There’s a phenomenon that I both understand and don’t understand. That phenomenon is happy Emacs or Org users feeling the need to try out every alternative that comes their way. Notice I said “happy” users. If Emacs or Org isn’t working for you, then of course you’d seek an alternative. What I’m talking about are those who’re happy with their Emacs/Org experience.
On the one hand, I can understand the eternal search for the best possible tools and that entails trying out new candidates. On the other hand—unless you’re a software reviewer—your job is not to find the best editor or outliner/todo manager. When you find one that meets your needs well, it’s time to stop actively searching and fallback to “stumble on mode”. By that, I mean if you stumble across an app that for one reason or another appears to meet your needs better, it’s worth giving it a look. Otherwise, spend your tool cycles mastering the ones you already have.
Eric MacAdie has come to a similar conclusion. For a long time he kept a list of Org mode alternatives that he planned to try out. The list got longer and longer and one day he realized that Org met all his needs and, given Org’s extensibility, was likely to continue to meet his needs in the future.
He’s got a great quote from a Hacker News discussion on one of those alternatives. I’ll let you read it on his site or at the link above but the TL;DR is that if you’re looking for a plain text outliner/todo manger you can not do better and are unlikely to ever do better than Org mode. Not only is Org better than anything else, it’s not even close. The quote reminds me of Neal Stephenson’s line about Emacs outshining its competition.
If you believe that it’s somehow incumbent upon you to always be searching for something better than Org even though Org is meeting all your needs, take a look at MacAdie’s post and be disabused.