I am very excited about this:

WhizFolders has just implemented the ability to copy external links to its Tree Topics, AND links to text/paragraphs/section headings whatever 'inside' its Topics' Notes - that can be pasted into many other applications - such that you can then navigate from that app to either a WhizFolders Topic (in the Tree) - or to some text buried deep in any Topic Notes Content (like an anchor)... See here: http://whizfolders.com/blog/index.php/category/news/alpha-version-news/ And by the way, what WhizFolders call an alpha is as good as or better than what many other vendors release as advanced betas.

So I am now using Axon Idea Processor (could have been any other concept or mind mapping tool, but I really love the freedom of the 'many to many' linking that you just don't get with Mind Mapping tools which essentially just give a different view of a hierarchy) to create a Visual Navigation system around all my stuff, and especially my extensive notes in WhizFolders (and maybe in due course UltrRecall, if I can get the "Copy Item Command Line" to work in UR which I can't right now)....

This combination of best of breed Notes Management, and Visual Diagramming/Linking that's available now with WhizFolders (and perhaps UltraRecall), with Axon Idea Processor is precisely what I have been looking for for ages....

Thoughts?

Ian, I read your note about WhizFolders with interest.

I have always thought that other programs could do most of what WF does, as well as some other things, such as provide clones, metadata, etc.

But from your post it appears as though you use WF for a lot of your notes.

I know that, like me, you try all kinds of software related to information processing bcause I see your name on many of the same forums I am on.

Bit it also seems from reading your posts that you are also using a number of the different programs.

So I am curious -- what kind of information are you making notes about and processing, and how do you decide which program to put which notes into? Is it not a drag having information split among several programs? I know I am continually trying to get my usage down to one or two programs, and as my posts elsewhere in the last week or so indicate, I am pretty much choosing on MDE InfoHandler.

While there are things I like with other programs, such as the aesthetics and the idea of a nice neat outline, I am beginning to realize that when it comes to slicing and dicing information, and being able to get at it real fast, that IS is -- for me -- the best of the bunch.

Having said that, I have been testing both MyInfo and EverNote.

There's no doubt that MyInfo has become one nice program, and -- IMHO -- a better choice than Whize Folders if one wants the outline metaphor. MI offers clones, tags (keywords), and metadata columns, as well as capture of web pages.

EverNote's metaphor of the endless paper roll or tape is also appealing, and I especially like how the automatic categorizing works. However, it messes up a lot of the web pages it captures (especially The New York Times, which is a main information source for me). I thought it might be good to use it as a one place for all my data. Then with sober second though I realized that though I like the nifty auto cat feature, manual cats in IH can run circles around EN. And in version 10, Manfred has made it so much easier to add categories by way of the category tree.

The cat tree means you no longer have to use the bottom third or so of the page with the category groups, so you have more room for the actual documents. The cat tree is a left sidebar, and is easy to use.

IH has an autocat feature, but it seems to be not as automatic as EverNote's. However, that's a minor detail given how much more IH will do.

So, except for CRIMP motivated testing, I think my information is moving away from the outline to a system based on the infinite possibilities of groups of categories. The question of cloning doesn't even come up because there are no folders. The categories are essentially tags.

I am interested in and do like ADM and Ariadne, and hope both succeed. But I have realized it does not make sense to spread data across different programs, and that I have spent way too many hours trying to make that work, and then wondering why I cannot find things easily.

Daly

Ian Goldsmid wrote:

I am very excited about this:

WhizFolders has just implemented the ability to copy
external links to its Tree Topics, AND links to text/paragraphs/section headings
whatever 'inside' its Topics' Notes - that can be pasted into many other applications
- such that you can then navigate from that app to either a WhizFolders Topic (in the
Tree) - or to some text buried deep in any Topic Notes Content (like an anchor)... See
here:
http://whizfolders.com/blog/index.php/category/news/alpha-version-news/
And by the way, what WhizFolders call an alpha is as good as or better than what many
other vendors release as advanced betas.

