Messages

101

General Software Discussion / Re: Contra Chrome

« on: April 17, 2022, 04:37 PM »

Most of the described issues apply only to Chrome - not Chromium. No shortage of good, privacy oriented Chromium browsers. Firefox not essential unles you want it.

102

General Software Discussion / Re: I'm thinking of going primitive, with discursion into zettelkasten

« on: April 12, 2022, 05:23 PM »

appearance is very similar to Inspire Writer, though not quite as good

-Dormouse (April 12, 2022, 03:09 PM)

I've learned that one of the attractions of IW's appearance was its use of the often denigrated Droid Sans Mono font. I find it very easy to read. Suits my eyes. So I have switched to using it in many programs now, when I have the option to set a font.

103

General Software Discussion / Re: I'm thinking of going primitive, with discursion into zettelkasten

« on: April 12, 2022, 03:15 PM »

A stray thought that occurred to me is that I'm surprised that no writing program has tried to use the same trick as Obsidian by defining all the contents of a folder as a project/document. It could keep a small database about the project in the folder and have a separate folder elsewhere which contains information from all projects. This would make it easy to calculate words per day etc across all projects, sequence fo files in a project etc etc. And no need for the program to be designed as a database hidden from other programs.

104

General Software Discussion / Re: I'm thinking of going primitive, with discursion into zettelkasten

« on: April 12, 2022, 03:09 PM »

My planned workflows atm:-

1. Mindomo > Workflowy > Inspire Writer > Word
2. Inspire Writer > Workflowy > Inspire Writer
3. Inspire Writer > Word > Inspire Writer

-Dormouse (March 04, 2022, 04:41 AM)

The plan was to make Workflowy central, but it has always felt clunky - particularly the shift from the outline to the writing. I tested writing in Workflowy, but it's not designed for it and never felt smooth. The big question was what exactly ought to be done in Workflowy and how would it be transmitted to the writing program.

I decided to try iA Writer. I'd had it a while but never seen that it was worth using. Maybe my revisit was triggered by reading multiple Ulysses Vs iA Writer reviews (usually won by Ulysses). The big selling point for iA Writer was that the Windows version was very functional, it has Android and iOS apps, as well as Mac, and it is a purpose designed writing program that has been going for nearly twenty years. And indeed it works okay, and appearance is very similar to Inspire Writer, though not quite as good to my mind. And it is pure local file rather than a database, so interoperability with other programs should be straightforward; it hides hashtags in output (v.good!). And, being a standrd markdown editor (multimarkdown), it works with YAML, which Inspire Writer doesn't.

Which makes it obvious to put the section details into YAML format in Workflowy bullets notes, and thence, via OPML, into markdown notes. The YAML approach requires using individual notes rather than a single long document since front matter has to be at the front. But splitting at headings is easy enough. The iA Writer method to combine segments into a document is simply to drag the files into a document file. Preview is a check to see that it is combining as wanted. And iA Writer works as cosily with Word as Inspire Writer, which ticks my other essential box. A secondary benefit is that the files are always available to any other markdown editor I might choose to use, including Inspire Writer.

105

General Software Discussion / Re: I'm thinking of going primitive, with discursion into zettelkasten

« on: April 10, 2022, 04:08 AM »

Visual Studio Code

-wraith808 (April 09, 2022, 08:52 PM)

Electron?

Forgot: it cannot be electron-based.

-urlwolf (April 09, 2022, 07:19 PM)

106

General Software Discussion / Re: WinPatrol appears dead

« on: April 03, 2022, 03:43 PM »

WinPatrol was nice and simple, unless you chose for it not to be.

One lesson I took from it is that handing on such a project frequently fails however carefully it's done. I've seen quite a few instances of that. Also true for large company taking over a small; rarely ends with the product developing as it would have done if the original developers had the resources of the larger one. Even when the original developers stay on. As with WinAmp.

107

General Software Discussion / Re: I'm thinking of going primitive, with discursion into zettelkasten

« on: March 20, 2022, 04:43 PM »

an editor that keeps versioning per sentence? That is, you can go to old versions of every sentence.
I think roam has that, but I dislike roam

-urlwolf (March 20, 2022, 03:31 PM)

So basically  an editor that saves in blocks and keeps versions of each block? (Assuming sentence effectively = block.)

