FV and FVP Forum > "Final Version" - what about a new name?
Scott:
<< It is also very difficult to find "Final Version" in a search engine.>>
I checked Google just now for final version (without quotes) and it is on p. 2 of _Australian_ Google. That's a lot faster than AutoFocus or SuperFocus got into an equivalent position even in United Kingdom Google.
If in doubt I suggest you tell your friends to google my name.
<< It is also very difficult to find "Final Version" in a search engine.>>
I checked Google just now for final version (without quotes) and it is on p. 2 of _Australian_ Google. That's a lot faster than AutoFocus or SuperFocus got into an equivalent position even in United Kingdom Google.
If in doubt I suggest you tell your friends to google my name.
March 16, 2012 at 14:12 |
Mark Forster
Mark Forster
In case it wasn't clear, my interest in this topic is because I am literally BURSTING to tell people about this. I'm not trying to diminish FV in any way. I believe Mark has created a work of genius.
March 16, 2012 at 14:17 |
scottmoehring
scottmoehring
Googling Mark Forster will give you six hits out of ten for my site on p. 1 of Google Australia.
March 16, 2012 at 14:18 |
Mark Forster
Mark Forster
Scott - I may WRITE FV in the forum, but in conversation I SAY Final Version. For me, FV is too fricative and difficult to say. It is, however, much quicker to write - especially for those using smartphones (not me)
March 16, 2012 at 14:38 |
Terri Cleary
Terri Cleary
Hm, Final Version is on page 2 of Dutch Google also, but from the snippet below the hit it doesn't seem to have anything to do with time management (only from the link is it clear that this is Mark's Final Version).
Dutch Google on Mark Forster gives the same result as Mark got himself: 6 out of the first 10 are about "our" Mark Forster.
Suggestion: why not talk about Mark Forster's Final Version when you want to tell people about it? I must confess I haven't talked much about it to others myself, but I haven't done that for AF, SF, DIT either, only when people ask about it. No use trying to convert people to a good system when they feel their own way is working well enough (even if it doesn't :-).
Dutch Google on Mark Forster gives the same result as Mark got himself: 6 out of the first 10 are about "our" Mark Forster.
Suggestion: why not talk about Mark Forster's Final Version when you want to tell people about it? I must confess I haven't talked much about it to others myself, but I haven't done that for AF, SF, DIT either, only when people ask about it. No use trying to convert people to a good system when they feel their own way is working well enough (even if it doesn't :-).
March 16, 2012 at 14:48 |
Nicole
Nicole
Indeed. As far FV seems to be really the best time management system ever devised (like the other ones devised by Mark were, at their time). Maybe it is true that you can't say the same about its name, one of the less fortunate of all, and not a real name for its own (I mean that the name "FV" has a "real" sense only for us, the users of Mark previous systems).
Maybe we shouldn't care about that. Or maybe the system will deserve a better name, once it goes beyond this short experimental "beta" period. I think Mark will decide the best, like always.
Maybe we shouldn't care about that. Or maybe the system will deserve a better name, once it goes beyond this short experimental "beta" period. I think Mark will decide the best, like always.
March 16, 2012 at 15:09 |
Miguel Angel Cestao
Miguel Angel Cestao
The accountant in me sees "Future Value" whenever I see "FV" and maybe that's not a bad thing...
March 16, 2012 at 16:33 |
Tom C
Tom C
I must agree the name doesn't spark the imagination. Finished Vision. Final Victory!
March 16, 2012 at 17:38 |
Alan Baljeu
Alan Baljeu
Future Vision (combining Tom C and Alan).
March 16, 2012 at 18:04 |
moises
moises
Perhaps I'll give it one of those really evocative names like WD-40.
March 16, 2012 at 23:42 |
Mark Forster
Mark Forster
MF-23 would be a fine name!
March 17, 2012 at 13:27 |
Alan Baljeu
Alan Baljeu
I concur with Scott. I am very impressed with FV but the name lacks the magic of the system it represents.
The full name "Auto Focus - The Final Version" is a mouth full and a provocative working title but for marketing and education it could use a little more jazz.
Auto Focus (AF) is a great name.
Super Focus (SF) is a great name.
