I am a Logseq user. One thing I realised is that PKM people tend to spend 99% of intellectualising and fetishising different systems like Zettlekasten and P.A.R.A. when in the end your output is what matters.
I wasted months, just to realise the tools or systems do not matter at all. Interlinking notes doesn't scientifically make you a better writer, writing does.
I think apart from just writing, the one thing that feels like it matters to me is rewriting and consolidation. Having years of notes you never revisit does very little. What is good about some of the systems is that they provide a framework for consolidation and forcing you to keep reviewing things. But I find the specifics of how you end up reviewing and consolidating changes very little, as long as you do.
If anything, I think re-writing works better than interlinking notes, because it forces you to consider the whole. But at some point some things becomes static enough that putting it aside and linking to it may be worthwhile.
80% (random number that seems reasonable) of the value of notes is the act of writing them the first time. For the other 20% they deserve more effort, rewriting and origination are both useful for them.
Agree with that, in that rewriting should include deciding which notes are worth just leaving as is, so that what you rewrite reflects what is still relevant and that will usually as you say be a very small percentage of the whole.
Rewriting to me also seems to reduce the need to refer back to the notes even further, because it effectively acts as a revision also for the notes I decide are not worth summarising, and the few bits that might still be beneficial gets carried along in the rewritten summaries.
If you were fetishizing someone else's system with no thought to your needs, it's good you stopped. But don't you find that you write and research better with a better command of your notes and documents? Do you not much care what sources end up going into your writing and to what extent?
Well where 2 hours into this and no-one mentioned org / org-roam, so I feel a begrudging responsibility to do so.
Org-mode is a combination of note taking, todolist, jupyter notebook, & calendar major-mode for Emacs. It is wonderful and terrible in a lot of the ways emacs itself is. It is incredibly configurable and extendable, and feature rich to the degree that discovering spreadsheet support after using it for 6 months seems to be a rite of passage.
Org-roam is an extension ontop of org-mode that creates an roam like layer.
The largest drawback stems from it being so flexible making it hard to develop a good phone client for it. Through Álvaro Ramírez's PlainOrg(iOS) & Orgzly (Android) do help somewhat.
Org-mode is brilliant. The key is to pick stuff up as you find a need for it, otherwise it gets overwhelming. But you know this.
Mobile-wise, lately I've been using emacs through termux on my Android (LineageOS) phone. With a keyboard attached through usb-c there isn't much difference. Even using the touch keyboard it's better than the alternatives.
IMO the best org phone client is a VPS + CLI emacs + good mobile SSH client + syncthing. Requires connectivity but then I have e.g. org-agenda feature parity. I basically live in this setup. Surprisingly ergonomic to use with a touchscreen and phone keyboard.
If I have no connectivity, the last thing I want is to be editing my org files on yet another device and introducing conflicts. I use something like beorg (ios) for background-sync offline read-only access but don't use it to write offline.
Would highly recommend reconsidering paper notes. Get a small notebook [0] and write down what you need. You’ll lose it and spill coffee on it but you’ll be fine. For the vast majority of things the note writing experience is what makes the difference, not the actual paper. For the rest a subscription is not for me, but to each their own.
I’m only familiar with Obsidian, but it’s business model does have an $8/mo sync tier, and a $16/mo publishing tier as well as a $50/user/year commercial plan.
You can easily set up sync using SyncThing or Dropbox or any other tool that syncs directories between devices. I did pay $25 because I enjoy using Obsidian - but I don't think there is anything missing in the free version. The best part is that everything including themes, plugins and themes are synced perfectly between desktop and mobile.
I installed iSH [0] (Alpine linux emulator) on my iPad and sync obsidian directories between my laptop and the iPad using git and ssh. Works like a charm.
One folder- a Notes folder where all your "vault"s are- on your phone. That syncs with a folder on the cloud. Then get the sync app client on your laptop/PC. Then sync a local folder from your laptop with the cloud folder.
The Obsidian for desktop app is pretty great.
The whole thing works great for me.
So it's like this-
_______ _________________ ________
|phone |---------------> |cloud |<--------------------- |laptop|
|notes | (2 way sync) |folder of | (2 way sync) |notes |
|folder|<-------------- |MEGA/DB/box/sync|---------------------> |folder|
------- ------------------ --------
This method is tried and platform agnostic. All you need is a client that is available for your platform.