It's not something I've ever looked for, so I don't know. but I assume it would have to be an editor with a database.
I'm afraid nothing immediately springs to my mind as likely. Apart, as you say from Roam. And presumably Roam clones either have it or aspire to it, since blocks are a key feature.

108

General Software Discussion / Re: I'm thinking of going primitive, with discursion into zettelkasten

« on: March 16, 2022, 07:26 PM »

The admonitions/callouts are simple to write and potentially useful.

-Dormouse (March 14, 2022, 08:38 PM)

Because they are customisable, and foldable, and very popular, I thought I'd have a little play with this as a possibly useful way of adding notes and comments to documents. Certainly I can see many ways in which I could use them.
And customise for my particular purposes at the time - whether that be research or editing.

Then I thought there's other ways of achieving those effects more easily.
1. General comments can be done simply as a wikilink to another file  - the hover will have the comment.
2. Particular comments in families can be done as headings. Use an emoji for the heading and that's all that shows on the page when it's folded. Faster and more flexible. And the size of the emoji can be set with this syntax <span style="font-size: 250%;">emoji<span>
And, if there's a need to have the foldable comment in a quote block, that just takes one > on the next foldable line anyway.
And very fast to do with a text expander.

That actually suits me much better.

Instead of


Another advantage of this system is that it works in Word and Workflowy via OPML.

109

General Software Discussion / Re: I'm thinking of going primitive, with discursion into zettelkasten

« on: March 15, 2022, 12:39 PM »

Came across novelWriter in my peregrinations. Also on GitHub
Looks promising but not ready for prime time yet (the only Export I could find was 'bulld novel project' on the tools menu). Though I've only had a quick look.

What I found interesting were the issues he's grappling with. Markdown compatibility vs usability; markdown Vs rich text; database Vs files.
I'm not sure if the program is built around a database - he's contemplating json for the next version - but the text files themselves seem to be hidden to avoid users editing them externally, potentially mucking up project data.

Since my markdown format allows for comments and commands, that regular markdown does not, I'm not sure how to preserve this in case of an export/import of the same project.

Other than that, it seems to utilise a standard two-pane markdown editor.
Decent focus and full screen modes + typewriter scrolling. Good stats.

otoh, some of the syntax choices strike me as odd. **=bold; _=underline. This is an awkward subset of the markdown spec. Most apps using **bold will use *italic which is easier to use and remember. There's an unnumbered heading level - not a bad idea in itself, but ##! Is pretty idiosyncratic. I'm not sure that all these choices have been deeply thought through.

I do think the future for programs like these is a hybrid database/files design. Obsidian started by selling itself as local files only, which is still true - but only up to the point where it also keeps databases including data on the files - and not just metadata.

110

General Software Discussion / Re: I'm thinking of going primitive, with discursion into zettelkasten

« on: March 14, 2022, 08:38 PM »

I very much agree with the sentiment behind a recent comment on a a post on the Workflowy Blog

I would always vote for full LaTeX, markdown is very simple, but of course very limited ...
the majority do prefer clean simple formatting and WYSIWYG. Also, most people, including myself, abandon software even if it is functional, when it is not pleasing the eyes, you must "like" to work with it, otherwise you will not be productive.

So while I always like more formatting options ..., I am more inclined towards the concepts of block editors (like Notion, Nimbus, Craft ... and all the clones)

In the end, if you need to be productive, comfort and workflow is everything.

Also made me reflect on why markdown is a very poor match for me.

• For the vast majority of the time I use no formatting or markup at all. Just paragraph and line breaks.
• Since moving back to working in single large documents, I use headings - but once I pass h3 I find counting #s irritating; even html is better.
• For the final document, I need underline and italics, rarely bold.
• When reviewing, I also need colour (text and highlight) and strikethrough.
• When publishing, I often need to control pagination.

Markdown doesn't tick these boxes at all. (It is compatible with but unnecessary for the first.)
Simple tables are possible, but it's not very good at them.

So we have variants. And most markdown editors go further adding extensions and scattering html in the file (underline being the most common). So if markdown is a bad fit, why not the more widely understood docx (which for me was always a txt/docx combo)

The most recent version of Obsidian (0.14 insiders only atm) effectively sherlocks the admonitions plugin. The admonitions/callouts are simple to write and potentially useful. They're not exactly incompatible with other markdown editors, but they don't work in them either.

