Samsung Blackjack and GTD

A couple of weeks ago, after multiple weirdo issues, I decided to replace my Treo 650 with a Samsung Blackjack. While there are quite a bit of physical differences with the Blackjack being lighter and A LOT thinner, the change in OS and workflow has been quite a challenge.

The Blackjack uses the Windows Mobile OS (WM OS) versus the Palm OS of Treo. The first time I tried using the WM OS, I didn’t like it (see Cingular 2125 First Impressions). The second time using it, I’m still not entirely sold on it. The main reason is the implementation of tasks ( see Cingular 2125 Second Impressions). Personally, I like to work from ‘contexts’ list in GTD terms. That is, I group my action items in terms of context. When I’m at home, I only want to see tasks I can do at home. When I’m at work, I only want to see work related tasks, etc.

While it’s possible to filter tasks based on category in WM OS, it IS NOT possible to assign a category to a task when entering on the phone. What this means is I have to modify the task at my home computer to assign it a category. In addition, assigning a category in Outlook is not as intuitive and easy as it is in Palm OS.

However, with all these minor shortcomings and gripes, I do like the Samsung Blackjack. Not only for it’s looks, but for some reason, I’m less worried about picking the right category for an action item. I’m less worried about being in the right context at the right time. Overall, it seems to have made things a bit simpler. More and more, I am digging this whole K-I-S-S philosophy thing, that is: “Keep it Simple, Stupid”.

Look for a Teacher, not a Style

Reading Taiji.quest.ion’s post on Sunlight and Shadow made me think about advice I often hand out, that is, Look for a teacher, not a style.  I’ve often encountered various forum threads or emails about what style is the best, but to me, that’s really the wrong path, IMO. The important thing is finding a good teacher.

Let us consider the phrase again:

Look for a Teacher, not a Style

For me, I would take this even further to note the importance of finding good, local instruction. I cannot emphasize the importance of working with a real, live instructor. We’ve often heard the saying that our true selves are revealed through the eyes of another. This is because we often project certain things on ourselves that can result in a rosy view of reality.

For example, I thought my stances were really good and low but after working with my chen instructor, he showed me the error of my ways. He introduced things to me that can only be felt. Now, when I do the form, I can easily feel when I’m off, or just not settling right in my stancework.

In addition to corrections, a good instructor will teach us how to learn. Instead of spoon-feeding everything, a good teacher will show us how to discern the answer for ourselves. When I asked questions about a specific posture, I tended to get a question in response. This caused me to think about my actions. Is my movement inline with the principles of silk reeling?

What really got me thinking about this whole ordeal is a comment Taiji.quest.ion made about missing chen. I have to admit, that I am in the same boat as him and do miss my chen style.  This is the style where I’ve received the most instruction and hands-on correction. With my yang, I am basically going self-taught as I’ve only had formal instruction via the TT Liang CMC style Yang, but I’m currently doing YZD flavor of Yang.

Upon inquiries, I’ve often advised people to find the best local instruction first. If someone has a background in taiji, then I advise them to continue working on their material until they find local instruction.

When the student is ready, the teacher will appear.

Perhaps, I’m just not ready ready…