Many years ago I used UltraRecall. Recent discussion here makes me wonder whether again UR might have a place in my workflow. Many programs have come and gone over the years, and I wonder about UR's future trajectory. I sense its pace of development has slowed down; perhaps that's simply because it is a mature program, and the developers don't want to add new features just for the sake of doing so.

I wonder what others think? I must admit I am leary of recommitting to a program which may not contain to be developed.

Daly

I think there is an important difference between not having new features added and not being maintained. As a vendor you run into diminishing returns adding new features into a mature product and it may not be worth the extra effort, bugs and support. But an unmaintained product could break next time a new OS version comes out (particularly on an Apple OS!).

BTW I have idea which of those 2 applies to UltraRecall.

This forum's contributors are free to create new threads as they like, but obviously, Gagne's (oh, sorry, he's of nobility: he's worth more than just plebs!) new-thread here, just about 5 hours after, obviously, having seen mine: https://www.outlinersoftware.com/topics/viewt/10049/0/some-words-about-ultrarecall-etc-vs-search-tools-meow perhaps makes readers (who are free to make their own conclusions) will make think again about core info vs. just propaganda of some. That being said:

Just-Gagne (oops! I did it again! well: we're in Modern Times now, ain't we, and with "equality between any-n-everything" an'all that? hahaha!) is right in his implicit allegation that UR is a "traditional" outliner: no "web" and those things - but from my experience with what they call "heavy duty", UR's the most sturdy of those; your mileage may differ...

And yes, before UR's first-day-on-bits this time, 450 bitsers or so "wanted that offer", according to what I read there, so it's obvious that my (kindly worded) "update by bits" comment's "observation (well: call it allegation then...) over there plays a role in current sales: 500 times just 20 bucks is 10k, yeah, and that's been perhaps 80 p.c. in "updates" i.e. upgrades, but TheBrain do that better for their business interests, selling any upgrade - and their upgrades come 2 or 3 times as frequent as UR's ones - the original (or then "full version") asking price to anybody not complying to their subscription...

And then, Daly's (correct) observation that UR's development speed isn't as fast as TB's, e.g., cannot be denied, but then, UR NEVER TOOK AWAY current functionality from what had been already there, whilst TB exactly did that, proof on file if ever needed.

So, let's remain honest: Interplay between users and developers DO play a role in the latter's motivation to speed up their development, or then not...

And yes, Gagne is right again by saying (or implicating) that UR's developer's often unwilling to introduce new features he doesn't deem "necessary" - "best" example here: no introduction of an intermediate (i.e. "third") pane, relegating the current "tree" (which he calls the "Data Explorer") to just a "project" depository, as I had wished for years ago.

But again, let's re-become honest here: We all know that very same unwillingness to do coding work they don't see the necessity of, from any other developer we rely on in adapting our workflow to "what we got", necessarily, and here again, much-beloved Devonthink (Mac) even has DONE AWAY with that intermediate, third, pane, quite recently, and again, Kyle, UR's developer, has at least NEVER EVER TAKEN AWAY ANY functionality that had been already there.

Thus, Kyle is RELIABLE, and obviously "reactive" at least for "those little things" (AND for any bug I, or any other UR user, might discover, but then, it seems that 80 or 90 p.c. of the time, it's just me who discovers them: any questions then about the "quality" of "involvement", "engagement"... real "NEEDS" then, of my UR co-users???)...

whilst - proof on file - at least DevonThink's and TheBrain's developers are not, and re "software power" or what you might call it, e.g. RightNote is a joke, by direct comparison.

And so on. Fact is, SQLite as a a db backend isn't "ideal", oh no... but at least it's sturdy within its physical i.e. practical limits, and its data is more or less "available" by standard SQL front-ends, in case of (user-caused) "troubles", so then at least "repair" then is easy.

For example, J.P. Miller, in his very recommendable blog, said, already years ago (I cite from memory), upon UR that with its extremely fine-grained individualization capabilities, and if you didn't pay attention, you could get in some real metadata mess, with UR - and, you might have read about my problems in the UR forum very recently, I got into such troubles, by my own fault, AND because in his original remark, Miller did NOT get into any explanations, and so had me fall into the very trap he had seen in time.

But then, now, after some analysis, and with doing some work within a (paid or free, whatever: paid in my case whilst free alternatives abound and would have been perfectly as helpful!) SQLite front-end, I was able to correct it all, and everything works fine again.

And, remember: These had been problems caused by extremely fine-grained UR individualization facilities, NOT even provided by "competitors", AND my not having being aware of their implications when used frivolously.

No, Mr. Gagne: Let's be honest, and it had been Mr. Brice indeed who (on bits) had said (again my words),

"Buy the very current state of my software, don't let any wishful thinking for future developments play within your purchase decision, in order to not deceive yourself... and in order for me to be free to do what I desire to do or not do, development-wise".