111

General Software Discussion / Re: I'm thinking of going primitive, with discursion into zettelkasten

« on: March 14, 2022, 07:28 PM »

I don't know if you can collapse a group of linked notes into a single document.

-rjbull (March 14, 2022, 06:45 PM)

You can, but it's convoluted at best, and all options on a menu don't do the same thing. I wouldn't regard it as practical. Unless there's something about it I haven't discovered.

Works well if you want an HTML file.

112

Mini-Reviews by Members / Re: Inspire Writer

« on: March 09, 2022, 09:55 AM »

Ghostwriter ... FocusWriter ... OmniaWrite

-n8wachT (March 09, 2022, 01:35 AM)

Hi n8wachT,
Can you say more about why you would suggest these as alternatives?
I see very little parity in workflows or features.

I like FocusWriter, but, apart from minimalism, it has very little in common with IW. No autosave, isn't a markdown editor, formatting only comes through in odt/docx/rtf..

I didn't know Ghostwriter, but it looks like a traditional markdown editor with a few writer statistics. And the install options (Windows portable only, Mac has to be built from source) just scream high friction and Linux based.

I only had a quick look at OmniaWrite. Initial warning that latest update solved some security issues was hardly inviting. Rigidly based on books, Chapters, Scenes. Seemed very limited from what I saw.

IW is polished and functional for both long and short-form writing. Ulysses might deserve the design credits, but IW is still polished. (I look at some of the recent 'imporvements' in Ulysses and can't help wondering whether they're reducing its polish.)

I've noticed that Ia Writer has a new outline function (Windows only - hasn't arrived for Mac yet). Big step for Ia but it's still navigation only - no manipulation - so doesn't really make it much more suitable for long-form.

113

General Software Discussion / Re: I'm thinking of going primitive, with discursion into zettelkasten

« on: March 05, 2022, 07:00 PM »

I'm okay with a very long document in a plaintext format, but I'd worry about a huge tome entirely in Word.

-Dormouse (March 05, 2022, 09:07 AM)

Doesn't seem like a problem. Tested it with War and Peace. No complex formatting etc, but it was only just over 2MB and pretty snappy. Perfectly manageable. Broke it once ("not responding"), but I was trying.

Briefly tested setting Word up for writing since it is so so long since I've used it like that, and it's not so bad. Had to change (set up) a few shortcuts - but I'm not big on shortcuts most of the time, so minor for me. Outlining flexibility - shifting lines, paragraphs etc - better than most programs (actually as good as any), which is very different to what I remember.  Word/paragraph/page counts good - though I don't think there's a session counter. Entirely practical tbh. Extremely configurable in some ways, and not at all in others.

Okay, it won't compete with WikidPad for Sanderson's Story Bible; or with the wiki-linking PKM apps for research and linking (I don't see how Sanderson's setup could be as good as one with incorporated wiki-links). Doesn't compete with Inspire Writer/Ulysses/Scrivener for writing in multiple projects. Don't believe there's a typewriter mode. But still much better than I had expected. And everything co-operates with it.

114

General Software Discussion / Re: I'm thinking of going primitive, with discursion into zettelkasten

« on: March 05, 2022, 09:07 AM »

I need smooth workflows

-Dormouse (March 04, 2022, 04:41 AM)

IW ... is limited and rigidly not configurable. But everything is part of the whole and seems, so far, to be very reliable.

-Dormouse (March 01, 2022, 05:34 AM)

so when I found this quote

I also like how picky the developers of both apps are. Neither of them just add every requested feature. It needs to fit tightly into their app’s workflow.

In a Review comparing Ulysses with Bear I thought "Exactly!"
There are times when I'm happy to play and learn, but others when I need to get things done. Most writing is getting things done. Research too, but not quite such a high proportion of the time.

The problem with smooth workflow apps is that they are very very good if they match your workflow, but can be close to useless if they don't. But most of the newer PKM apps I've tried are in the very rough category (I'll except Amplenote, which simply didn't meet my needs). Obsidian used to be far smoother than most, but hasn't been the same since the move to CodeMirror 6 and Live Preview and the plugin explosion.