I’m iPhone & Pop_os! . There are some obsidian forum threads that can help, I think this is the one that I used for my setup (1).
It is not completely obvious in the UI, but the basic idea is that you use a iOS git app (I use the excellent Working Copy) to just push and pull everything to GitHub, working around some inherent iOS limitations. As a bonus, you can setup the Shortcuts app to auto push and pull with closing and opening obsidian. There’s a git sync extension for obsidian, makes it all pretty seamless once it’s set-up.
If you choose to straddle ecosystems there really isn't that much that the likes of Obsidian can do to help though (especially when it comes to iPhone). I use Obsidian with Mac + Android (Synced via Dropbox, and backed up using git) and it works. Little bit of manual setup, but I can handle that.
At the end of the day Obsidian is just a directory structure of Markdown files. If needed, you can edit them with Obsidian (say using the Dropbox app).
You set up all your vaults under the same folder. You 2-way sync that folder to a cloud folder- Dropbox, MEGA, sync, box- whatever. You then create a folder with the same name on another device, and then use the client for your cloud service for that platform, and then set up two way sync with that folder on the cloud.
Works great with my Android-PopOS system.
Also tried it with Android-macOS, and iOS-Windows.
+1. I wanted to build a daily journaling habit but digital just wasn’t cutting it for me. I managed to do it once I bought one of these [0]. I punched a hole in it and tied a pen to it.
The forgiving format (entries are not pre-dated so you’re allowed to miss a day, the bar on entry length is set low by design) coupled with absence of friction when traveling (no poor connectivity, low battery, etc.) really went a long way.
I knew that even the need to find a pen to write the day’s journal would be enough friction for me to skip it, which is why I tied one to it.
I’ve filled up a couple of these little notebooks, but I haven’t been able to replicate this consistency with any digital solutions.
I'm a pretty happy logseq user. I've found that I still need some degree of hierarchy in my notes, as opposed to just having organic, non-hierarchical linking between everything. So I end up making subnotes: [[Topic A/subtopic x]] is a pretty common occurrence in my knowledge database. As an example, all projects I'm currently working on get [[ProjectA/log]] and [[ProjectA/todo]] subnotes. Keeps my TODOs segregated by topic. You could of course do most of these things with typical note-taking apps that rely on the hierarchical file system motif. But the fact that it's up to me to explictly construct my organizational structure in logseq forces me to be more intentional about how I organize my notes.
Perhaps the greatest benefit I've found in using logseq is in organizing the scientific literature I'm reading. At any point while writing, linking a paper I've read (the PDF itself, as well as my notes on it) is a few keystrokes away. This linking allows me to externalize the context with which I know a paper. I just need to browse the backlinks to see all the ways in which I've made reference to it over the entire history of my notes.
My journey was somewhat similar (Evernote, Any.do, Bear, Noteplan, Obsidian, LoqSeq) but now I've settled with org-{mode, roam}.
There was always _something_ missing from those apps. If you have time and inclination, Emacs can be customised to behave almost exactly like you want it.
I haven't actually. I took a quick look at it and (could be wrong) it seems they keep the data on their servers?
Data freedom is a biggie for me. I like to have a folder of text files that I can move around, backup as I want and do fun stuff with[0].
[0] e.g. I've been having fun with making a Mastodon toot-queue org file. I just dump ideas on the org file and a cron job toots one every hour until the queue is empty.
I've been interested in coming back to remnote, the mobile app seems a lot better. The key thing I wanted in it is the spaced repetition flashcards. I feel like linking that to my notes would be really useful, although I've not got back into it and stuck with it. The best thing being the one you use I guess.
This year I'm just trying a paper agenda. Pretty standard small agenda I think. Each page view is a week: on the left page a detailed view of the week with space for each day, on the right a freeform text area to jot down unstructured ideas/goals for the week.
I find this approach quite similar to TeuxDeux in the OP.
This topic has been touched on before, but what I do is use a paper-bound notebook. I number the pages.
The topics come in fairly random order. I keep a table of contents at front, and compile an index at the back as I go. After trying this system for a few months, I can attest that an index is, indeed, a useful thing. The great things about an index is that it allows you to find information based on multiple viewpoints.
The acid test of all these systems is "how useful have they been in practise?" As a lady in QA once sagely said: add value, not process. Or, as another poster noted, we have a tendency to fetishise different systems. As programmers, we're likely to be more guilty of this than most. But remember the whole point of the exercise. We're here to find information, not obsessively adhere to a system.