The latter is short for Super Auto Focus (SAF).
A core methodology of FV is a particular way of selecting a sub-list from an AF list. I would be tempted to suggest the name "Selected Auto Focus" (SAF) but that acronym has already been established for Super Auto Focus.
May I suggest "Auto Focus Select" (AFS)?
What ever it is called it truly is an elegant and ingenious system. It is a great achievement. Congratulations!
The full name "Auto Focus - The Final Version" is a mouth full and a provocative working title but for marketing and education it could use a little more jazz.
Auto Focus (AF) is a great name.
Super Focus (SF) is a great name.
The latter is short for Super Auto Focus (SAF).
A core methodology of FV is a particular way of selecting a sub-list from an AF list. I would be tempted to suggest the name "Selected Auto Focus" (SAF) but that acronym has already been established for Super Auto Focus.
May I suggest "Auto Focus Select" (AFS)?
What ever it is called it truly is an elegant and ingenious system. It is a great achievement. Congratulations!
March 18, 2012 at 1:55 |
Mike D
Mike D
I have to agree with reservations about the name "Final Version."
MF-23 is not bad at all. Cryptic names work quite while in the marketplace, such as the "ARC" binder or the "G2" pen. The trouble with "Final Version" is not that it's cryptic, but that it's stuck in between cryptic and descriptive. You understand the phrase, only to wonder "Final Version OF WHAT?"
For a descriptive name, maybe something that includes "chain" or "select." Or "Forster." People talk about the "Covey Quadrants," so why not the "Forster Chain"?
Forster's Chain, or Forster's Ladder. If Colley has a Rule, Forster can have a Rule, no?
Acronyms are fine; if there can be a "GTD," then why not an "FV"?
For that matter, look at the title of this web site:
Get Everything Done ... GED?
It fits very well, since *every* item gets preselected, one at a time. No room to hide, no Someday/Maybe, and yet no resistance, leading to ... getting everything done!
GED. Unfortunately, in the U.S. a GED has another meaning, as a sort of alternative diploma. But maybe that does not matter.
MF-23 is not bad at all. Cryptic names work quite while in the marketplace, such as the "ARC" binder or the "G2" pen. The trouble with "Final Version" is not that it's cryptic, but that it's stuck in between cryptic and descriptive. You understand the phrase, only to wonder "Final Version OF WHAT?"
For a descriptive name, maybe something that includes "chain" or "select." Or "Forster." People talk about the "Covey Quadrants," so why not the "Forster Chain"?
Forster's Chain, or Forster's Ladder. If Colley has a Rule, Forster can have a Rule, no?
Acronyms are fine; if there can be a "GTD," then why not an "FV"?
For that matter, look at the title of this web site:
Get Everything Done ... GED?
It fits very well, since *every* item gets preselected, one at a time. No room to hide, no Someday/Maybe, and yet no resistance, leading to ... getting everything done!
GED. Unfortunately, in the U.S. a GED has another meaning, as a sort of alternative diploma. But maybe that does not matter.
March 18, 2012 at 2:30 |
Bernie
Bernie
Just thinking about it from the "other" side ...
"Final Version" could be a great cryptic name.
Q: What are you doing?
A: I'm using Final Version.
Q: What Final Version?
A: Mark Forster's Final Version.
Q: Final Version of what?
A: Mark Forster's Final Version of time management methodology.
Oh, MF-23 is also great. Not just saying that because my nick is sabre23t. [*]
I think MF-FV is great too. Or may be even MF-42. Mark Forster's anything is nicely googleable with www.markforster.net as the top hit.
Perhaps, what I'm saying is, it doesn't matter what FV is actually called, as long as we attribute it to Mark Forster, our audience can get to it from www.markforster.net .
[*] 23 --> 2/3 --> two-third --> toothed ;-}
"Final Version" could be a great cryptic name.
Q: What are you doing?
A: I'm using Final Version.
Q: What Final Version?
A: Mark Forster's Final Version.
Q: Final Version of what?
A: Mark Forster's Final Version of time management methodology.
Oh, MF-23 is also great. Not just saying that because my nick is sabre23t. [*]
I think MF-FV is great too. Or may be even MF-42. Mark Forster's anything is nicely googleable with www.markforster.net as the top hit.