Also
The resurgence of Workflowy development seems to be associated with an increase in the number of developers from 2 to 14. Some in Ukraine.

And Also
Brandon Sanderson apparently does his outlining (he's a heavy outliner) AND writing entirely in Word. Maybe in a single long document?Story Bible in WikidPad. I'm okay with a very long document in a plaintext format, but I'd worry about a huge tome entirely in Word. Though I assume he has much more powerful computers that I have.

115

General Software Discussion / Re: I'm thinking of going primitive; new writing workflows plan

« on: March 04, 2022, 04:41 AM »

When I found IW, I was really just looking for a better writing front end to cover me for markdown and rich text workflows. Turns out that it will be used further into the backend too.

My planned workflows atm:-

1. Mindomo > Workflowy > Inspire Writer > Word
2. Inspire Writer > Workflowy > Inspire Writer
3. Inspire Writer > Word > Inspire Writer

Programs involved:
Planning and Development - Mindomo, Workflowy, Inspire Writer
Writing - Inspire Writer, maybe some in Workflowy
Editing - Word, Inspire Writer

Storage formats - markdown, docx, OPML

General support program - Typora

I don't know about related note-taking and research. I'm sure wiki-links, backlinks, and tags will be core components, but haven't worked out a plan yet.

Though I have switched my newish formal zettelkasten project from Obsidian to Workflowy.  It lacks the nice Ctrl-hover that made Obsidian very fast when it came to position a new page; but that was only needed because the MOC with links was required to maintain folgezettel. Workflowy has folgezettel automatically, and the notes are immediately visible anyway.

I think Obsidian will remain a code editor at heart, with clunky features and a constant risk of workflows breaking - at least for the next few years. That doesn't make it something I can afford to rely on when I need smooth workflows. I think in 5-10 years time, it will either have improved massively, morphed into something else or be in terminal decline; atm I'm not confident that the first option is the most likely.

Workflowy has the requisite wiki-links, backlinks and tags but is an online database. That's okay for 95% of what I need. But I haven't checked out what it can do in this regard. It seems to be in active development, so hard to be too definitive about planning its use - it could get better (or worse); so far the newer features seem pretty well implemented.

Though I have switched my newish formal zettelkasten project from Obsidian to Workflowy

-Dormouse (March 04, 2022, 04:41 AM)

In fact, it's becoming my research/writing hub. I'd started by also having my small number of tasks etc there too (better to only use one program I thought), but I struggled to cope with that. Moved those to Dynalist (so that's no longer deprecated). Odd the way our minds work. What ought to be most efficient turns out simply irritating.

What Inspire Writer does it does okay. But no wiki-links, a limited tag system, limited search and no auto-complete. It could never be more than a small contributor to a system centred in another program.

Most of the other programs I have looked at in the PKM space are some way behind Obsidian, but I'm sure there will be more to come. The hybrid database/files model operated by Ulysses and IW has the potential to be very powerful.

116

Mini-Reviews by Members / Re: Inspire Writer

« on: March 03, 2022, 05:05 AM »

importing a long markdown document took much more time than i anticipated.

-Dormouse (March 01, 2022, 04:45 AM)

otoh, IW will only import one file at a time, so large files are still more useful than small ones.

117

Mini-Reviews by Members / Re: Inspire Writer

« on: March 02, 2022, 06:49 PM »

Typing [[ automatically generates a URL link.
...
doesn't recognise #tags, but has its own internal tag system
...
doesn't have highlight as such
...
Neither does it recognise strikethrough

-Dormouse (March 01, 2022, 04:45 AM)