So I am now using Axon Idea Processor
(could have been any other concept or mind mapping tool, but I really love the freedom
of the 'many to many' linking that you just don't get with Mind Mapping tools which
essentially just give a different view of a hierarchy) to create a Visual Navigation
system around all my stuff, and especially my extensive notes in WhizFolders (and
maybe in due course UltrRecall, if I can get the "Copy Item Command Line" to work in UR
which I can't right now)....

This combination of best of breed Notes Management,
and Visual Diagramming/Linking that's available now with WhizFolders (and perhaps
UltraRecall), with Axon Idea Processor is precisely what I have been looking for for
ages....

Thoughts?

Daly

I have been using UltraRecall mostly... as i have been saving hundreds of web pages - and UR, I have found through extensive trial and error, is absolutely the best for this (even better than ContentSaver - much better actually). I don't like the fact though that UR only indexes keywords - so this is quite a big limitation (no practical phrase searching for example) - and it also doesn't highlight search terms - so you search once to find the Item, then again in each item to find the text.

In the last few days, as a result of my suggestions (that I got insight into from playing with OneNote 2007), Sanjay, the developer of WhizFolders has implemented external links from WF as URL's - so that you can now effectively use WhizFolders as the Notes management application from other programs - as I said in my last note. This is a revelation actually, I find this to be truly productive and creative.

I have always wanted to use a graphical, visual application to manage my information - but all of them, even Mind Manager 6 Pro, are completely NOT built to work with extensive collections of notes (and don't deal with web pages at all), especially where there will be many and complex cross references - and you want to perform fast, complex text searches too. So a combination of Axon Idea Processor (extremely versatile visual/graphical concept mapping program), and Whizfolders I am finding to be ideal (for now). And then I think UltraRecall will soon make it possible to copy external links into their info Items that can then be pasted into Axon (or any other tool like it) - at the moment UR has a function called "Copy Command Line to Item" - but it doesn't work right yet when pasted into other apps (as file or web hyperlinks) - but I am certain it will soon - I am in conversation with Kevin about this right now, and I believe he is working on it.

Whizfolders is actually really superb, handles rich text exceedingly well, tables and so forth, has a very poweful full text search, and implements hyperlinking better than any other application out there. The overall feel, responsiveness and pleasureableness of using it is also very high/good.

The key for me is to have a structurally unlimited visual/graphical view of my data, i.e. not just hierarchical (like a mind map is limited to) - it has to be able to represent many-to-many - and much more than that. So with Axon, I can create a superb structurally unlimited graphical front end to all my notes and web pages - and still retain the power of WhizFolders for cross referencing and searching - and UR to retain pristine copies of any web page I throw at it.

I agree with you about InfoHandler, it is truly a superb product, there is nohing like it for rapidly categorizing your info items with potentially complex combinations of categories/sub categories, and for finding/filtering info, potentially where you will want to use complex category intersection - and do that easily and quickly - fabulous! It also makes it possible to link all you other stuff (disk files, web links, Outlook emails/contacts etc) into it, and categorize those links too - marvellous! I nearly went for it 'lock stock and barrel' - but the search mechansim in it is rather weak (unless you wanna use Regular Expressions and I don't, they drive me crazy) - and so is internal linking... and I figured there was something about that that would start to annoy me when I got a lot of data in it.... But it was close...

Another great thing about UR is its ability to easily and quickly export info item content, especially web pages and rich text items... I thereby overcome the UR search limitation by keeping a copy of all my saved web pages, pdf's, word, ppts etc on disk - and then I have a saved search in X1 that limits the initial search to a set of folders with UR exported data. X1 makes it real easy to perform complex/boolean whatever searches, highlighting all the results, and letting you preview pretty much anything you throw at it.....