Perhaps, what I'm saying is, it doesn't matter what FV is actually called, as long as we attribute it to Mark Forster, our audience can get to it from www.markforster.net .
[*] 23 --> 2/3 --> two-third --> toothed ;-}
March 18, 2012 at 3:38 |
sabre23t
sabre23t
Another page killed dead by FV!
"KTD" = Kills Tasks Dead!
It was an old DWM2 page. Funny I say "old," because it is only from 25 Feb. That's how much FV has caught up.
"KTD" = Kills Tasks Dead!
It was an old DWM2 page. Funny I say "old," because it is only from 25 Feb. That's how much FV has caught up.
March 18, 2012 at 5:21 |
Bernie
Bernie
sabre23t,
<<[*] 23 --> 2/3 --> two-third --> toothed ;-}>>
I don't know *how* I missed that!! ;->
<<[*] 23 --> 2/3 --> two-third --> toothed ;-}>>
I don't know *how* I missed that!! ;->
March 18, 2012 at 5:22 |
Bernie
Bernie
Hi guys,
What about FiVe ( Final Version )?
5 is the third prime number. Isn't this the "3rd" time Mark did give us a time management system to study? "Do It Tomorrow", all the ( Auto / Super ) Focus / DWM variants we played with and now the Final Version? And let me tell you, that it really is the best most simple and powerful system Mark has created - and hence I do believe him, the final one for him.
That's how I am going to promote FivE.
There are even more analogies one could use, but I leave it to you to find out ;)
Just my 0.02
What about FiVe ( Final Version )?
5 is the third prime number. Isn't this the "3rd" time Mark did give us a time management system to study? "Do It Tomorrow", all the ( Auto / Super ) Focus / DWM variants we played with and now the Final Version? And let me tell you, that it really is the best most simple and powerful system Mark has created - and hence I do believe him, the final one for him.
That's how I am going to promote FivE.
There are even more analogies one could use, but I leave it to you to find out ;)
Just my 0.02
March 18, 2012 at 8:09 |
Stefano F. Rausch
Stefano F. Rausch
"The Final Version" (with quotes) is the second item on p.1 of Google Australia. Even without the quotes it's still on p. 1.
March 18, 2012 at 8:45 |
Mark Forster
Mark Forster
How about Aoutofocus FV?
Simple and concise.
Simple and concise.
March 18, 2012 at 12:34 |
AS
AS
Having it appear in searches is good (and probably necessary).
My issue is that it's hard to talk about. Once you say Final Version, you have to play 20 questions to explain the name before getting back on topic. Even explaining a catchy name (e.g., FiVe) is more interesting than explaining a name that is a description like Final Version.
Then again, look at all the discussions we've had over it.
My issue is that it's hard to talk about. Once you say Final Version, you have to play 20 questions to explain the name before getting back on topic. Even explaining a catchy name (e.g., FiVe) is more interesting than explaining a name that is a description like Final Version.
Then again, look at all the discussions we've had over it.
March 18, 2012 at 13:10 |
MartyH
MartyH
MartyH:
<< Then again, look at all the discussions we've had over it. >>
So now I've got "The Final Version" into the 2nd Place on Google and 3,215 people signed up to the "The Final Version Newsletter" - both in less than a week - you want me to change the name?
<< Then again, look at all the discussions we've had over it. >>
So now I've got "The Final Version" into the 2nd Place on Google and 3,215 people signed up to the "The Final Version Newsletter" - both in less than a week - you want me to change the name?
March 18, 2012 at 13:25 |
Mark Forster
Mark Forster
I think you should keep "FV" in it - whatever you do...
March 18, 2012 at 14:01 |
BKK
BKK
<<you want me to change the name?>>
It worked for Prince
It worked for Prince
March 18, 2012 at 14:35 |
avrum
avrum
TMFKAFV: The Method Formerly Known As Final Version
March 18, 2012 at 14:44 |
AndreasE
AndreasE
I think Final Version is Fine. :-)
<< Once you say Final Version, you have to play 20 questions to explain the name before getting back on topic. >>
In other words, the name is a built-in conversation starter. How can that be bad? :-)
<< Once you say Final Version, you have to play 20 questions to explain the name before getting back on topic. >>
In other words, the name is a built-in conversation starter. How can that be bad? :-)
March 18, 2012 at 15:05 |
Seraphim
Seraphim
Ultimate Focus would be my vote.