If wanting syntax that works in markdown exported notes, the following works in Obsidian:
~[[wiki-link]]
~![[transclusion]]
~~~~strikethrough~~
==highlight== ; naturally ::==highlight in Obsidian and IW==:: highlights in both
@tags and #tags ; ~#tag works for beginning of line

I'm not sure what happens with a code export
''code block
Indents the contents and colours them in Obsidian and Typora
Nothing shows in source mode, and neither Obsidian nor Typora recognise the IW syntax if typed in directly
I don't need to know why. It may be useful. Possibly as an exportable comment.

118

General Software Discussion / Re: I'm thinking of going primitive, with discursion into zettelkasten

« on: March 01, 2022, 05:34 AM »

Obsidian ... less inviting to use.

-Dormouse (February 28, 2022, 05:10 PM)

Workable but not smooth.

-Dormouse (February 28, 2022, 05:10 PM)

seems slightly clunky

-Dormouse (February 28, 2022, 05:10 PM)

Heading sizing has been re-done - ... I have tried adding some CSS overrides to avoid old themes from screwing it up, but ...
... Please report .. issues to the theme developer though.

The final quote is from the Obsidian developer in the forum, responding to a report that h1 headings had become gargantuan in the latest update. I think it sums up many of the issues that make Obsidian problematic for productive use. Things can change suddenly (it is still in beta, after all), sometimes break and that most users' workflow depends on a large number of developers, not all of whom are entirely up-to-date. Good program for fiddling, very responsive and flexible for programmers, but not the greatest for maintaining a smooth and productive workflow especially for the non-technically minded.

The contrast with IW is stark. In some ways that program is limited and rigidly not configurable. But everything is part of the whole and seems, so far, to be very reliable.

119

Mini-Reviews by Members / Re: Inspire Writer

« on: March 01, 2022, 04:45 AM »

Observations so far

I'd like folding, but understand that IW's design means multiple tiny blocks which can be shuffled. The groups and sheets are the equivalent of markdown headings and text. For me it's the equivalent of the Scrivener approach of starting with little bits, but that's the way it is. It does have an outline, and it does allow it to be used for navigation, though not reorganisation. It recognises any line starting with a # as a heading.

It's not bad at taking clips from the web. Images have to be pasted separately, but it's fairly seamless. Potentially makes IW quite a good inbox.

Generally fast, but importing a long markdown document took much more time than i anticipated.

Tables are straightforward (they don't exist in Ulysses at all).

The file splitting and merging functions are simple, effective and very useful.

Colour emojis appear in black and white when used. That's odd; makes it pointless to use them.

There's some fairly hinky behaviour with markdown and Obsidian syntax. Though I can see that some of it is actually useful:

• It recognises any line starting with # as a heading.
• Typing [[ automatically generates a URL link. Mmm. That seems to have stopped happening. That's good. But now it happens the minute the first closing bracket is typed. [[ ]] - but pasting it works.
• Inconvenient behaviour like the above can be escaped by making it 'raw source' - that's putting a tilde (~) before the text. The tilde won't appear on the export, but the following text will.
• Comments can be created with ++comment++ and comment blocks with %%. They don't show on export. This is useful.
• It doesn't recognise #tags, but has its own internal tag system (same way Ulysses works). This means the tags exist in the database but not  any export. There are some advantages to that. @tags aren't recognised either but don't interfere with any other behaviour.
• It doesn't have highlight as such. It has 'marked', using double colons before and after. Neither the highlight nor the colons are exported to markdown or plaintext, but are on export to rich text and docx. However, Ctrl-A, Ctrl-C followed by paste into any editor, does export the double colons, which can then be found and replaced. Again there are some advantages and disadvantages to this system.
• Neither does it recognise strikethrough. Instead it has double pipes before and after. On markdown export, it applies the usual syntax; on rich text and docx export it strikes through the text; on plain text export the word disappears entirely.

120

General Software Discussion / Re: I'm thinking of going primitive, with discursion into zettelkasten

« on: February 28, 2022, 05:10 PM »

While I was working with IW, I noticed that I had copied a web page to IW and was immediately, automatically highlighting. ??? Why? IW was for writing not research. So I thought I needed to understand this. It's something I've had to make myself deliberately do usually.

Question 1 is about the highlighting. And comments.

IW's highlighting isn't great, and not especially easy to do. Also rather glaring. Pasting in to IW is easy though. It doesn't transfer to markdown, so exporting highlights means exporting to docx. So why then was I highlighting automatically here, when I haven't been in the apps I'd intended for the purpose? (That is Obsidian mainly.)