Is there an iOS app for plain text files (Markdown apps are okay, of course) that implements its own searching and doesn't just use Apple's search controls?
So that I can search for strings (bonus points for wildcards or regexp) in all the files in several folders and then lets you open the file at that point.
As a software devloper, I only write post-it notes or to-dos on my phone, 99.9% I use computer to type notes, I use vim-markdown+nerdtree+git all these years and they work well for me.
After having tried a number of approaches, including various VIM plugins, I decided to go with the Apple Notes. If you are bought into Apples ecosystem, it works incredibly well. Syncs to cloud. Available on both my desktop and phone. I recently went through a prep phase, which required tons of note taking with screenshots, pictures etc. it scaled beautifully.
Hey Scott, I like how you're generalizing PhoneToNote to support multiple note-taking services. I have a project Go Note Go where I also aim to support whatever note-taking service the user uses as the backend. We currently support Roam, RemNote, Mem, Notion, and IdeaFlow.
https://davidbieber.com/projects/go-note-go/
It'd be great to standardize the interop with note-taking services so people like us can write applications once and easily have them work with all the note-taking platforms out there. E.g. I'd love for someone to be able to write a spaced repetition app once, and immediately have it support any of the dozens of note-taking apps without needing special handling for each one.
Author's journey is pretty similar to mine, where I used OneNote extensively in college for lecture notes but fell off when I started working and needed something that would better capture technical documentation including code blocks.
I also initially went to Bear before trying out Notion and am now happily using Obsidian, which just got a Live Preview mode.
I’m curious as to what made you choose Kinopio over Are.na. I use the latter a lot and find it really useful for unstructured thoughts. I mainly use it privately though.
Kinopio looks great I will take it for a spin soon.
I tried using are.na and it just didn't stick for whatever reason. Kinopio on the other hand, I wanted to use it more and more once I started. Just suited my brain better I suppose.
Is it just me, but using local files just gives me an uneasy feeling when it comes to robust backups. How do I make sure my local files are backed up somewhere? What happens when I want to revert? How do I really know I didn't accidentally just wipe out all my notes locally with a bad command. How do I 100% know that changes I made on my desktop are reflected on other devices?
The obvious solution is to keep files in dropbox or google drive. This handles sync but not backup. I'm not sure about dropbox, but I know google drive is a nightmare to backup. You can use a few paid services to backup google drive, but you then need some kind of alerting to know when it's not running. Having to rely on a cloud storage service and a cloud backup storage does not give me long term confidence. I want something that works on most devices, is as future proof as possible and keep me in control of my data as much as possible.
Another option would be to use git to store notes, but I ran into problems when I tried to set up an auto commit and auto push. I couldn't get it working reliably. Some kind of auto pull would also be needed. Git just isn't designed to work like this so it seems like any setup would be janky at best.
Some options I've considered:
- Evernote: cloud based. rigid structure. Bad performance. I'm not in control of my data.
- emacs: I don't use emacs any more, so it's not already part of my workflow. Bad mobile experience. Same local syncing issues.
- Trilium: Really complex for someone who does not want to work with javascript. It might be too flexible for me.
- Roam: no web app last time i looked. No self hosted version.
- Logseq: Same issues as roam. Not server based / self hosted. The FAQ did mention a future option to maybe self host the optional server sync config, but it looks like it's not even on the roadmap.
My ultimate solution would be this:
- Web based. This will give the ultimate flexibility for me. Day to day I either live in a browser or VSCode. An optional app would be great, but not required.
- Ideally it would save files in simple, directory based, markdown files. This would be optimal for longevity. A second best would be storing it in a Postgres database.
- Easy to backup. Flat files or a database can be easily dumped and pushed off site with a cron. I use an easy dead mans switch / healthchecks.io alert if a job has not been fired off recently. The cron does some simple checks to make sure the data is a reasonable size (above 1MB). In an ideal world, if I used a DB I would dump the contents, restore it in docker somewhere and query a test entry before pushing it off site (encrypted s3, backblaze, or both).
- The right mix of simple, but feature rich. This will be different for everyone, but for me, the key things I want are: tags, search, task lists/todo lists, directory based structure and an auto daily notes template. I'd love a button that I could click to auto generate todays notes, with some pre-set todo tasks at the top, all in a specific format. Trilium could do this, but I'm not a javascript developer, so it was a non-starter for me.
