Todoist vs Things 3: I Used Both for 6 Months

I missed a deadline.

It wasn’t dramatic. A minor client deliverable, nothing that would tank the project. But it bothered me in a way that stuck.

I’d been running multiple “systems”: notes on my phone, reminders buried in email, and an elaborate collection of mental lists that felt impressive until they failed me. When I transitioned to full-time remote work, the cracks became chasms. Without the structure of an office, my days blended together. Meetings, deep work blocks, client deliverables, and admin tasks all happened in the same physical space.

My brain needed one place to put everything so it could finally relax.

That realization launched a six-month experiment testing the two productivity apps that kept surfacing in every introvert forum I visited: Todoist and Things 3. Not in parallel (I learned that mistake early) but in dedicated testing phases that revealed surprising truths about how introverts actually work.

Why Most Productivity Advice Fails Introverts

Here’s what nobody tells you about productivity systems: most are designed for people who thrive in chaos.

Busy dashboards. Constant notifications. Achievement streaks. Points and badges. Collaborative boards you’ll never use. These features reflect an extroverted philosophy that equates motion with progress and noise with productivity.

The extroverted approach to productivity? Act fast and often.

The introverted approach? Think deliberately and act once.

As an INTJ, I don’t need motivation. I need clarity. My task management system has to function like an operating system: everything must have a place, a purpose, and a justified reason to exist.

Research in cognitive load theory supports this distinction. Working memory can only process a limited number of information elements at once. Extraneous cognitive load (the mental effort wasted on poor interface design and unnecessary complexity) directly reduces our capacity to handle intrinsic cognitive load, the actual work we’re trying to accomplish.

For introverts who already expend significant energy navigating social demands, protecting cognitive resources isn’t optional. It’s essential.

The Testing Protocol: Three Phases Over Six Months

I structured my comparison into three distinct phases:

Phase 1 (Months 1-2): Todoist as primary system
I used projects, labels, recurring tasks, and natural language input daily. I tracked every feature, noting which ones added value versus which ones added noise.

Phase 2 (Months 3-4): Things 3 as primary system
I focused on Areas, Today, Upcoming, and checklists. The manual nature initially felt inefficient until I realized what it was actually doing.

Phase 3 (Months 5-6): Weekly alternation
This is where the real differences emerged. Switching between systems every week revealed friction points I’d missed and clarified which approach actually supported my introvert energy management patterns.

Throughout all phases, I tracked:

• Task completion rates
• Feelings of overwhelm
• Friction points in daily use
• Interface calmness
• Speed of capture and processing
• Weekly review clarity

The Fatal Mistake I Made Early

My biggest misstep happened in the first two weeks: I tried running both systems simultaneously.

The logic seemed sound. Test them “live” in parallel, compare them directly, make the obvious choice.

Instead, I confused myself. I duplicated work. I missed tasks. I created the exact disorganization these systems were meant to eliminate.

It left me feeling scattered, the precise thing I was trying to fix. That crushing weight in my chest returned, the one that made me realize I needed a better system in the first place.

Here’s what I learned the hard way: decision fatigue compounds cognitive load. Every time I had to choose where to put a task, I depleted the mental resources I needed to actually do the task. We make an estimated 35,000 decisions daily. Adding “which system gets this task?” to that list was self-sabotage.

I abandoned the parallel approach. One system at a time. Complete commitment. Only then did I start seeing real patterns.

Todoist: Speed and Automation for the Systematic Mind

What Todoist Does Brilliantly

Quick capture is genuinely fast
The natural language input works exactly as advertised. “Email client proposal tomorrow at 2pm #work @deep-work p1” creates a fully tagged, prioritized, scheduled task instantly.

For INTJs who think in systems, this feels intuitive. You’re essentially using a command-line interface for task management. Type → parse → done.

Automation reduces repeated decisions
Recurring tasks, filters, and automatic sorting meant I could build systems once and let them run. Weekly reviews happened automatically every Sunday at 10am. Deep work blocks appeared in my Today view based on labels and priorities.

The cognitive load reduction was real. According to research on task management psychology, personality traits significantly influence how knowledge workers choose and benefit from productivity tools. People with high conscientiousness scores (common among introverts) benefit most from systematic, rules-based approaches.