I tested options in the programs I am using (I'm sure there will be better out there), using a clip form the web. Looking at highlighting and comments. Word and Workflowy were great. OneNote was good. Obsidian was workable. But there was a general problem in exporting the highlighted text to other formats and programs; ultimately the highlighting was best done in the program where it would be used.

Comments on individual programs:

Spoiler

Obsidian

Ordinary highlighting using mouse is a pain. I'd need left hand for the == but that's not a convenient part of the keyboard to reach.

The colour highlighter works okay, but is a slowish and deliberate process. Workable but not smooth.

Comments can be added fairly easily

OneNote

Web clipping and highlighting is good. Comment boxes can be added. Pretty effective for this part of the operation.

Workflowy

Highlighting is easy and good. But I couldn't find a way of exporting it. Easy to paste into outline (note doesn't work well). Very good for comments.

Word

Highlighting and annotating etc is superb. But highlighting doesn't transfer to markdown if converted through Typora (not surprising since markdown doesn't have colour, and presumably Typora doesn't want to make assumptions about highlight syntax.

So good, if docx is final saved form.
(Otherwise best for document parts to be saved to markdown and then use the colour highlighter - but that's no so good for productivity.)

Atlantis

Just to check whether it is better than Word.

About the same. Slightly better highlighting, worse commenting.

Databases might be the key

I saw the potential power of using duplicate, split and merge when going through this note-taking part of the research process. Obsidian can do this (though I think it is clunky) and it feels as if it's something databases might be much better at.

I noticed IW doing a lot of the visual part of this in the Library (outline) rather than in the files.

Comment on individual programs:

Spoiler

Inspire Writer

Very quick and easy.

Obsidian

Duplicating a file is easy.

Splitting isn't. Really needs the Note Refactor plugin and using named h1-h3 headings. And having set up a folder for them to be put into (else they become lost). Maybe they could all be named split and automated with text expansion.

Merging files again works, but seems slightly clunky.

Workflowy

Splitting is quite easy because everything is in blocks. Merging too. And duplicating is instant. Manual rather than automatic though - which has advantages and disadvantages.

OneNote

No splitting etc. Can be achieved manually. But not the best workflow; wouldn't be efficient at all. Noticed that splitting was one of the Gem additions, so not an uncommon issue.

Word

Splitting apparently possible, but extremely cumbersome. If it were to be done, probably best done in IW first followed by highlighting etc in Word if colours are needed. 

Overall conclusions

Images always had to be handled manually. No major difference between the programs.

I was surprised that IW was probably the best for overall efficiency and productivity. Duplicating, merging and splitting probably best in class. Highlighting works and exports to docx. Comments fine. By far the best export options overall.

Obsidian will do all the jobs to a reasonable standard, but is much slower and less inviting to use.

Word and Workflowy are good in their ways. Workflowy good across the board, but export options are very limited. Word less good at document management than I had anticipated.

121

Mini-Reviews by Members / Re: Inspire Writer

« on: February 26, 2022, 10:23 PM »

I continue to be impressed by Inspire Writer in use. I Posted in the Primitive thread about being surprised by finding it useful in note-taking. It's just very usable. Easy to concentrate on what I'm doing rather than the program - despite still having to check shortcuts.

122

Mini-Reviews by Members / Re: Inspire Writer

« on: February 26, 2022, 07:14 PM »

degree of similarity in its design and syntax with Ulysses

-Dormouse (February 26, 2022, 04:13 PM)

Spoiler

I'll admit that I have some level of concern about the remarkable degree of similarity. Similar design, even to using the same symbols and syntax. I can see that some features are implemented differently though. I did once complain to Microsoft's store about them selling a Ulysses app that had a butterfly emblem and had nothing to do with the real Ulysses; it stayed there for a long time, but has now disappeared. OTOH, it's clear that Ulysses has no intention of developing for Windows; it allows some Ulysses users to work cross-platform using a similar but less good program (I can see that Ulysses might see this as a good thing rather than a problem) - see the review cited in my first post; it has been developing steadily for the last four years, and it makes no claim to be Ulysses or in any way related to it. If I had a Mac, I could check to see whether IW has any features that Ulysses doesn't, but I don't so I can't. I do know that Ulysses has features that IW doesn't because I can read about Ulysses and check IW for its presence. And, despite the concerns, I think the world is a better place for having the app available and I don't see any losers (with the Ulysses titled windows app, the purchasers were losers if they believed it was connected to the Mac Ulysses); I hope that belief's not influenced by self-interest.

