Schedule Management Report

Table of Contents

Project Report - This article is part of a series.

Part 1: Analysis Report on the Note-to-Blog Project

Part 2: This Article

A Schedule Management Software Functionality Analysis Report.

Foreword
#

The schedule management software discussed in this article refers to software with the following features:

Support for individual users
Capability for daily scheduling
If additional features are included, they must not compromise the core scheduling functionality

Desired Features:

Task Management: Create and edit tasks, set task priorities and categories
Procrastination Analysis & Focus Monitoring: Record task delays, procrastination analysis, focus time tracking, and automatic reminders
Smart Adjustment Engine: Automatically adjust subsequent schedules if a task is delayed or completed early
Smart Suggestions: Provide users with schedule improvement suggestions based on related data to help them take control of their time

Current Project Status
#

The current status of the project primarily involves analyzing the features of well-established schedule management software in the market to identify essential features and distinguishing features.

Static Schedule Management
#

TickTick
#

TickTick offers a comprehensive set of features with a simple design, making it convenient for daily schedule management. Its scheduling logic can be summarized as follows:

graph LR; id1("Schedule Collection")-->id2("Manual Schedule Setup")-->id3("Execute Schedule On Time"); id2("Manual Schedule Setup")-->id4("Missed Schedule")-->id5("Manual Adjustment");

Analysis and Evaluation
#

Manual Schedule Adjustment is an essential part of static schedule management and is the most time-consuming process. While TickTick allows users to create time blocks for scheduling, it lacks the ability for dynamic adjustments. This is not problematic for fixed schedules with clear start and end times, typically dictated by external factors.

However, for softer, more flexible tasks—such as memorizing 15 words, doing laundry, or reading a magazine—these tasks don’t have specific start times and just need to be completed by the end of the day. Moreover, they lack a clear end time. For instance, memorizing 15 words may take 30 minutes, but on some days, the task might be completed in just 20 minutes when the user is in a good state.

These fragmented tasks pose a significant challenge to static scheduling. Although a single task’s delay or early completion may not affect the overall schedule, their cumulative effect can significantly disrupt the schedule.

Additionally, when these tasks aren’t aligned, they can create time gaps, where users suddenly don’t know what to do. For example, if the user finishes memorizing the words early and has 10 minutes of free time, without a clear plan, they might waste that time on short videos. This leads to a cycle of delays as subsequent tasks may not be completed on time or might be rushed, leading to more time gaps.

To break this negative cycle, there are three solutions:

Manual Adjustment by the User: This would be very tedious, as it wastes valuable time on rearranging small tasks. Moreover, time spent on manual adjustments could lead to further delays.
No Adjustment, Ignoring Specific Time Control: This would render the schedule management ineffective, as it loses its primary purpose of maximizing time value through precise scheduling. At this point, using a simple task list tool without time control might be a better choice.
Strict Adherence to the Schedule: This is theoretically ideal but practically ineffective. Unexpected events are inevitable in daily life, and delays can compress the time for subsequent tasks, leading to either unfinished tasks or rushed work. Conversely, if a task is completed early, it’s difficult to add a suitable task to fill the time gap, resulting in wasted time.

Time Gaps and Their Negative Cycle are the Critical Flaws of Static Schedule Management Software, severely limiting its market acceptance. As a result, the common belief is that schedule management software is only suitable for highly self-disciplined individuals and is considered a niche product designed for them.

I’ve personally used several schedule management tools, but none of them were sustainable for me: either the learning curve was too steep, or I struggled to stick to a fixed schedule.

Therefore, a truly meaningful time management software should not require users to have a perfectly organized life or strictly adhere to their schedules. Instead, it should provide solutions for unexpected situations: motivate users to complete tasks ahead of time, discourage procrastination, and quickly generate new schedules after delays, preventing users from abandoning their plans.

Dynamic Schedule Management
#

Dynamic schedule management traditionally relied on specific algorithms, but in recent years, due to significant breakthroughs in AI, most dynamic scheduling is now driven by large language models.

During my research, I noticed something peculiar: there are almost no AI-driven dynamic scheduling tools in China; however, many similar products exist abroad, often at a very high cost and not user-friendly for Chinese users.

Motion
#

Motion is said to be a highly advanced AI scheduling tool, but it’s expensive. Additionally, domestic users don’t have access to foreign bank cards, so even the 7-day free trial isn’t accessible. Hence, I couldn’t gather detailed workflow information 😢

However, based on the official website and online reviews, it seems like it offers impressive functionality.

Dola
#

Dola is a futuristic AI scheduling software with a unique approach: it has no software interface, and communication happens entirely via common messaging platforms such as WhatsApp, Apple Messages, etc. However, it doesn’t support domestic platforms like QQ or WeChat.

Since I don’t have accounts on these international platforms, I couldn’t test it firsthand 😢 But this minimalist approach to human-computer interaction seems like the future trend 🤔

Based on official information, I have roughly outlined the user flow:

graph LR; id1("Send message through messaging platform")-->id2("AI analyzes and generates schedule")-->id3("Store schedule internally"); id1("Send message through messaging platform")-->id4("AI analyzes and modifies schedule"); id1("Send message through messaging platform")-->id5("AI analyzes and returns query results");

While scheduling still requires the user’s input, it simplifies the process by using natural language. Dynamic adjustments, however, are not supported.

Analysis and Evaluation
#

In theory, AI-driven dynamic schedule management should be more effective, as users can describe their schedules in natural language and AI can adjust the schedule accordingly. Through detailed reasoning, the AI could optimize the schedule based on a high-quality knowledge base or user-specific information.

However, it’s important to note the limitations of artificial intelligence: instruction misunderstanding, large model hallucinations, high usage costs, slow response times, the need for substantial initialization data for optimal performance (theoretically, reinforcement fine-tuning could solve this but is costly), and data privacy concerns.

Summary
#

Currently, effective and easy-to-use schedule management tools are rare in China, even though there’s strong demand for good scheduling solutions. This project is worth exploring.

Project Report - This article is part of a series.

Part 1: Analysis Report on the Note-to-Blog Project

Part 2: This Article