March 18, 2012 at 15:06 |
DanM
DanM
I'm too enmeshed with (and an evangelist for) Mark's work to have any objectivity of what would draw someone to any of his systems.
Beyond All Ye Faithful, a marketing strategy would need to consider two distinct markets:
1. GTD'ers who have soured on their system
2. Overwhelmed folk who know little about productivity systems
Mark's focus on Psychological Readiness, and other meaning-making processes, would be a nice differentiation point from other systems. Some of the touchstones could include: increasing motivation, reducing procrastination, non partisan (analog or digital), etc.
Our voices will be the most persuasive "sell" of FV (or whatever it's called).
The developer of weekplan (an online, 7-Habits, inspired task system) has been gathering video testimonials for his site. I think this is a very smart idea.
Beyond All Ye Faithful, a marketing strategy would need to consider two distinct markets:
1. GTD'ers who have soured on their system
2. Overwhelmed folk who know little about productivity systems
Mark's focus on Psychological Readiness, and other meaning-making processes, would be a nice differentiation point from other systems. Some of the touchstones could include: increasing motivation, reducing procrastination, non partisan (analog or digital), etc.
Our voices will be the most persuasive "sell" of FV (or whatever it's called).
The developer of weekplan (an online, 7-Habits, inspired task system) has been gathering video testimonials for his site. I think this is a very smart idea.
March 18, 2012 at 15:44 |
avrum
avrum
Sabre23t, to think: I've been missing that pun all these years! <groans>
Seraphim, so you propose ITFVIF??
I suppose System 42 would rather open us up to the charge of hubris.
For Mark, it's FV.
I guess he wouldn't object to MF's FV.
The most important thing is not that the name explains the concept, but that it doesn't lead to confusion with other things. FV seems to be passing this test quite well, according to Mark's Google research.
Autofocus doesn't really work because of all those pesky photographers. I suspect that superfocus also risks confusion with optics.
Seraphim, so you propose ITFVIF??
I suppose System 42 would rather open us up to the charge of hubris.
For Mark, it's FV.
I guess he wouldn't object to MF's FV.
The most important thing is not that the name explains the concept, but that it doesn't lead to confusion with other things. FV seems to be passing this test quite well, according to Mark's Google research.
Autofocus doesn't really work because of all those pesky photographers. I suspect that superfocus also risks confusion with optics.
March 18, 2012 at 17:05 |
Will
Will
"AutoFocus FV" has a really nice feel to it, and if spelled out "AutoFocus Final Version," it will still capture all those Google hits, no?
March 18, 2012 at 17:16 |
Bernie
Bernie
"The Awesome Method" ...
Seriously: Let's stay with "Final Version". It will make everyone who comes across the name wondering what that means, it's a conversation starter and it contains all the history of it's development.
Seriously: Let's stay with "Final Version". It will make everyone who comes across the name wondering what that means, it's a conversation starter and it contains all the history of it's development.
March 18, 2012 at 18:52 |
AndreasE
AndreasE
<<It will make everyone who comes across the name wondering what that mean>>
I'm not sure how you know that. Besides the fan-boy/girl(s) i.e. us, why would anyone think "Final Version" would solve any of their productivity, goals or stress issues better than:
1. Getting Things Done (Ah yes, I want to get things done)
2. 7 Habits (Habits... dear Lord I need some of these)
3. Zen To Done (Ah, stress free productivity)
I'm not sure how you know that. Besides the fan-boy/girl(s) i.e. us, why would anyone think "Final Version" would solve any of their productivity, goals or stress issues better than:
1. Getting Things Done (Ah yes, I want to get things done)
2. 7 Habits (Habits... dear Lord I need some of these)
3. Zen To Done (Ah, stress free productivity)
March 18, 2012 at 19:04 |
avrum
avrum
Forster's View?
March 18, 2012 at 19:29 |
Roger J
Roger J
Forster's View?
