ATTENTION: You are viewing a page formatted for mobile devices; to view the full web page, click HERE.

Main Area and Open Discussion > General Software Discussion

I'm thinking of going primitive, with discursion into zettelkasten

<< < (170/227) > >>

Dormouse:
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.
-wraith808 (November 18, 2020, 09:55 PM)
--- End quote ---
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.

Dormouse:
@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.
-wraith808 (November 18, 2020, 09:55 PM)
--- End quote ---

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.

wraith808:
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.
-Dormouse (November 19, 2020, 04:01 AM)
--- End quote ---

I'm actually not opposed to databases as it might seem.  I don't care about something being in a db, if I also have it in files.  It's the reason that I still use Scrivener, Writemonkey, and Cintanotes.  In all three cases, I have the content of the database/project replicated in plain text elsewhere.

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.
-Dormouse (November 19, 2020, 04:01 AM)
--- End quote ---

You bring up some good points.  I haven't opened Obsidian in a long while; at the time that I did it, 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.  I apparently (a) haven't  kept up with Obsidian changes, or (b) was just unaware that it stored other files in other locations.  That's really concerning to me, and I might just go ahead and uninstall it as it's sort of withered on the vine in my workflow.

Dormouse:
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
-wraith808 (November 19, 2020, 07:53 AM)
--- End quote ---
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.
-wraith808 (November 19, 2020, 07:53 AM)
--- End quote ---
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.
-wraith808 (November 19, 2020, 07:53 AM)
--- End quote ---
No obvious reason why not, if you don't use it.

I like the way transclusions work.

superboyac:
Just out of curiosity …

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?

I’m more curious about the individual “business” use cases rather than the supporting technology. Technology and solutions that offer varying degrees of utility aren’t that difficult to run down. God knows there’s tons of software out there. But the reasons to employ said technology can sometimes be less obvious. At least to me.

So help me out. What is/are your goal(s). What’s it all for? What are you guys doing with all this information you’re gathering?  :)
-40hz (November 14, 2020, 10:58 AM)
--- End quote ---

40....
When I learned about this, the thing that intrigued me the most was how prolific that Lurhman guy was due to using this system.  Prolific in terms of churning out books.  I also want to continue writing books, so that is my end goal.  I remember writing my first set of books how annoying and time=consuming/frustrating it was to organize everything, and then once organized, even keeping track of your thoughts and notes and edits, etc.  So the idea of using a system such as this to capture your thoughts and then later to recover it and put quickly together in long-form or book form, is the ultimate goal for me.

I've been an unorganized notetaker for many many years, most of my life.  But their all over the place.  If I wanted to put something together based on my thoughts, I have to search and find everything, then reread it (because they are long and disjointed), then re-understand my original points, then organize, then edit.  Supposedly, this allows us to skip all that once the "zettels" are created and its just a matter of following each zettel (which should already be concise and easy to read/understand) and they are already linked, so you can just churn out books...theoretically.

Now, in practice, much of the last 2 years of the exercise was just to see if this even works with the software and tools etc.  Nothing really "took" for me until i saw that software Neuron that I am loving.  And the thing there was that it syncs with my local files and presents a very nice looking website instantly with everything there.  The softwares technically do the same, but something about the aesthetic of neuron really is working for me.

So now I am just writing away, and hopefully some nice books will come out of it.

Business wise, I don't see many applications.  Would employees really use such a tool?  Not really.  Even if they were research oriented, it still takes a rare kind of dedication to use it all (the markdown, the linking, the curating) it's all very rare.  Maybe if the system could be more automated somehow, but still, I struggle to find a good application.  Actually, in the neuron forum, one of the users presented it to a company, and he said there wasn't much interest at all, lol. 

What's wrong with us?  Why do we write and write and curate and write?  I don't know, might be a mental problem.

Navigation

[0] Message Index

[#] Next page

[*] Previous page

Go to full version