In conclusion, even though I am putting most everything in UR, WZ, Axon, I am still waiting with baited breath for two new PIM type applications to emerge into beta - Personal Brain (V4 completely re-written and updated), and Tinderbox. Personal Brain should be available in its new incarnation within a few months, and Eastgate's Tinderbox for Windows sooner than that.

Well, knowledge management is where much of the issue and opportunity is now and into the future. So I think we are all justified in putting a lot of effort and time into finding the best tools to manage all our stuff. And frankly new ones are always emerging, existing ones compete with each other, coming up with important new features, like external linking, that I find just too compelling to gloss over. So I also look for tools that make it easy to export all the content, and then at least the pain of changing is reduced - albeit you can't generally automate the export/import of the metadata like the categories in IH... oh well...

Thoughts?

Cheers,

Ian

As an information manager, I think Whizfolders isn't all that strong... although its new, more powerful hyperlinks might help. But I do think Whizfolders is a contender as a writing tool, because of all the tree-based PIMs, its editor seems to me the strongest. It has almost all the features of a genuine word processor.

To me, the greatest weakness of most PIMs is the editor. They are okay for clipping information into, and for quickly jotting notes, but they tend to get in the way of actually composing writing. Whizfolders is an exception, one of the few.

So, for more, how Whizfolders can fit into my workflow is being the repository for the longer documents I need to compose, but it wouldn't be the application I use to gather and organize notes.

Steve Z

Ian -

have been using UltraRecall mostly… as i have been saving hundreds of web pages - and UR, I have found through extensive trial and error, is absolutely the best for this (even better than ContentSaver - much better actually). I don’t like the fact though that UR only indexes keywords - so this is quite a big limitation (no practical phrase searching for example) - and it also doesn’t highlight search terms - so you search once to find the Item, then again in each item to find the text.

_____________________________________

I was very interested in your comments about Contentsaver (now re-named Web Research [WR]), since I am seriously thinking about switching back from it to Net Snippets Standard. Given that Ultra Recall has many of WR's limitations, why do you think it is so much better?

Incidentally, my reasons for returning to NS are:

- doesn't contain data within a proprietory database

- easy to index and search - especially pdf files - without having to export them first, using external program (e.g., dtSearch - my favourite)

- offers a rudimentary bibliographic feature

- many ways of saving web-pages, extracts, files, links, etc.

- works well with Firefox

- can make separate notes (stored as htm files) with html editor

- provides for comments and other metadata

- offers keywords (but not virtual folders - so can't "permanently" organize files on basis of keywords; only gather temporarily when doing a keyword search)

- can easily send file as attachment by email (neat)

- can keep on adding clips to existing snippet

- can "hoist" working folder by zooming in, and de-hoist by zooming out.

Many of the above are also offered by programs like Surfulater and WR, of course. And I like the visual elegance of WR's three-pane display, and its categories; but getting at its data from third-party programs is just too complicated.

As NS uses the Windows filing system to store files, not only is indexed searching easy, but there is no need to tag files with special URL-type addresses in order to hyperlink them to the outside world. It's easy, for example, for Zoot to make file-links to them.

Down the line there is promise that these problems of proprietory databases will be solved by Windows desktop search, xml, or whatever. At the moment, though, I am leaning back) towards NS again as the only viable current solution to integrating scattered data. Firefox's Scrapbook is another potential candidate, too, as it doesn't use a proprietory database either.

Derek

Hi Daly,

As I was mentioning to Ian, I'm thinking of standardizing on a Zoot/Net Snippets/dtSearch solution as my answer to the data integration problem at the moment. I struggled for a while with Contentsaver's (now Web Research) URL-type links, but just when I got Zoot to work with them, they've broken again.

This means using Zoot as the central data-gathering point, with links to other programs. As Zoot has a proprietary dB - albeit as ASCII one that can be directly indexed and searched by dtSearch - a better method is to export the contents of Zoot to html first, as one (very large) file. This gives much clearer search results.