March 18, 2012 at 19:31 |
Roger J
Roger J
While I agree there could probably be a better name, I am at a loss to suggest one.
But whatever the name, I'd like to say that I've been using this method for several days now, and find that it works brilliantly. All of the thinking and refining that Mark has done over the years has culminated in a system that works well. It is simple and elegant, and it balances all the aspects of priority, urgency, and psychological readiness. I've had a seemingly impossible workload lately, yet I'm really chipping away at it. I'm looking forward to the book, in whatever form it is released!
But whatever the name, I'd like to say that I've been using this method for several days now, and find that it works brilliantly. All of the thinking and refining that Mark has done over the years has culminated in a system that works well. It is simple and elegant, and it balances all the aspects of priority, urgency, and psychological readiness. I've had a seemingly impossible workload lately, yet I'm really chipping away at it. I'm looking forward to the book, in whatever form it is released!
March 18, 2012 at 20:17 |
Sarah J
Sarah J
<<I'd like to say that I've been using this method for several days now, and find that it works brilliantly>>
I agree - though I've only started using FV today.
The question is... how to convey the depth of this system beyond: "Oh great, another to-do list idea".
I agree - though I've only started using FV today.
The question is... how to convey the depth of this system beyond: "Oh great, another to-do list idea".
March 18, 2012 at 21:03 |
avrum
avrum
Oh dear. I've really stirred up a hornet's nest here. Not my intention, but in hindsight I can see how it happened.
Two thoughts, and then I think I'm done with this topic.
First, several thousand people have seen this released under the name Final Version. If this is truly the greatest task management system we have ever used, then that is an inconsequential number of people. The systems of Franklin, Covey, and David Allen reached millions around the world. If a change is to be made, now is the last and only time to make it.
Second, I think the brilliant and ever-helpful minds of this forum have hit upon the solution already. What system do I use? "Mark Forster's Final Version". That gives proper credit, respects Mark's name for the system, sounds like a complete thought, is easily searchable, and encompasses ALL the previous systems leading up to this masterpiece.
Simple, effective, no extraneous fluff, and (through the use Mark's name) a direct pathway for further exploration and learning if so desired. Sounds like that aligns perfectly with FV to me.
Best to all,
Scott
Two thoughts, and then I think I'm done with this topic.
First, several thousand people have seen this released under the name Final Version. If this is truly the greatest task management system we have ever used, then that is an inconsequential number of people. The systems of Franklin, Covey, and David Allen reached millions around the world. If a change is to be made, now is the last and only time to make it.
Second, I think the brilliant and ever-helpful minds of this forum have hit upon the solution already. What system do I use? "Mark Forster's Final Version". That gives proper credit, respects Mark's name for the system, sounds like a complete thought, is easily searchable, and encompasses ALL the previous systems leading up to this masterpiece.
Simple, effective, no extraneous fluff, and (through the use Mark's name) a direct pathway for further exploration and learning if so desired. Sounds like that aligns perfectly with FV to me.
Best to all,
Scott
March 18, 2012 at 21:51 |
Scott Moehring
Scott Moehring
Scott:
Yes, I like "Mark Forster's Final Version". In fact I will change the home page to reflect it. Many thanks to everyone for the help and suggestions.
In Google Australia without quotes it has eight hits on p. 1, including the top four.
Yes, I like "Mark Forster's Final Version". In fact I will change the home page to reflect it. Many thanks to everyone for the help and suggestions.
In Google Australia without quotes it has eight hits on p. 1, including the top four.
March 19, 2012 at 0:00 |
Mark Forster
Mark Forster
US Google has six hits on page one for "Mark Forster's Final Version", including the top four.
March 19, 2012 at 4:25 |
Seraphim
Seraphim
Main hits on page one in the UK and South Africa too.
March 19, 2012 at 6:33 |
Stefano F. Rausch
Stefano F. Rausch
The search engine rankings is interesting. And obviously especially interesting to Mark. Only works, of course, to people who already know the name - I'm pretty sure Mark would prefer Bing (or Google if you must) to rank his page highly with a more relevant search such as "time management". But anyway, with all due respect, I don't really see how search engine rankings is relevant to the question that has been raised here, namely the awkwardness of the name "final version" relative to what it describes, and the purpose thereof.