- Docker based would be ideal. I run everything I personally self host in docker. It's not a deal breaker, but I would try to implement it my self in docker if I needed to.
I know my needs are different to most. My ideal setup is based on my deep understanding of tech, containerization, cloud and the cloud. The reason my ideal setup does not exist is likely because throwing a few docker containers up on a server is a non-trivial task for most people, and a desirable thing to maintain for even less people.
I'm still looking for my golden tool. Right now, I've actually gone back to evernote. It's "good enough" at its core task of note taking, but for someone with an eye to build a personal knowledge base over the rest of my career (20 years left), I'm still looking for the ideal tool.
Obsidian has a git plugin that I've been using for a while. It's pretty configurable for frequency of commits, and I've never had a problem with it.
It is at the end of the day a directory of Markdown files, so it's flexible with other tools. I have a bunch of things like Markdownload configured to write into various sub-directories.
I also use git to make backups of my org-mode files. I made a simple script in git bash for windows to commit changes to local repo and then push to a remote repo. I did this because I discovered that dropbox was no longer versioning my org files as I expected. Not sure why but I'm way more comfortable with a local and remote git repo. I run the script several times a day. There are libraries for emacs that can automate this process but I haven't bothered.
It could be worth looking at Wiki.js (https://js.wiki/). It's not perfect, but I started using a self hosted instance recently and it has worked out ok so far. With markdown and git sync it doesn't feel like I'm stuck if I want to move on to something else in the future, or if I want to do some automation/scripting with the contents.
> Both the desktop and web app don't and will not require a commercial license for both personal usage and company usage, as long as if the data are stored locally and doesn't use our server.
> I see this comment or some variation of it every time a new product is shared here that has such a model.
I observe something similar, but we seem to have drawn different conclusions.
> What I rarely if ever see is a proposal for how the developer should make money instead of a subscription.
At the risk of sounding trite, I think people who find subscriptions unpalatable would be happy with anything that isn't a subscription. These could be offered in parallel, so subscription-averse consumers have an alternative to evaluate.
A one-off payment is the obvious and most simple choice -- wrap some limits or caveats around data / transit usage if needed. Freemium option may work in some cases (I think there's sufficient successful examples to validate this as viable). (Only) enterprise users pay. Tier the offerings to protect yourself from the heavy eaters.
I don't think expressing fatigue at the relentlessness of subscription-ONLY services is invalid.
I think a one time payment is great when you’re selling a standalone app, but for online services, I don’t think there are many options beyond a subscription or possibly some kind of pay-as-you-go model, the latter of which has a whole host of other issues.
I don’t think it’s invalid to express fatigue at the model, but as feedback on a specific app/service here, it’s a bit tired without at least some kind of suggested alternative.
And truly I get it - I too have far too many subscriptions to things, but putting myself into the devs shoes, I get why it’s a prevailing approach these days.
One-time payments for Apps are a lie we tell ourselves anyway. There will always be another version, and the new version with have that feature we need (or support for new hardware).
Like you, I find the attitude about subscriptions frustrating. "Wants to be paid but doesn't want to pay". And yes, it's possible that the person objecting lives outside capitalist society and contributes an enormous volume to open source (or other volunteering), but statistically less likely.
I can see the benefit of bundling (e.g. Setapp), so that you're not killed by a million tiny subscriptions, but people need to be paid for their work, so one way or another money needs to flow to the creator.
That's poor evidence, considering some of the first movers to this new model were people who ensured their services were going to be used irrespective of what their pricing model was, and then everyone else following without providing an alternative. Where's a consumer to go?
What else could prefer mean in this case other than that people are willing to pay more money when it’s a subscription?
Of course people rather pay $10 x 1 than $10 x some number greater than 1. They rather pay $10x1 than $100x1 as well. All else being equal people prefer to pay less for things.
When more are willing to pay $10x20 than $100x1 I don’t know what you’d call that other than expressing a preference.
For example, people complained very loudly about not being able to buy photoshop anymore. Any time office365 is discussed, again people complain.
People seem to hate subscriptions.
What is true instead is that people are forced into subscriptions because one-time purchases are just not offered anymore.
I agree. For quite a few people, both Photoshop and Office is software that is "done". It already does a thousand things more than they use so users would be absolutely fine to pay a one-time fee for a particular version, and just stay there. This option has been taken away, which is consumer-hostile.