This combination is not perfect, of course, as it leaves outlining out. Graham Smith (somewhere) suggested using Brainstorm, partly because it can be easily linked to Zoot:

"The *.brn files used by Brainstorm can be incorporated into Zoot using the Zoot File Folder sync action, which automatically then adds any new brainstorm models to Zoot as they are created. This means that any Brainstorm model can be searched from within Zoot, inspected from within Zoot and then Brainstorm launched with the selected model from within Zoot."

Presumably this might work with other outlining programs...

For me the only remaining problem is getting Biblioscape to work with Zoot. So far Biblioscape's URL addresses - e.g., biblioscape://RefID=28 - don't seem to work in Zoot yet.

I had thought of moving from Zoot to Ultra Recall, but the latter just is not nearly flexible enough on the searching or "notes" sides to act as a data HQ.

I see that you are homing in on InfoHandler these days. What advantages do you see it as having over Zoot?

Derek

Steve -

But I do think Whizfolders is a contender as a writing tool, because of all the tree-based PIMs, its editor seems to me the strongest. It has almost all the features of a genuine word processor.

Oh bother - crimped again! I'll have to download it :-)

Derek

Derek Cornish wrote:

Oh bother - crimped again! I'll have to download it :-)

Sorry, about that, Derek! I'll be interested in hearing your opinion about WF.

Steve Z

Stephen Zeoli wrote:

As an information manager, I think Whizfolders isn't all that strong... although its
new, more powerful hyperlinks might help. But I do think Whizfolders is a contender as
a writing tool, because of all the tree-based PIMs, its editor seems to me the
strongest. It has almost all the features of a genuine word processor.

I would agree with this. I've been using Whizfolder for several years, and it has been a great place to hold all my miscellaneous writing. The latest alpha makes the wordprocessing component even better. However, there are better information managers out there.

Ken

Let me throw in my two cents here. I think the best rendition of note-taking, information manager, and writing software I've seen so far is Circusponies Notebook. It's rather eloquent in its integration and rendition. Unfotunately, I don't use a Mac, and they have no intention to port their program to Windows. They cite MS Onenote as the main reason, and I had to laugh since Notebook is so much "better" than Onenote 2007 in my book.

Perhaps now that Mac's can run Windows XP parallel, my next laptop might be a MacBook Pro.

Derek

Yup, I have licenses for ContentSaver/Web Researcher, NetSnippets, and UltraRecall.. Ultimately I found that UltraRecall was and is able to replicate every web page I throw at it perfectly, looking identical to the original - I really like that. Also UR provides a much greater range of metadata, or tagging with dirrerent attributes such as dates of various kinds, keywords, pick-lists, notes and on and on.. Its extremely well engineered, the developers are constantly improving it at an impressive rate, they are incredibly responsive to users..... AND Saved Web pages can be easily mirrored on your hard disk by exporting them. To keep copies synchronous what I do is create a saved (advanced) search: "Create Date is equal to or greater than [the date at which I last saved my web clips to disk] " AND "Doc Type = [1 OR 2....]- which then means its real easy to keep a synchronised copy of all of that on my hard disk. ALSO, UltraRecall are now developing an iFilter for Google Desktop Search so all the insides of UR will be exposed to GDS search. I expect that will be available in the not very distant future. http://www.kinook.com/Forum/showthread.php?s=&threadid=993

NetSnippets, hasn't been updated for two years, and the developer looks to be putting all his eggs in eSnips...Nevertheless is a very neat product - but merely because it saves data to hard disk isn't enough for me. Also with Contensaver, its real easy to export/mirror your stuff to disk if you need to link it into other applications. With hard disk being so low priced, who cares?

So, yes, I also agree with Stephen, WF has a really excellent editor, (and full text search by the way) - but clearly isn't a contender as a collector and manager of all your data/document types - and of course its external links could equally well be pasted into UltraRecall - and ZOOT! In fact it (would need to be the latest alpha) could now be used to instantly overcome the rtf shortcomings of ZOOT, just write up all your notes in WF and create links to them in Zoot.