Again, that was the pack's here beloved Mr. Brice, proof on file, whenever anybody here wants.

Thus, Mr. Gagne: Judge UR, as any other software, by what-it-is - it's Mr. Brice who tells you.

Then compare. And I think that current UR 6.2.0.x or whatever it is, not only is worth your 39$, but also your possibly needed efforts of importing from some (far?) lesser software, and of getting acquainted with its (current) intricacies.

Just yesterday, I read some simili-"review" for TheBrain, https://www.seriousinsights.net/review-thebrain-10/ , and which falsely alleges you need TB, in order to get transclusion; it's almost the "quality" of most - paid-for, or rather to-BE-paid-for (by the purchase link then) "reviews" of "Scrivener", but then, its author at least is perfectly honest in his disclaimer, and thus stands out from 99.5 p.c. of so-called "reviews" in today's web: by saying,

"Currently, TheBrain provided a single user professional license to facilitate this review. Serious Insights has also previously been retained by TheBrain as an analyst firm."... which says that big money had changed hands before indeed...

(Whilst on the other hand, even "serious" sources now come up with "millions of tax payers' bucks flooded to venal so-called "journalists"" - again, my words, but for the "official", proven facts -, and in some occurrences even about 7k for 1 day's "work" - if ever some critic (new-speak: "some right-extremist", ho-ho!) called many "journalists" - and not all of them, of course - "governments' writing-whores" or something like that, well:

those critics-"right-extremists", as they are called now, could now, on their turn, tell you:

"proof on file".

Get honest, folks. (If you remember what honesty meant that is.)

(And InfoSelect's developer is not reliable either, according to the criterion I set up supra, i.e. at least not taking AWAY existing functionality; and I had not only not explained the missing link above, but not even copied it, sorry: https://www.telepolis.de/features/Zahlt-es-sich-aus-Neues-zu-Journalismus-und-Staatsknete-7538635.html - and that's heise, i.e. c't, and all, and nobody could call'em "right-extremists" then. Btw, I think that in North Korea, regime critics have been called "right-extremists" all the time... but you're right, here in the West, "we"... well: they, in fact... haven't re-opened the camps yet, so let's all be happy and enjoy...)

As for "diminishing returns": Yeah, some (not: single) developers try to counter that effect (TB), but then... even TB developers / marketers had had the good idea to seriously cripple, yes, their "free version", but then, just so that TB prospects, continuing to use TB, in some "extended trial", beyond the "switch to free", were then seriously hampered in their "comfort", but could CONTINUE to use TB in some, some limited indeed, way, and thus, TB retained a real, positive, actual chance to sell their product to those "sceptics", as I would call'em.

Today's "TB free", on the other hand, is just a slap in the face of any prospect who didn't decide "on/in time", and its so-called "conversion rate" should zero in on zero sells / rents, I suppose.

Thus even the TB guys should be far from being as smart as they think they are.

Daly says more relevant and useful information in two or three sentences than you do in your entire word vomit posts, so you might try being more civil.

22111 wrote:

This forum's contributors are free to create new threads as they like,
but obviously, Gagne's (oh, sorry, he's of nobility: he's worth more
than just plebs!) new-thread here, just about 5 hours after, obviously,
having seen mine:
https://www.outlinersoftware.com/topics/viewt/10049/0/some-words-about-ultrarecall-etc-vs-search-tools-meow
perhaps makes readers (who are free to make their own conclusions) will
make think again about core info vs. just propaganda of some. That being
said:

Just-Gagne (oops! I did it again! well: we're in Modern Times now, ain't
we, and with "equality between any-n-everything" an'all that? hahaha!)
is right in his implicit allegation that UR is a "traditional" outliner:
no "web" and those things - but from my experience with what they call
"heavy duty", UR's the most sturdy of those; your mileage may differ...

And yes, before UR's first-day-on-bits this time, 450 bitsers or so
"wanted that offer", according to what I read there, so it's obvious
that my (kindly worded) "update by bits" comment's "observation (well:
call it allegation then...) over there plays a role in current sales:
500 times just 20 bucks is 10k, yeah, and that's been perhaps 80 p.c. in
"updates" i.e. upgrades, but TheBrain do that better for their business
interests, selling any upgrade - and their upgrades come 2 or 3 times as
frequent as UR's ones - the original (or then "full version") asking
price to anybody not complying to their subscription...

And then, Daly's (correct) observation that UR's development speed isn't
as fast as TB's, e.g., cannot be denied, but then, UR NEVER TOOK AWAY
current functionality from what had been already there, whilst TB
exactly did that, proof on file if ever needed.

