Talk:Personal information manager

This article appears to be more of a stub than anything else. There is not enough depth.

Further, it disparages the decades-old term, PIM, as no longer applicable. Not only is that ridiculous, but it is an attempt to rewrite history. Bad idea! - KitchM (talk) 15:53, 1 April 2010 (UTC)

I deleted the paragraph which took the release of a report by some unknown lobby group (Progressive States Foundation? Something like that, a total non-entity), which was supported by a congressman, and attempted to make it sound relevant to the article.

It is almost totally irrelevant, the article itself doesn't mentions PIMs, PDAs or social media even once! I added a small paragraph myself talking about the merge of the two originally distinct technology, cell phones and PDAs, and how the instant access to, and ability to share and publish, information, along with all the information storage capabilities introduced by PDAs, could be a profound development in our society.

115.64.9.69 (talk) 12:18, 1 August 2010 (UTC)

In the following text:

The acronym PIM is now, more commonly, used in reference to personal information management as a field of study.

I take issue with "more commonly". I have never seen "PIM" mean anything other than a piece of software that does Personal Information Management.

The citation for the entire sentence is a book called Personal Information Management. No chapter or page number is given. Does the book support the "more commonly" claim? Could we get a section or page number or something more specific?

69.140.197.217 (talk) 15:53, 18 April 2016 (UTC)

The concepts in the article can be better expressed as Personal information management#Tools than as a separate article. Brandon (talk) 17:22, 6 January 2025 (UTC)