Cheers, Ian

Derek Cornish wrote:

Ian -

> have been using UltraRecall mostly… as i have been saving hundreds of web
pages - and UR, I have found through extensive trial and error, is absolutely the best
for this (even better than ContentSaver - much better actually). I don’t like the fact
though that UR only indexes keywords - so this is quite a big limitation (no practical
phrase searching for example) - and it also doesn’t highlight search terms - so you
search once to find the Item, then again in each item to find the
text.
_____________________________________

I was very interested in your
comments about Contentsaver (now re-named Web Research [WR]), since I am seriously
thinking about switching back from it to Net Snippets Standard. Given that Ultra
Recall has many of WR's limitations, why do you think it is so much better?


Incidentally, my reasons for returning to NS are:

- doesn't contain data within a
proprietory database

- easy to index and search - especially pdf files - without
having to export them first, using external program (e.g., dtSearch - my
favourite)

- offers a rudimentary bibliographic feature

- many ways of saving
web-pages, extracts, files, links, etc.

- works well with Firefox

- can make
separate notes (stored as htm files) with html editor

- provides for comments and
other metadata

- offers keywords (but not virtual folders - so can't "permanently"
organize files on basis of keywords; only gather temporarily when doing a keyword
search)

- can easily send file as attachment by email (neat)

- can keep on adding
clips to existing snippet

- can "hoist" working folder by zooming in, and de-hoist
by zooming out.

Many of the above are also offered by programs like Surfulater and
WR, of course. And I like the visual elegance of WR's three-pane display, and its
categories; but getting at its data from third-party programs is just too
complicated.

As NS uses the Windows filing system to store files, not only is
indexed searching easy, but there is no need to tag files with special URL-type
addresses in order to hyperlink them to the outside world. It's easy, for example, for
Zoot to make file-links to them.

Down the line there is promise that these problems
of proprietory databases will be solved by Windows desktop search, xml, or whatever.
At the moment, though, I am leaning back) towards NS again as the only viable current
solution to integrating scattered data. Firefox's Scrapbook is another potential
candidate, too, as it doesn't use a proprietory database either.

Derek

Steve -

Before I d/l Whizfolders, can you tell me whether it has:

- any single-pane outlining features

- ability to import .HEAD outlines (e.g., to import Grandview files)

- ability to export outlines to Word

- tabbed interface as well as notes tree (e.g., like Keynote)

- ability to work with URL-type address hyperlinks - e.g., like "biblioscape://RefID=28" - in order to link with data from other programs

- ability to add marginal-type comments to text

As you can see I am struggling hard against my addiction. OTOH, so many tree-type organizers, so few major differences amonst them...

Derek

Derek

Ian,

I very much appreciate your discussion of Ultra Recall - much food for thought. I've d/l it a couple of times, but never really gave it much of a workout. One problem is the tree-organizer concept: great for browsing files, but soon cluttered for organizing purposes. I found this true of Contentsaver, now Web Research [CS/WR], too, although it does have categories as an alternative permanent way - almost like Zoot's virtual folders - of organizing content.

Choosing between UR and Zoot as data-central is a difficult one. While Zoot avoids screen clutter with its excellent virtual folder system, its browsing capabilites are confined to its internal text notes. Although files can be linked to these notes, browsing through the linked files is slow and awkward. And one does need to be able to browse. OTOH, I am not sure if the goal of being able to browse through notes AND files at the same time can be a realistic goal, unless a proper virtual folder system with Zoot-like capabilities is implemented - the Zoot 5 we are all waiting for.

As a consequence, at the moment I tend to keep note-taking and file organizing/browsing separate. I broadly mirror the basic organization of Zoot's virtual folder system - e.g., book chapters and section topics - in my Windows filing system (as far as that is possible), use Net Snippets to collect web data, and my file manager - Total Commander - to do my quick browsing through the Windows folder system (which, of course, include the Net Snippets folders and subfolders).

