topbanner_forum
  *

avatar image

Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
Did you miss your activation email?

Login with username, password and session length
  • Sunday April 19, 2026, 1:36 am
  • Proudly celebrating 15+ years online.
  • Donate now to become a lifetime supporting member of the site and get a non-expiring license key for all of our programs.
  • donate

Recent Posts

Pages: prev1 ... 10 11 12 13 14 [15] 16 17 18 19 20 ... 79next
351
I'm also having another go at doing a serious journal/diary.
I've been inspired by Virginia Woolf's diaries which I hadn't read until I was recently gifted a copy. (Ebook versions are available for free on the internet, like all of her work.) I've always been impressed by the famous diaries (Pepys etc) , but they'd never seemed relevant to my own potential use. These diaries fit much better. They seem to cover everything. She took them seriously, trying to set aside a small amount of time each day, but there are still many days with no entries. There's description, observation, activities, introspection, planning and recording her reading and her writing programme. Recording and trying to analyse her feelings and emotions and health (frequently poor). Practicing phrasing and style (and reporting her feeling, after some years of use, that it had helped her writing to flow more easily).

In the past, I've often been caught out by the physical methodology getting in my way. And limited time. That led me to focus on what seemed important (with the habit stopping when it no longer was), and books (printed diaries/plain notebooks) which then became inconvenient. And I've tried so many digital methods without ever getting going seriously with any of them. At least with the pen and papers ones, I still find the ones made years ago interesting today. But in recent years I've never been able to do more than a few days at a time in a paper diary, so digital it has to be.

I tried a plain document approach using Obsidian, but that became messy and not very useful. So as my system is opening again, I've returned to Diarium, which I first looked at in March last year before encountering Obsidian. AND I'm having another go with dictation on the phone. The availability suits me well and I'm accustomed to dictating, even if it is never as fast as typing, when it feels as if it ought to be faster. Worked okay so far, but very early days, so mostly likely another false start; maybe not because the Woolf model could easily work for me. And I'm not limited to dictation or the phone. I expect to export regularly into .txt files.

But the dictation works  remarkably well. 'Marques de Riscal, Rioja Reserva 2016' without a hitch. I was well impressed.
352
I've not been following the development of Obsidian that closely recently. It continues apace. Multiple plugins and themes now - though I'm aware that some of them on occasion have caused data loss. Many still look for Roam features, implemented exactly the way Roam does it. Hosts of other improvements and tweaks that sometimes catch out even experienced users. If most users use a large number of them, I can foresee the day in a few years where switching to anything else will become very hard because their preferred features aren't all available elsewhere; or they'll gradually give up and start again with another program. I think giving up will be frequent anyway because so many users are students who won't have the same needs once they finish their courses and the system they have built with Obsidian will have been tweaked and fine tuned into inflexibility.

We'll see.
Won't be an issue for me because I'm staying primitive.
I'm limiting my markdown formatting to headings and very occasional text (italic, bold, underline, strikethrough) = and half of that isn't really markdown. Maybe lists. Plus wikilinks. Plus images.
Most of what I do works perfectly well as pure .txt.
Editing and reviewing needs much more than markdown can provide and I will continue to switch to other programs for those.
353
General Software Discussion / Re: Vivaldi, the new Web browser for power users
« Last post by Dormouse on January 17, 2021, 02:06 PM »
It's never been an issue for me: I always typed d anyway  :)

Was going to check  on Firefox, but then found that I hadn't installed it.
354
For navigating, I basically use the sidebar where the files are listed, and the graph webbing view.
I was interested because I find I'm ignoring most options.
I virtually never use the graph or the file explorer sidebar.
I do use links (backlinks sometimes), tags and search - and that's about it. I use my nested vaults as an easy way to limit the available files and would expect to use MOC (Maps of Content = indices) when they become useful.
355
Is there a way in obsidian to get a toolbar for markup? 
I'd suggest just using Typora as your front end until Obsidian has its WYSIWYG editor. They both update fast, meaning they can be used at the same time.
356
The last good version (IMO) of WinAmp was v2.x IIRC
Winamp 2.10 was released March 1999, and AOL took the company over in June of that year; v3 not coming out until 2002 when AOL itself had merged with Time-Warner.
Gnutella was released in 2000, until AOL ordered it taken down. Thereafter, he released programs, and AOL would take them down until he finally resigned in 2004.
He's shown no sign of ever wanting to sell Reaper.

