As one of the mad people behind Apollo (OK, it’s a link, but it’s a genuine one: http://www.apollohq.com ), I can agree with both comments here. The main issue is that more functionalities come at a price: it’s really, really hard to develop software that is easy to use and just does a lot.

I don’t think the web interface even allows powerful and features-packed programs. Basecamp is simple for a reason… And Comindwork is a little confusing for a reason…

We have Ajax, and it _is_ possible to write a full application without a single page reload. We did it… and we think we found the happy medium between “usable” and “useful”.

But, it wasn’t the easy path, at all…

Merc.

The one exception is Basecamp – which is what I continue to use today. My clients love it because it’s simple and learning something new for a contractor, in reality, is just not going to happen. As much as they want project management, they don’t care enough to learn a system, especially one for a vendor of theirs…. and, it works well even for my non-web savvy clients.

Basecamp has some shortcomings – I wish there were a basic meeting calendar in there, I have to set meetings as milestones – but other than that, it’s the only solution clients will actually use, and for us, it keeps things out of email which is the goal as email gets lost, people talk about different projects or parts of projects in emails with the same subject line, etc.

Taking a gander at Comindwork, it’s just too complicated for working with people externally and how most web workers are. Now, as a corporate-implemented internal solution where there is time for training, etc. and clients don’t have to deal with it, it might work. But not for the web worker at all.