I tried every todo app and ended up with a .txt file

Appeal of plain text and extreme simplicity

• Many commenters independently converged on a single text file (often TODO.txt or TODO.md) as their most reliable system after bouncing through multiple apps.
• Benefits cited: zero friction, works offline, no vendor lock‑in, survives app shutdowns, fully greppable, versionable with git, and can be edited in any editor on any OS.
• Some use minimal structure: dates as headings, sections for TODO/Pending/Done, simple tags like #project, or markdown checkboxes for visual feedback.
• Several treat the file as a combined daily log + task list, where unfinished items are manually copied forward, forcing regular review and pruning.

When text isn’t enough: reminders, recurrence, and scale

• A recurring theme: plain text breaks down for time‑sensitive or far‑future tasks without an external “runtime loop” (reminders, alarms, agendas).
• People solving this layer use calendars (Google/Outlook/CalDAV), Todoist/TickTick/Tasks.org, or simple cron/notification scripts; some want automated syncing from TODO.txt into calendars.
• Heavy users with hundreds or thousands of tasks argue that rich features—recurring rules, start/due dates, dependencies, multiple lists, prioritization—are indispensable and that a flat file won’t scale.

Org-mode, Obsidian, and other power tools

• Org‑mode in Emacs is repeatedly described as a “supercharged text file”: nested tasks, deadlines, agenda views, time tracking, links, tables, and programmable workflows.
• There is pushback: learning Emacs/org is non‑trivial, mobile support is patchy, and some prefer Vim/VS Code + markdown, Logseq, Obsidian, Taskwarrior, or Todoist for a gentler curve.
• Obsidian is seen as “one step above a text file”: keeps markdown portability while offering plugins, daily notes, backlinks, and optional Kanban or task plugins.

Paper, physical systems, and habit formation

• Many report that notebooks, index cards, Post‑its, or a daily A5/A4 page outperform digital systems for focus and recall.
• Benefits: physical presence, forced rewriting of lingering tasks (which naturally kills stale ones), and reduced distraction compared to screens.
• Novel physical setups (receipt printers, clipboards, wall calendars) are popular for making tasks “visible” in the real world.

Custom and “snowflake” workflows

• A large subset built their own tools: CLI task managers, bespoke webapps, org‑based frontends, mind‑map systems, GitHub‑issues-as-TODO, or text + cron + git history.
• Some now use LLMs to parse or reorganize text files, generate schedules, or push events into calendars, seeing AI as a way to keep plain text while offloading drudgery.
• Others note the irony that people rebuild features of existing apps around text files—often as a form of enjoyable procrastination.

Meta‑observations: it’s more about process than tools

• Several argue the real leverage comes from habits: daily/weekly review, ruthless pruning, and clear separation of calendar vs tasks, not from any specific app.
• There is skepticism toward “productivity porn”: elaborate systems that feel productive but mainly serve as structured procrastination.
• Consensus under the disagreement: the “best” system is highly personal, should be as simple as possible for the user, and must actually be used every day.