Cross-platform consistency
Every device had the same interface, the same shortcuts, the same behavior. No cognitive switching costs when moving from laptop to phone.

Where Todoist Created Friction

The Today list became a guilt machine
Here’s what nobody mentions: Todoist’s automation can work against you.

I set up recurring tasks. Created filters. Built complex label systems. Then watched my Today view explode with 47 tasks I definitely wasn’t completing today.

One week during Phase 1, I found myself staring at a list that had essentially duplicated itself through poorly configured rules. Every refresh added more items. The system designed to reduce overwhelm had become a source of it.

Gamification feels exhausting
Streaks. Karma points. Achievement levels. For some people, these provide motivation. For introverts who already battle perfectionism, they add pressure.

I started checking tasks off just to maintain my streak, not because they mattered. The system was managing me rather than serving me.

Visual noise compounds by the third month
The interface isn’t busy by objective standards. But after 90 days of seeing project colors, priority numbers, label tags, and filter views, I noticed something: opening Todoist never felt calm.

My morning routine started feeling reactive instead of intentional. The app was showing me everything I could do, which activated anxiety about everything I wasn’t doing.

Things 3: Intentionality Over Efficiency

What Things 3 Does Differently

The interface feels peaceful
I know how this sounds. Who cares about aesthetics in a productivity app? But here’s what happened: every morning I opened Things 3, I took a breath instead of tensing up.

The white space. The typography. The lack of visual noise. These weren’t superficial choices. They were cognitive load management through design psychology.

Manual planning forces better thinking
Things 3’s “limitation” turned into its greatest strength: it makes you think about what actually matters.

No automatic sorting meant I had to decide which three tasks were genuinely important today. No recurring task explosions meant I had to consciously choose to reschedule or delete. No complex filter systems meant I had to use Areas and Projects intentionally.

This manual approach initially felt inefficient. Then I realized: the five minutes I spent each morning thoughtfully planning my day prevented three hours of scattered, reactive work.

The Today view stays manageable
Because nothing appears in Today unless you put it there, the list never explodes. During Phase 2, my Today view averaged 4-7 tasks. All of them chosen deliberately. All of them actually possible to complete.

Checklists support deep work blocks
Here’s a subtle feature that transformed my workflow: turning complex tasks into project checklists with individual items.

Instead of seeing “Finish client proposal” looming on my list, I saw:

• Draft executive summary (15 min)
• Create timeline visual (30 min)
• Write budget breakdown (20 min)
• Add case studies (45 min)

Breaking down resistance before it built up. Making the next action obvious. Reducing the cognitive load of figuring out where to start.

Where Things 3 Falls Short

Capture speed is slower
No natural language parsing. No smart scheduling. You type the task name, manually set the date, manually choose the project, manually add tags.

For quick capture during meetings or when an idea strikes mid-task, this friction adds up.

No cross-platform
Things 3 only exists in Apple’s ecosystem. If you use Windows at work or Android anywhere, it’s not an option.

Limited automation
Recurring tasks exist but lack Todoist’s sophistication. No filters. No automatic sorting. No complex rule systems.

For some introverts, this simplicity is the point. For others who think in systems and algorithms, it feels restrictive.

Higher upfront cost
Things 3 requires separate purchases for Mac, iPhone, and iPad. Todoist offers a free tier and subscription pricing that works across all devices.

The Breakthrough: When I Finally Understood

My perspective shifted around week 10, deep into the Things 3 phase.

I realized: the tool doesn’t create focus. The structure does.

Both systems could support my work. The real question was which approach matched how my introvert brain actually processes tasks and makes decisions.

Todoist optimized for speed and efficiency. Things 3 optimized for intentionality and calm.

I’m an INTJ who needs clarity over motion. I spent twenty years in marketing agency leadership learning that systematic analysis wasn’t a weakness to overcome. It was my competitive advantage. The best decisions came from careful thinking, not rapid execution.

My task system needed to reflect that reality.

Once I simplified my workflows in both apps (removing the guilt-inducing features in Todoist, accepting the manual nature of Things 3) something clicked. The specific tool mattered less than the thoughtful structure I brought to it.

Decision Framework: Which One Fits Your Introvert Work Style

After 180 days and approximately 2,847 tasks completed across both systems, here’s what I learned about choosing between them.