I consider a note-taking service to be a different situation, similar to a photo hosting service. Costs are ongoing (and typically growing) so it's not reasonable to expect a one time payment.
As for the first case, both Adobe and Microsoft are thriving for forcing subscriptions, so it makes a lot of business sense. From their perspective it makes sense to dismiss the outrage. People that need the software will ultimately give in and those that are complaining the most, weren't delivering revenue anyway.
The important thing to understand is that both examples are industry standard, irreplaceable software. There are little to no serious alternatives. A startup with some very optional software can't afford this arrogance.
As I mentioned on a thread, one-time purchases are a lie we tell ourselves anyway, and every version of Office or Photoshop (pre subscription). You still have to pay for the newest version with the support for new hardware/OS and features.
You do not have to pay for the newest version. I know plenty of people who are several versions behind on Adobe apps because they are enough for their needs and they cannot afford new ones. Those same people can’t afford the newest hardware and are fine with not upgrading their OS to be able to use their apps.
Right, it was a massive generalization. However, I highly doubt those people are using Windows 98 (insert other example), and they probably did at some point (depending on age, ecosystem etc).
They may well not be using the 'most current' version of the software, and I can think of a few pieces of software where that's been the case for me too. Either because I don't use it enough to justify the upgrade, or I actively object to being fleeced again for essentially the same product that's been "updated".
But eventually, if they want to continue doing the task they'll end up paying for a new version. Unless it's open source, it's always under the control of the product creator, and their incentives are always going to be on extracting money, and indeed they need to, to continue supporting the software.
In the Apple Ecosystem, the move to M1 Macs is an example that will force people to pay for upgrades.
Buying it once and riding it as long as possible is undoubtly cheaper than subscriptions, however it's still got a lifespan that eventually requires the next payment.
> But eventually, if they want to continue doing the task they'll end up paying for a new version.
Freehand[1] has been discontinued for almost two decades, and ten years ago I was still able to use it to great effect. Heck, if I wanted to use it today I probably could, thanks to Wine[2].
> however it's still got a lifespan that eventually requires the next payment.
Unless you wait so long that a competitor arises or you stop having the need. I never paid for Adobe Creative Cloud and Affinity[3] came along without subscriptions. One could also conceivably do without Microsoft Office updates so long that Open Office catches up to the needed features and surpasses it.
Note I do tend to pay for new versions of software I use. But I have no quarrel with stopping if they no longer provide adequate value, like 1Password moving to subscription pricing to collect rent on a done product yet somehow still managing to make it inferior (Electron).
I continue to disagree with the premise that “one-time purchases are a lie we tell ourselves”. If that were the case companies would have continued as they were. They move to subscriptions precisely because it removes the customer’s choice to upgrade—you either keep paying or can’t even access your past files. And they can jack up the price or remove features at any time (see LastPass).
Though I can get behind the hybrid model of Perpetual Fallback Licenses[4].
I almost mentioned competitors, I consider buying a competitors product to be an example in support of my argument, and open-source the exception. I too own a copy of Affinity, because I don't use those features enough to justify the rent-seeking that Adobe does.
I don't think we disagree as much as you think, I'm not arguing in favour of subscriptions. I'm simply pointing out that the majority of the companies that have avoided subscription models still have to make money and they do that by only releasing features in new versions of the software. Only supporting new platforms with new versions.
When it comes to technically competant users, there are usally alternatives that allow usage (as you suggest), but those aren't realistic for the majority of users.
Software creators must take in money to support themselves (or else work for free, as is the case with open-source). That can either be in the form of subscriptions, paid upgrades, or donations.
Given the constant onward march of technology and platforms, eventually they'll get you (or their competitor will get you), and you'll open your wallet again.
I wonder if this is actually true. Or maybe if it was, I wonder if the tide is changing. It seems there's more and more "subscription fatigue" these days (parent's reply is a good example).
I sell a one-time-purchase Mac app and I've had multiple customers tell me "I wouldn't have bought if it was a subscription" - and this is for an app that saves people hours a week on video editing, what would seem like the prototypical example of a "recurring need". I think people are just tired.
I think the way they do the model is the ideal. You want to use their servers? You pay your rent. You want to not use their servers? Then you just use the local app.
I wasted months, just to realise the tools or systems do not matter at all. Interlinking notes doesn't scientifically make you a better writer, writing does.