So, let's remain honest: Interplay between users and developers DO play
a role in the latter's motivation to speed up their development, or then
not...

And yes, Gagne is right again by saying (or implicating) that UR's
developer's often unwilling to introduce new features he doesn't deem
"necessary" - "best" example here: no introduction of an intermediate
(i.e. "third") pane, relegating the current "tree" (which he calls the
"Data Explorer") to just a "project" depository, as I had wished for
years ago.

But again, let's re-become honest here: We all know that very same
unwillingness to do coding work they don't see the necessity of, from
any other developer we rely on in adapting our workflow to "what we
got", necessarily, and here again, much-beloved Devonthink (Mac) even
has DONE AWAY with that intermediate, third, pane, quite recently, and
again, Kyle, UR's developer, has at least NEVER EVER TAKEN AWAY ANY
functionality that had been already there.

Thus, Kyle is RELIABLE, and obviously "reactive" at least for "those
little things" (AND for any bug I, or any other UR user, might discover,
but then, it seems that 80 or 90 p.c. of the time, it's just me who
discovers them: any questions then about the "quality" of "involvement",
"engagement"... real "NEEDS" then, of my UR co-users???)...

whilst - proof on file - at least DevonThink's and TheBrain's developers
are not, and re "software power" or what you might call it, e.g.
RightNote is a joke, by direct comparison.

And so on. Fact is, SQLite as a a db backend isn't "ideal", oh no... but
at least it's sturdy within its physical i.e. practical limits, and its
data is more or less "available" by standard SQL front-ends, in case of
(user-caused) "troubles", so then at least "repair" then is easy.

For example, J.P. Miller, in his very recommendable blog, said, already
years ago (I cite from memory), upon UR that with its extremely
fine-grained individualization capabilities, and if you didn't pay
attention, you could get in some real metadata mess, with UR - and, you
might have read about my problems in the UR forum very recently, I got
into such troubles, by my own fault, AND because in his original remark,
Miller did NOT get into any explanations, and so had me fall into the
very trap he had seen in time.

But then, now, after some analysis, and with doing some work within a
(paid or free, whatever: paid in my case whilst free alternatives abound
and would have been perfectly as helpful!) SQLite front-end, I was able
to correct it all, and everything works fine again.

And, remember: These had been problems caused by extremely fine-grained
UR individualization facilities, NOT even provided by "competitors", AND
my not having being aware of their implications when used frivolously.

No, Mr. Gagne: Let's be honest, and it had been Mr. Brice indeed who (on
bits) had said (again my words),

"Buy the very current state of my software, don't let any wishful
thinking for future developments play within your purchase decision, in
order to not deceive yourself... and in order for me to be free to do
what I desire to do or not do, development-wise".

Again, that was the pack's here beloved Mr. Brice, proof on file,
whenever anybody here wants.

Thus, Mr. Gagne: Judge UR, as any other software, by what-it-is - it's
Mr. Brice who tells you.

Then compare. And I think that current UR 6.2.0.x or whatever it is, not
only is worth your 39$, but also your possibly needed efforts of
importing from some (far?) lesser software, and of getting acquainted
with its (current) intricacies.

Just yesterday, I read some simili-"review" for TheBrain,
https://www.seriousinsights.net/review-thebrain-10/ , and which falsely
alleges you need TB, in order to get transclusion; it's almost the
"quality" of most - paid-for, or rather to-BE-paid-for (by the purchase
link then) "reviews" of "Scrivener", but then, its author at least is
perfectly honest in his disclaimer, and thus stands out from 99.5 p.c.
of so-called "reviews" in today's web: by saying,

"Currently, TheBrain provided a single user professional license to
facilitate this review. Serious Insights has also previously been
retained by TheBrain as an analyst firm."... which says that big money
had changed hands before indeed...

(Whilst on the other hand, even "serious" sources now come up with
"millions of tax payers' bucks flooded to venal so-called "journalists""
- again, my words, but for the "official", proven facts -, and in some
occurrences even about 7k for 1 day's "work" - if ever some critic
(new-speak: "some right-extremist", ho-ho!) called many "journalists" -
and not all of them, of course - "governments' writing-whores" or
something like that, well:

those critics-"right-extremists", as they are called now, could now, on
their turn, tell you:

"proof on file".

Get honest, folks. (If you remember what honesty meant that is.)

Hear! Hear!

Stephen Zeoli wrote:

Daly says more relevant and useful information in two or three sentences
than you do in your entire word vomit posts, so you might try being more
civil.

As many generations of my family were wont to say, 22111, them's fightin' words.

The rest of this post voluntarily redacted. It's a good thing, to rant, fulminate, and to defend good people.

But it doesn't necessarily have to see the light of day.