Choose Todoist if you:

• Think in systems and rules
• Want extensive automation
• Need cross-platform access
• Prefer keyboard shortcuts and command-line efficiency
• Don’t mind visual complexity
• Value feature richness over simplicity
• Work across multiple devices and operating systems

Choose Things 3 if you:

• Need visual calm to focus
• Prefer manual, intentional planning
• Work exclusively in Apple’s ecosystem
• Want clean aesthetics
• Fight perfectionism and analysis paralysis
• Value peace of mind over feature abundance
• Tend toward overwhelm with busy interfaces

The Real Question to Ask

Here’s what it ultimately came down to for me: Which tool makes my brain feel calmer on Monday morning?

Not which has more features. Not which is more efficient on paper. Which one reduces the mental friction between me and the work that matters?

For me, that was Things 3.

What I Use Now and Why

I’ve been using Things 3 as my primary system for eight months since the experiment ended.

My capture isn’t as fast as it was with Todoist. My recurring tasks require more manual management. I can’t build elaborate filter systems or automation rules.

But when I open Things 3 in the morning, I take a breath instead of tensing up.

I look at my Today list and see three to five tasks I actually chose, not 47 that algorithms decided I should do. I plan my week thoughtfully rather than reactively. I end Friday feeling accomplished instead of guilty about what I didn’t finish.

The peace is worth the manual effort.

That said, I keep Todoist for specific contexts:

• Collaborative projects with external teams
• Complex recurring task sequences
• Cross-platform work when traveling

Neither system is universally better. They serve different working styles, different cognitive preferences, different needs.

Lessons That Apply to Any Productivity System

1. Captures should be fast, reviews should be slow

Quick capture means lower friction to getting tasks out of your head. But reviewing and planning should be deliberate, thoughtful, intentional.

2. Contexts matter more than categories

Your task list should reflect your energy states and work environments. “Deep work,” “Low energy,” “Quick wins”: these contexts help you work with your natural rhythms instead of against them.

3. Fewer tasks equal more consistency

Three intentional tasks completed beats 47 aspirational tasks that create guilt. Quality and completion matter more than ambitious lists.

4. If your system isn’t calming your brain, it’s not your system

The right productivity tool should reduce cognitive load, not add to it. If opening your task manager makes you anxious, something’s wrong.

5. The tool doesn’t create discipline

I see this mistake constantly: people switching productivity apps every few months, convinced the next one will magically solve their problems.

The app won’t make you disciplined. The app won’t overcome procrastination. The app won’t fix poor planning or unclear priorities.

What the right app can do is get out of your way while you build the habits that matter.

The Unexpected Discovery: Emotional Tone Matters

Here’s something I didn’t expect to matter: the emotional experience of using the app.

Todoist felt efficient and powerful. Things 3 felt calm and peaceful.

Both completed the same function (managing tasks) but the psychological experience was dramatically different.

When I asked myself which tool I was more likely to open proactively (rather than avoidantly), the answer was clear. Things 3’s calm interface invited planning. Todoist’s feature-rich interface reminded me of everything I wasn’t doing.

This aligns with research showing that environment significantly impacts cognitive function. We focus better in spaces that feel calm. We think more clearly when our tools don’t activate our stress response.

For introverts who already manage high cognitive load from social interactions and external stimulation, choosing tools that add peace instead of pressure isn’t luxury. It’s strategic thinking.

What Would I Tell My Younger Self

Looking back at that missed deadline that started this experiment, here’s what I’d say:

Don’t build a complex system when what you need is a calm one.

Productivity tools should reduce thinking, not add layers of it. The goal isn’t to manage more tasks. It’s to accomplish the right ones with less mental friction.

Choose the system that respects silence. No noise. No overwhelm. No constant dopamine loops designed to keep you engaged.

Pick something that helps you think clearly and then gets out of your way.

The best productivity system is the one that feels peaceful when you open it.

This article is part of our Introvert Tools & Products Hub , explore the full guide here.

About the Author

Keith Lacy is an introvert who’s learned to embrace his true self later in life. With a background in marketing and a successful career in media and advertising, Keith has worked with some of the world’s biggest brands. As a senior leader in the industry, he has built a wealth of knowledge in marketing strategy. Now, he’s on a mission to educate both introverts and extroverts about the power of introversion and how understanding this personality trait can unlock new levels of productivity, self-awareness, and success.