March 19, 2012 at 7:29 |
Steve Schapel
Steve Schapel
@Steve Schapel,
The search engine ranking is a measure of how many other popular concepts are using a similar name. So "Autofocus" almost perfectly described what the system was about, but was completely drowned out by photographers.
The search engine ranking is a measure of how many other popular concepts are using a similar name. So "Autofocus" almost perfectly described what the system was about, but was completely drowned out by photographers.
March 19, 2012 at 10:23 |
Will
Will
I was thinking a lot like Steve. If someone is looking for a new tool, method, technique, etc. to get everything done, it almost doesn't matter how they search: They always find GTD. Mark wants them to also find FV.
I also agree that the Google examples don't really address the original topic: the awkwardness of the name "final version" relative to what it describes, and the purpose thereof. While playing 20 questions may not be all bad, it is a distraction from the primary topic.
In another thread Sabre23t showed that it is being discussed. That's good but it doesn't address the earlier question either.
Since I'm not a marketing guy in any respect, I'm not really advocating changing the name. And I don't know if those Google numbers are good, bad, or meaningful to marketing Marks future products. Just pointing out that the name might not be as good as it could be. Scott points it out clearly:
"First, several thousand people have seen this released under the name Final Version. If this is truly the greatest task management system we have ever used, then that is an inconsequential number of people. The systems of Franklin, Covey, and David Allen reached millions around the world. If a change is to be made, now is the last and only time to make it. "
I also agree that the Google examples don't really address the original topic: the awkwardness of the name "final version" relative to what it describes, and the purpose thereof. While playing 20 questions may not be all bad, it is a distraction from the primary topic.
In another thread Sabre23t showed that it is being discussed. That's good but it doesn't address the earlier question either.
Since I'm not a marketing guy in any respect, I'm not really advocating changing the name. And I don't know if those Google numbers are good, bad, or meaningful to marketing Marks future products. Just pointing out that the name might not be as good as it could be. Scott points it out clearly:
"First, several thousand people have seen this released under the name Final Version. If this is truly the greatest task management system we have ever used, then that is an inconsequential number of people. The systems of Franklin, Covey, and David Allen reached millions around the world. If a change is to be made, now is the last and only time to make it. "
March 19, 2012 at 12:39 |
MartyH
MartyH
I can't explain why, but "Mark Forster's Final Version" feels right, and far better than "Final Version" alone. Next comes, "Who is Mark Forster?" and then here they are reading Mark's front page.
Then it'd be nice to corner the search market on "better than GTD" and "low-overhead time management" and so forth.
Then it'd be nice to corner the search market on "better than GTD" and "low-overhead time management" and so forth.
March 19, 2012 at 16:55 |
Bernie
Bernie
Maybe "we" (Spain, Italy) are not so important, but just out of curiosity:
Final Version in google Italy: page 4, position 35.
In google Spain: page 6, position 57.
Anyway, I quite agree with Steve Schapel...
Final Version in google Italy: page 4, position 35.
In google Spain: page 6, position 57.
Anyway, I quite agree with Steve Schapel...
March 19, 2012 at 18:34 |
Miguel Angel Cestao
Miguel Angel Cestao
I agree with others here that the Final Version needs a proper, marketable name. I like DanM's suggestion of "Ultimate Focus" but as a slight variation on that, how about: ULTRA FOCUS.
For me, this name is not only marketable, but it makes sense on more than one level.
First, it is truly "Ultra", ie beyond: beyond AF, beyond SAF -- and logically, the ultimate continution (and conclusion) of the "*-focus" group of systems.
Secondly, Ultra Focus perfectly describes what the system is. I think its great strength, elegance and beauty is the way it keeps you absolutely focussed on your planned (pre-selected) work. Something new comes into your world? Capture it at the end of the list and return to your planned work. An urgent matter comes up? Deal with it -- and return to your planned work. Several urgent things you must deal with? Capture them all, work through them until all these interruptions have been neutralised -- and return to your planned work. If that isn't the attitude of someone who has an "ultra" focus, I don't know what is.