If I had a Mac, I could check to see whether IW has any features that Ulysses doesn't, but I don't so I can't.

-Dormouse (February 26, 2022, 07:14 PM)

On checking Ulysses Guides, I find that it doesn't have tables: Inspire Writer does!

-Dormouse (February 26, 2022, 10:23 PM)

From Ulysses blog March 25th 2016:

We’re flattered by the requests to see Ulysses on other platforms. There are no plans to port Ulysses either to Microsoft Windows or to Android though. First, we’re true Apple enthusiasts. We have been using Apple devices in our professional and private lives for many years. We know these platforms well and would like to keep our focus on them. Second, both Microsoft Windows and Android greatly differ from Apple in their technical specifications, which means bringing Ulysses to them would be quite a lot of work for our small team. Nevertheless, thanks for asking.

Inspire Writer launched in 2017
There's a huge number of features that Ulysses has and IW doesn't (some small, some quite large) and a few that IW has and Ulysses doesn't. Improvements in IW have e emerged slowly, but steadily, over the last four years and they are clearly targeting the market of Ulysses users when they work on Windows.They wrote a blog post about this a few years ago. Certainly, if I ever had to use a Mac, I would, as things stand, subscribe to Ulysses having had this experience with IW.

I have delved further. I appear to have done some digging in 2017 (according to an email exchange I had with Matt (AeonTimeline)), and found that Inspire Writer was being sold then by the same company as was selling the fake Ulysses. I don't know if it was the same product with different branding, although it seems quite likely.

So, I don't feel I can recommend a product sold by a company that has in the past attempted to sell it fraudulently. OTOH, I do like the product. And copying ideas and methodologies seems par for the course in software. Libre Office deliberately imitates MS Office, Dynalist seems to be as much a clone of Workflowy with some differences and original code - that's pretty much the state of play between Inspire Writer and Ulysses afaics. And Microsoft are still selling this one, despite being aware of the history. And I'll carry on using it, though I will probably have a scout around for any other Ulysses alternatives that nmight be around.

123

Mini-Reviews by Members / Re: Inspire Writer

« on: February 26, 2022, 04:13 PM »

Because there doesn't seem to be written about using Inspire Writer on the net, and the degree of similarity in its design and syntax with Ulysses, I thought I'd see what I could find written about Ulysses.

The first thing I found was this on the main page of the website:

Hmm. I thought.

I can think of another program with a minimalistic writing interface and a much better ability to see everything and move it around.



And, unlike Ulysses, it has two types of tags, and a variety of coloured text and highlights.



Take a bow Workflowy!
(And it has kanban and wiki-links too.)

I've also found this blog page about using Ulysses, which I think is actually quite interesting about his methodology and how it's supported by Ulysses. Though maybe seeing it in a slightly Scrivenerish way. I think the features described are all in Inspire Writer.

Writing a novel with Ulysses

 So far, I don't think I've found a feature in Ulysses that's absent in Inspire Writer and I wish it had.

124

Mini-Reviews by Members / Re: Inspire Writer

« on: February 26, 2022, 10:41 AM »

It remains my firm belief that AsciiDoc or MarkDown would be so much bigger, if there was such a thing as a WYSIWYG editor for it.

-Shades (February 25, 2022, 07:32 PM)

Agreed, up to a point: I think there's a limit to how much lipstick can achieve here.

I think plaintext is a great idea, but the specifications are rubbish. Being a precursor to HTML is a very limiting view of the world. Of potential uses. I've even started drafting out a better plaintext specification, just for my own interest.

[rant]

Spoiler

More like putdown's did occur.

-Shades (February 25, 2022, 07:32 PM)

Yeah. I find the Obsidian Discord and Forums exactly the same. Generally disdainful of those who use word processors. Fiercely aggressive to explaint markdown rules that they often don't understand. Fierce to defend markdown purity for the sake of interoperability - and this in an app that doesn't fully accept .txt or .markdown etc files! - despite the number of 'acceptable' markdown variations meaning consistency can't exist. Wiki-links are now used by a far wider range of programs than markdown links. One thing I don't understand, even from a purists point of view is why there isn't an editor that doesn't have a config page where users can specify which syntax is read and which syntax is written

[/rant]

But I don't think that need trouble you about programs like Inspire Writer and Ulysses. They utilise some markdown syntax, but also use non-markdown syntax. From their perspective markdown purity will always lose out to their view of usability. And, in the end, I don't think you will ever see real progress through markdown editors. It will come, I believe from programs like this that have a purpose who see that plaintext can be a better way of achieving their ends.