I don't know if that's good or bad.
So I'd say it should be seen as good.
357
I noticed that 1by1 has winamp plugin support,
which reminded me
fwiw, that the founder/main developer of Reaper was the founder/original developer of WinAmp (and Gnutella). v1 of Reaper was in 2006, and it's now on v6.
358
Reaper has a Media Explorer. It's enough for most users, though some don't like way it looks/works.

Free if you decide to carry on using it without paying after the two months trial,  which is what most users do. As it's a DAW, the media explorer is only a tiny part of its functionality.

Simple it isn't, but I doubt you'd have difficulty with the media explorer.
359
I prefer Obsidian to navigate my content
Which features of Obsidian do you use when navigating?
360
One huge issue for me, having many files, is the whole file explorer set up. None of these programs are great. Obsidian possibly best because it has the greatest variety of ways of finding files (folder, search, tags, regex, graph), but convenience in everyday use is important.

Another issue is how well the editor/program integrates into a system where there are many types of files. Again I don't think any of them are great for doing this.
361
I prefer using Zettlr to write my content,
I'm often not very fussed about what I actually write in. Sometimes my choice will depend on a feature I want for that particular use.
For instance folding (which I use a lot):
Typora doesn't seem to have it;
Zettlr is better (headings);
Obsidian is better still (headings and outlines)
and WriteMonkey is best (no obvious limitation).
I admit I might have missed a use somewhere above - I've not tested in detail, just what I've found in use.
362
I'm still using TreeDBNotes
TreeDBNotes is very different to all of these, so you'd probably need to have decided to move on. And if that's your starting point, you'll know what you want to keep and what you'd like to add.
363
Back in the day, when I used it, there were a few nice features not as easily available in other software - but I used other programs more of the time. Always masses of potential, but never realised. Last I remember, he was talking about optimising it for use with photos from phones.

This time, I just opened a jpg and went straight for Pro functions.
364
I notice that Rob hasn't signed in to his forum since February. So another protracted disappearance. I also notice that his new forum only ever gained 41 registered users, including you - might have been a bit dispiriting when he'd put the effort in to setting it all up again. It's very sad because there will be reasons for it and it's great software - but no way you can rely on it being supported or updated.

That said, I took the risk and downloaded the free version - which did work as it should (W10, no compatibility modes). So I've got no idea why it wouldn't work for you. I'd suggest that you uninstall the program and hunt down and clean any vestiges of previous installs and then install the free version again.
365
I suspect it could be adequately handled by XML
If XML were a contender markdown et freres would never have been invented.

The number of commands most people need is small, it's just that markdown doesn't include them all, and some of its choices are distinctly odd and hard to use. Apart from other features which presumably fitted Gruber's original idea of purpose and target users, but aren't wanted by most WP users.
366
Could you perhaps post your thoughts on some Obsidian forum to see if someone can validate your approach?
With any particular outcome in mind?

Problem is that the Obsidian forums aren't great at analysis.
And this is an issue only to a tiny minority (possibly only me).
I would have expected more informed responses when I first raised the issue if more informed responses were to be had. And no comment from developers at all.
I have a few more tests to do, and recheck on the latest version, and then I'll probably put a small post on the forum in case anyone else is ever interested.

I mentioned it here as a follow-on to my post explaining my change of direction, to indicate that there were simpler methods of managing it. Certainly it makes it easier for me to continue using Obsidian for most notes, but does nothing to move me from Frankenstein.

Which had advantages anyway. I worked out how to do multi-coloured highlights in markdown fairly easily, but simply using RTF is easier still and it is only a temporary stage for me, not the final document. At some point, I'm sure someone will come up with a better form of plaintext for the average word processor user. It will give up document management and document styling features (the latter are rarely used by most, and the former are little used by the average user) ave but keep the text control and styling. It will give up code blocks. Maybe it will be called marktext.
367
“aspiration to achieve omniscience.”
Nothing wrong with that. Just one end of a spectrum. The better end usually.
With total ignorance being the midpoint, and being wrong about everything at the other end.
Life makes it hard for anyone to maintain a comfortable ignorance, which leaves you with a choice of directions.
368
General Software Discussion / Deleting contents of ObsidianCache
« Last post by Dormouse on November 19, 2020, 03:44 PM »
I've now established that deleting (or moving) contents of ObsidianCache has no effect on Obsidian's memory for the existence of previously opened vaults or their location. They still open as normal (presumably recreating the ObsidianCache file from the files).