Final Version was a great working title, but now the system is finished it surely deserves better. As for Google and SEO, no problem. Continue to make reference to FV as "ULTRA FOCUS: Mark Forster's Final Version of Auto Focus" until the name sticks and the FV working title is no longer relevant except to the history of the system.
For me, this name is not only marketable, but it makes sense on more than one level.
First, it is truly "Ultra", ie beyond: beyond AF, beyond SAF -- and logically, the ultimate continution (and conclusion) of the "*-focus" group of systems.
Secondly, Ultra Focus perfectly describes what the system is. I think its great strength, elegance and beauty is the way it keeps you absolutely focussed on your planned (pre-selected) work. Something new comes into your world? Capture it at the end of the list and return to your planned work. An urgent matter comes up? Deal with it -- and return to your planned work. Several urgent things you must deal with? Capture them all, work through them until all these interruptions have been neutralised -- and return to your planned work. If that isn't the attitude of someone who has an "ultra" focus, I don't know what is.
Final Version was a great working title, but now the system is finished it surely deserves better. As for Google and SEO, no problem. Continue to make reference to FV as "ULTRA FOCUS: Mark Forster's Final Version of Auto Focus" until the name sticks and the FV working title is no longer relevant except to the history of the system.
March 20, 2012 at 5:00 |
Lachlan Black
Lachlan Black
Steve:
<< But anyway, with all due respect, I don't really see how search engine rankings is relevant to the question that has been raised here, namely the awkwardness of the name "final version" relative to what it describes, and the purpose thereof. >>
In Scott's orginal post one of the things he mentioned was the difficulty of telling people where to find it in a search engine.
<< But anyway, with all due respect, I don't really see how search engine rankings is relevant to the question that has been raised here, namely the awkwardness of the name "final version" relative to what it describes, and the purpose thereof. >>
In Scott's orginal post one of the things he mentioned was the difficulty of telling people where to find it in a search engine.
March 20, 2012 at 9:20 |
Mark Forster
Mark Forster
<< The systems of Franklin, Covey, and David Allen reached millions around the world. If a change is to be made, now is the last and only time to make it. >>
I'll just point out that when Scott wrote this he described all three systems by the names of the authors.
I'll just point out that when Scott wrote this he described all three systems by the names of the authors.
March 20, 2012 at 9:23 |
Mark Forster
Mark Forster
We have a saying in Malay, that might possibly be relevant to this thread ...
"Harimau mati meninggalkan belang, manusia mati meninggalkan nama"
.. roughly translated that means ...
"Tiger dies leaving its stripes, man dies leaving his name"
"Harimau mati meninggalkan belang, manusia mati meninggalkan nama"
.. roughly translated that means ...
"Tiger dies leaving its stripes, man dies leaving his name"
March 20, 2012 at 14:05 |
sabre23t
sabre23t
My one and only gripe is that I have used Do It Tomorrow (DIT), Autofocus (AF1-4), Superfocus (SF1-3), and they have all been easy to talk about because they 1) had a simple acronym, and 2) a name that sounded like a name.
FV is easy enough, and is how I refer to it in my own tasks, such as "test FV apps". However, whereas I could easily tell someone about the cool new "Superfocus", I am really struggling telling someone about the cool new "Final Version". I have found myself referring to what might go down in history as the greatest task management tool EVER as "this really cool task management tool". I am loathe to say "Final Version" because it generates those looks of "Final Version of ....?", and doesn't create the immediate interest Superfocus and Autofocus did. It sounds like a mistake, or like there is more to it that I'm not saying.
It is also very difficult to find "Final Version" in a search engine. I have been simply telling people to search "get everything done".
Notice also how quickly we slid into "FV" in the forum, and even Mark chose that as the title (perhaps only for efficiency). There are far fewer references to Final Version.
I would never presume to rename this true and rare gem of knowledge work, but I felt compelled to open the discussion.
My best to all, especially "the regulars". Alan, Seraphim, Cricket, Bernie, etc. I'm a lurker mostly, but I have greatly enjoyed the collaborative atmosphere that has clearly been most helpful and influential as Mark developed Final Version.
Scott
Columbus, Ohio, USA