FEEDBACK: Looking for honest feedback on a new way to reduce tool overload
Hi everyone,
I’m looking for honest feedback on something I’ve been building.
Like many of you, I kept struggling with context switching — email, Slack, calendar, docs, tasks, meetings… everything scattered. So I built a small internal tool to bring it into one place.
It’s early and rough around the edges, and I’m not trying to sell anything — I just want to learn whether this actually helps or if I’m solving the wrong problem.
If you’re open to testing it and telling me what works / doesn’t, I’d really appreciate it.
Here’s the link, please fill the early access form :
https://omnex.tech
Trending on Indie Hackers
Context switching is painful, and most tools try to fix it by adding more layers.
How are you thinking about differentiation versus existing “all-in-one” tools?
Is the value more in aggregation, or in how information is surfaced and prioritized?
Early feedback like this is the right move. Glad to take a look.
You nailed the two real blockers. In our early convos it’s usually both: the pain is felt first by ICs (lost time, rework), but adoption only happens when a lead feels delivery risk and the relief is visible quickly. That’s why our wedge isn’t “replace your stack” — it’s making OMNEX the first screen people open after an interruption, so they can answer “what should I do next?” in seconds. If that re-entry moment gets measurably faster, the ROI becomes obvious enough for leads to justify change even before a full-blown fire.
This looks like a thoughtful solution to a very common problem — too much context switching really does drain productivity.
One question I have from what you described: what metric or experience are you hoping to improve most — total time battling context switches, or how often people lose focus or context mid-task?
A lot of tools reduce tool hopping, but don’t always change how work actually feels for users.
Happy to try the early access and share honest feedback if that’s useful.
Thanks — that’s a really good distinction, and honestly something we’re still validating.
Right now, the primary thing we’re trying to improve isn’t just fewer tool switches, but how work feels while you’re in it — especially that moment where you lose context mid-task and have to mentally reconstruct where you were.
The working hypothesis is that if the “active context” (messages, tasks, docs, upcoming meetings) lives in one place, the cost of interruption drops — even when interruptions still happen.
But you’re absolutely right: plenty of tools reduce hopping without changing the lived experience. That’s exactly why we’re keeping this in early access and leaning hard on qualitative feedback before locking anything in.
I’d really appreciate you trying it and sharing your honest feedback. here is omnex website https://omnex.tech , you can go and fill the early access form , and you will receive the app link . for any questions feel free to ask at [email protected]
Thanks for sharing the link — that helps. I’ll spend a bit of time with it.
As I’m looking at it, what I’m most interested in is where momentum is created vs where it stalls once everything lives in one place. In my experience, reducing context switching only really works if it also reduces hesitation around what to do next.
One question I’m curious about as you see people use it: do they tend to pause more before turning a discussion into an action, or after an action exists (deciding whether it’s actually the right next step)? That distinction usually says a lot about whether the core friction is clarity or follow-through.