don’t know how much of an impact your having on the rest of us. This software just does what it does, amazing.

With this filter it’s even better, you don’t want to stuff up your score but you also want to know what you’re up to. Crikey, these filters do just that. Thanks Matey.

Cheers,
Leo.

By: Tony Wright

Tony Wright — Tue, 07 Oct 2008 20:11:01 +0000

@Ateeb Well, the old scoring system also depended on the honesty of users. It’s not THAT bad to depend on this– the vast majority of our users are free/voluntary users and thus not overly incentivized to actually LIE. The only real difference is that the new system is an absolute number– it’s actually quite a bit more accurate than the previous system (in addition to being clearer).

Sorry it’s not an improvement for you- virtually any feature we launch is going to frustrate someone. We’d love to offer multiple options, but that is an expensive option and would take time away from other improvements.

Regardless, thanks for the feedback!