Changing the name of the Vault folder loses the memory of that vault and changing it back after Obsidian has been closed does not restore it. Presumably one of the other cache files stores names and locations of available vaults from the last session, and there's a check for their continued existence.

So deleting the vaults I want to keep secure from ObsidianCache should be sufficient for my purpose.
Only aggravation is having to check individually the cache names against the vault names.
Assuming I understand what's going on well enough.
369
Why do we write and write and curate and write?
Virtually all the money I've ever earned has depended on my writing. Curating too.
370
it seemed that all files were in the Obsidian folder, i.e. if I created files in VS Code, Obsidian seemed to pick it up and pick up the changes if I had both open
It will still do this, and the files themselves are just as they were and in the same location.

I apparently (a) haven't  kept up with Obsidian changes, or (b) was just unaware that it stored other files in other locations.
The big change came, I believe, in 0.8.7 when some files were switched from the vault folder to a system folder. Originally described as some data, and more recently as metadata, the amount stored has steadily increased as features have been added.

I'd prefer files alone, but I don't object to  this in principle. I would have wanted detailed disclosure and much preferred the approach of keeping this 'metadata' in the vault folders.
I might investigate what happens if I leave the system folder where it is but just move the vault 'metadata' for vaults I want to keep secure to an encrypted space (moving it back when I want to access that vault).

The big hit is to my confidence in the developers. I was anticipating subscribing to their Sync service when it came out (e2e encryption, secure cloud) - don't need it but I'd rather contribute if I'm using it a lot - but there's no way I'd trust their implementation now.

I might just go ahead and uninstall it as it's sort of withered on the vine in my workflow.
No obvious reason why not, if you don't use it.

I like the way transclusions work.
371
@Dormouse- that's a no-brainer for me too.  It's one of the reasons that I stopped depending on Obsidian pretty quickly, and moved over to the Frankenstein model that I have (Using Foam and Memo extensions).  But the plugins with Visual Studio Code has been working really well for me.  I wish that I had the ability to embed references- it's one thing that would have solved some issues I've had.  But it has worked out fine, especially with previews inline.

As you know, I have a much more nuanced approach to databases.
I'm OK with Writemonkey 3 with its coterminous files. I have my data in files and the extra features that come from the database (which include, I assume, its very good folding). Most writing programs have some sort of database; some also have files and some save much of the data in files.

But the Writemonkey approach to the database is far superior to that in Obsidian:
It's explicit that everything is in a database, with coterminous files being a selectable option.
The location of the database can be changed.
You can have more than one database.
You can run more than one instance at the same time.
This makes it easy to have a tiered approach to privacy and security.
Even so there are still some reports etc I wouldn't use Writemonkey for.

Obsidian has never been totally clear about what is saved where. Some is saved in the vault folder. But a large part has been moved to a json in a system folder.
It talks about vaults, and how every fault is totally separate, but then the data from every vault is in the same system folder in readable format.
It seems hard coded to only look at one location. If it's empty it writes another set.
And it has just announced saved searches. So a reiteration of the same question in my head - 'What is saved, where?'. I'm sure the answer will be that central json, but I'll have to run a few searches and do a file check to see exactly what's there. And will only be quick because I will know what I'm looking for and can do a search.
For me, it's straightforward poor design and not thinking through the implications of choices. Fixing a small immediate problem - today easier, tomorrow harder, and just don't think about next week.

Most of the immediate problems can be overcome. I control what I use it for. I can remove and encrypt the system file between uses (though that would always irritate me). And I can to a detailed test of every update (though they are weekly, more or less; I think I'll make it less going forward, updating is starting to feel too much effort for a small gain).
The big question about any developing software is where it's going to end up and how confident you can be about both quality and direction. This is where I now favour your Frankenstein model, though my version may look completely different to yours. Obsidian might be some part of it, maybe.
372
And for anyone using VS code, I just found a new model built on top of it - Dendron (https://www.dendron.so/).  I can't say too much about it yet, but I'm definitely going to take a look to see what's different between that and the others.
It's designed to have a strong hierarchy, reflecting a folder structure.

Didn't suit me, even if I had been willing to use VSCode.
I'm OK with opening VSCode for one purpose and then closing it again, but that wouldn't suit any Note app.
373
OK. Things have moved on swiftly since my last post and my Plan B has now become Plan A.

I said that I considered Obsidian's block reference method a hack. Not using it meant that it didn't affect me, but it was still something I noted.