To Daly and Andy Brice, I appreciate the hospitality here and always look forward to your posts.

22111 wrote:

This forum's contributors are free to create new threads as they like,
but obviously, Gagne's (oh, sorry, he's of nobility: he's worth more
than just plebs!) new-thread here, just about 5 hours after, obviously,

(snip)

whilst - proof on file - at least DevonThink's and TheBrain's developers
are not, and re "software power" or what you might call it, e.g.
RightNote is a joke, by direct comparison.

(snip)

Again, that was the pack's here beloved Mr. Brice, proof on file,
whenever anybody here wants.

(ibid, snip)

Get honest, folks. (If you remember what honesty meant that is.)

You appear to be as dense as your posts. I doubt if Mr. Gagne read your bloviated screed, though if he did, perhaps he chose to initiate a useful discussion and conversation on a similar topic, one that invites rather than repels participation. Your complaint supports the belief that you linger here in search of attention and for the opportunity to belittle respected developers and contributors. As you bring scant value, consider taking a time out. The corner awaits.

22111 wrote:

This forum's contributors are free to create new threads as they like,
but obviously, Gagne's (oh, sorry, he's of nobility: he's worth more
than just plebs!) new-thread here, just about 5 hours after, obviously,
having seen mine:

Thanks Andy, that makes sense.

Andy Brice wrote:

I think there is an important difference between not having new features
added and not being maintained. As a vendor you run into diminishing
returns adding new features into a mature product and it may not be
worth the extra effort, bugs and support. But an unmaintained product
could break next time a new OS version comes out (particularly on an
Apple OS!).

Thanks Steve for your post. I appreciate your words.

Alexander, thanks for your comment!

Amontillado, I appreciate what you wrote. Thank you. Hospitality is indeed what we find here, and That is one reason why, apart from the content, that we keep cominv back!

Daly

Amontillado wrote:

As many generations of my family were wont to say, 22111, them's
fightin' words.

The rest of this post voluntarily redacted. It's a good thing, to rant,
fulminate, and to defend good people.

But it doesn't necessarily have to see the light of day.

To Daly and Andy Brice, I appreciate the hospitality here and always
look forward to your posts.

22111 wrote:
This forum's contributors are free to create new threads as they like,
>but obviously, Gagne's (oh, sorry, he's of nobility: he's worth more
>than just plebs!) new-thread here, just about 5 hours after, obviously,
>
(snip)
>
>whilst - proof on file - at least DevonThink's and TheBrain's
developers
>are not, and re "software power" or what you might call it, e.g.
>RightNote is a joke, by direct comparison.
>
(snip)
>
>Again, that was the pack's here beloved Mr. Brice, proof on file,
>whenever anybody here wants.
>
(ibid, snip)
>
>Get honest, folks. (If you remember what honesty meant that is.)

Hi Tightbeam, thanks for your post. 22111's comments of late did lead me to take another look at the program, thus what I wrote yesterday.

Daly


tightbeam wrote:

You appear to be as dense as your posts. I doubt if Mr. Gagne read your
bloviated screed, though if he did, perhaps he chose to initiate a
useful discussion and conversation on a similar topic, one that invites
rather than repels participation. Your complaint supports the belief
that you linger here in search of attention and for the opportunity to
belittle respected developers and contributors. As you bring scant
value, consider taking a time out. The corner awaits.

22111 wrote:
This forum's contributors are free to create new threads as they like,
>but obviously, Gagne's (oh, sorry, he's of nobility: he's worth more
>than just plebs!) new-thread here, just about 5 hours after, obviously,
>having seen mine:

Daly de Gagne wrote:

Amontillado, I appreciate what you wrote. Thank you. Hospitality is
indeed what we find here, and That is one reason why, apart from the
content, that we keep cominv back!

Daly

Well said, and seconded. You can count me in your corner as well.

--Ken

Hi Ken, thanks for your good wishes.

Daly

Ken wrote:

Daly de Gagne wrote:
Amontillado, I appreciate what you wrote. Thank you. Hospitality is
>indeed what we find here, and That is one reason why, apart from the
>content, that we keep cominv back!
>
>Daly

Well said, and seconded. You can count me in your corner as well.

--Ken

Andy Brice wrote:

I think there is an important difference between not having new features
added and not being maintained. As a vendor you run into diminishing
returns adding new features into a mature product and it may not be
worth the extra effort, bugs and support. But an unmaintained product
could break next time a new OS version comes out (particularly on an
Apple OS!)

UltraRecall is certainly maintained, see
https://www.kinook.com/Forum/showthread.php?p=22819#post22819

I for one am not very bothered if it never gets another feature. Since I first bought it some 18 years ago, I've been through a lot of alternatives, but still come back to UR.