The big one will be when Word, or one of the other big word processors integrates markdown (or other plaintext) import and export. But that may be some way off; it wouldn't be hugely difficult to do, but wouldn't be a big gain for most of their users. Having to integrate all the complexity of documents, printing etc requires a substantial degree of complexity in both the program and the file format. There's a much bigger gain for programs like Ulysses and Roam who can do all the text processing using a database; they don't need to maintain individual documents just address them on import and export.

Hey Ho. On we go. TreeDBnotes ahoy.

125

Mini-Reviews by Members / Re: Inspire Writer

« on: February 25, 2022, 06:57 PM »

I don't have a very good answer

-Dormouse (February 25, 2022, 11:14 AM)

But now I do

Convenience

I think this is the core of the attraction. Comparing Evernote and OneNote a decade ago, Evernote was growing rapidly in popularity despite OneNote having many more features, and I think that's because most people found it convenient in a way that OneNote never has been. It did enough, it was simple to use, and was reliable.

The edit screen is nice to look at and work with. No distractions. It's something that sounds simple, and ought to be simple, but it's not often achieved; near misses impress by being near. And as I'm working on this, I notice my attention entirely on the text. As it should be. But rarely is even in programs with edit panes that occupy the whole screen with nothing but text visible.

The image above includes the ribbon. True full screen edit mode loses that.


And the key feature, is one that I'm not completely sure about - it has a database. AND it can use its file explorer to work with external files - importing into the database is not required for 95% of the features. The only other markdown program I know that can work with local files and has a database is WriteMonkey 3 which I also like. Ulysses must do too.

Since my aim is relying on local files, why am I finding a database so attractive? That's convenience and flexibility especially for Work in Progress. Now this database doesn't offer more than a small proportion of WriteMonkey's flexibility. And it's clunkier and harder to access - more akin to Scrivener's model. WriteMonkey's Snippet Repository is wonderful, easy and tucks itself completely out of the way when it's not needed. Unsure about that phrase? - no problem, just cut it into the repository; want to rearrange all the sentences, well just stick them in the repository and play copying them back here, there and everywhere. So Inspire's advantage isn't at that level. It's partly in the head (database - temporary - won't get lost) and partly practical. The sheets in the database don't actually live anywhere. Start them, play with them, move them around; they don't need to crystallise into files until until you're happy with them. No need to worry about where they should live or what form they should have (rather similar argument to those users put forward about Roam). It helps Inspire work as a hub.

Because it is also very good at helping the text into a final form and then distributing it wherever it's wanted. This isn't just the range of export options, but the way they are handled. Whatever format is chosen, there's the option to look at a preview of what will be exported, and that can be placed on the clipboard, opened with a chosen external program or saved as a file. Since it also imports a range of text files (docx, md, HTML, htm, txt), that makes for a complete function as a hub (I know the docx imports I tried, mostly failed, but they said they would investigate, and I've seen no other report of such problems). I'd never been particularly taken with Ulysses' feature set, despite its evangelical popularity with Mac writers, but, since it is apparently a much more capable program than this, I can see that it must be a very good program indeed.

Comparison with WriteMonkey 3

Having mentioned it above, and indicated WM3's superiority I ought probably to address the comparison directly. WM3's database has the same flexibility in reordering, searching etc as Inspire's. Inspire doesn't have an equivalent of the snippet repository. Dealing with external files is different - WM3 will import an external file and then synchronise its database with that file; it doesn't work with the external file directly.

WM3 is even more minimal than Inspire, has the most wonderful folding capability (Inspire doesn't have folding at all) and I consider it the most efficient and productive environment for writing and text editing that I have encountered. BUT it has a totally unique design. Being in it all day might increase productivity by 50%, but when there's a need to move in and out then that's -50% instead. It also does not have the ability to interface with docx, its preview is primitive even for a traditional markdown editor and the editing pane is good (with many colour options) but, to my mind, not Inspire good. A hub it is not.

Ultimately it looks as if Inspire Writer just ticks an awful lot of boxes that I need ticking. I'll start addressing foibles and issues in my next post. When I've used it a little more.