I was prompted a few days ago to take a look at exactly what data Obsidian was storing and where it was stored. In the Discord it was stated that data was stored in the vault, but actually most is stored in systems folders predominantly, on Windows, in Appdata\Roaming\ObsidianCache which contains .json files for every vault that has been opened. The .json contains the names of all files in the vault, plus headings, and links - in plain sight. A user might encrypt the vaults themselves but this information would remain easily read.

(This can be dealt with by simply deleting the obsidian file in Roaming every time the program is closed - it will just rebuild it when it is opened again. Presumably there will be a speed penalty which will become noticeable with very large vaults.)

I assume that starting Obsidian calls or creates these files, which are used to provide fast access to items that can be linked. This allows fast responses without having to load the full content of files into memory. JIT method.

When I first used Obsidian all information was kept in the vault. The switch to the system folders came in 0.8.7 and was apparently to address problems with sync programs.

I also noted that one of the recent plugins deleted user data before it was updated to address the issue. Plugins are optional but regarded as a central feature of Obsidian's design.

I drew a number of conclusions.
  • Until this is fixed, which I assume it will be, there is a potential security issue for any user who puts private information in file names or headings, unless they are confident of the security of their computer.
  • The method was chosen without any thought to possible security implications, despite a thread on the forum where a number of users were finding ways to circumvent employers restrictions on installing software so that they could install and use Obsidian on work computers (this would increase their risk if their computer were audited).
  • Together with the block reference methodology, my confidence in the expertise of the developer has reduced.
  • The developer seems to be responding to pressure to increase the number of features which would only work well in a database. Given that a large proportion of the posting community seems to be made of students, many of whom were either previous users of Roam or aware of its features but not keen to pay Roam's price, I would conclude that this is the group driving the direction of travel.
  • I see Obsidian currently as being a partial database with linked files. afaics it will end up as a full database program with associated files. They are discussing ways of saving folds between sessions, and it's hard to see how that can be done without a database. The argument will go 'we already have quite a large partial database, what would be lost if we move to a full database model?' and I think that's true. I now see Obsidian as a database program rather than a files based program  - I had assumed that this type of stuff was only in a cache which disappeared when the program was closed.

Since I don't want another database program, and since my needs aren't closely concordant to students, it seems likely that it will diverge further and further from something that works for me. So no longer Plan A, just a makedo until I have a better solution. The Plan B from last time is my new Plan A. And I'll maintain an open mind about the possibility of a better Plan B.
374
Sorry to remain harping on about AsciiDoc
I'm happy for you to keep on with it.
For me asciidoc is better than markdown but worse than org-mode .
And none have some features that would be essential for full utility (for me). So, theoretically, I don't mind moving around. But so far I don't see another program that looks as if it will be as good as Obsidian will be.

I do consider Obsidian's block reference method a misstep, but it won't affect me if I don't use it. Apart from that, I think they're doing well.
(I think a better approach would have involved a better file explorer, options for automatically creating new notes from a next command with a folgezettel name that's hidden in editor, and using transclusions for display etc. That would have been elegant and stuck to their first principles, but couldn't have been done with a quick hack.)
375
What are people doing with all this information they’re curating and cataloging with these various pieces of software? To what purpose? Or maybe even: to what avail?
Most of the time that isn't what I'm doing. Most of what I have is what I write. Stuff I don't write myself is just linked.

Mainstream uses
Writing and research.
It's a large part of what I do, and always has been.
It's pretty much what it's designed for, though the userbase in Obsidian seems to have a huge number of students.

Related uses
Work and professional stuff. Again really, it's largely writing and research. Just differently dressed.

Anything money related
Research on things to be bought, or suppliers, what's paid.
Ditto for pensions, investments etc. I'll probably record my tax stuff in it this year (that bit being purely local and secure).

Everything else
I'm actually using it for nearly everything.
Eg in the garden, what was planted where and how it did.
Anything at all.

My basic rule is that if something requires collection of information, weighing it up and making a decision - especially if it's something I might have to do again in future - then it goes in unless I can work my way through just by remembering (I'm not trying to give myself unnecessary work); or unless I don't get round to it.
But I'm still working my way around the system, so changes are still likely.

Of course, I'm only using it for everything because, I'm already using it and it works and it's easier to use one process for everything.
And having freedom to do that across the board makes it easier to innovate and adjust.

And even more of course, I couldn't write the above in markdown without adding HTML. And that was deprecated in HTML 5 for a while.
Pages: prev1 ... 10 11 12 13 14 [15] 16 17 18 19 20 ... 79next