I was hoping to use CS/WR for web-capture and browsing - especially because of its use of virtual folders - but (a) Zoot doesn't handle the URL-type address hyperlinks to CS/WR properly, so the two programs won't communicate; and (b) having to export the contents of CS/WR in order for them to be indexed and searched (especially pdf files - the bane of all our lives) is an awkward solution to the problem of how to search across one's hard disk. I think I'd find the same problems with UR.

But it's all swings and roundabouts. The combination of Ultra Recall plus Whizfolders definitely has its attractions, too, as does Infohandler, which I also periodically download.

Derek

Derek,

See my responses in brackets.

Derek Cornish wrote:

Steve -

Before I d/l Whizfolders, can you tell me whether it has:

- any single-pane outlining features [No]

- ability to import .HEAD outlines (e.g., to import Grandview files) [I don't believe so]

- ability to export outlines to Word [only RTF, text and HTML]

- tabbed interface as well as notes tree (e.g., like Keynote) [While notes are visible in the notes pane, you can also open notes in a separate editor window, which provides access to more formatting buttons on the tool bar... You can have individual notes open and accessible through tabs in this editor window. However, access to various notes databases (what WF calls documents) is in a separate window altogether... So you can access individual notes through tabs, as well as clicking on the heading in the tree, but you do not have tabbed access to various trees.]

- ability to work with URL-type address hyperlinks - e.g., like "biblioscape://RefID=28" - in order to link with data from other
programs [I'm not quite sure about this. When I dragged and dropped a file from my desktop onto the editor, this is the code that WF inserted

[~JumpFileShowText AP ad draft.pdf::..\..\AP ad draft.pdf]

When not in edit mode, that link looks like this

AP ad draft.pdf

But is, underlined like most links.]

- ability to add marginal-type comments to text [No]

As you can see I am struggling hard against my addiction. OTOH, so many tree-type organizers, so few major differences amonst them... [I agree with that statement. I may have overstated the power of the editor in WF. It has extended selection, which is rare these days. But it doesn't have outlining or footnoting or the powerful features of Word.]

Derek

Derek

Stephen -

Thanks very much. I'll take a look, I think (trans. I just must take a look now).

Derek

I think my information is moving away from the outline to a system based on the infinite possibilities of >groups of categories. The question of cloning doesn’t even come up because there are no folders. The >categories are essentially tags.

The more relevant question, I think, is: does a question functionally identical to cloning arises for tags? The analogous issue for tags is: alre tags are mutually exclusive? If they are NOT, like the different note flags in OneNote, for example, then you in substance have cloning into the categories formed from tagged items. If they ARE mutually exclusive, like the flags in Ultra Recall's Date Explorer, then you in substance have NO cloning into the categories formed by tags. IH's innovation was to allow multiple tags to be applied systematically to a given item. The terminology is different but it is completely isomorphic to the ability to clone under multiple topics. IH is an exercise in systematic cloning, and from thence rise its "infinite possibilities."

Stephen, good question.

I think of cloning in the context of the outline, and the notion of putting an item into a folder such that it is not someplace else. As a result, the question comes up of what to do when you want it in more than one place, and want changes made to each occurance of that item.

So the idea of cloning came in, which to my mind is a step toward tags.

In the InfoHandler scenario, the categories can be considered as tag inasmuch as they are assigned to a piece of information -- there is no putting information anywhere; attributes, ie. categories, are assigned to it.

With this system there is no need to even think of cloning because the tags are assigned.

The category assignments are not mutually exclusive as I understand the term.

IH allows me to retrieve data for any combination of categories from any of the cat groups.

So yes, I'd agree that IH is an exercise in systematic cloning, except given the structure the notion of cloning does not arise as it does in the case of outlines and the folder metaphor.

Good to hear from you -- hope all is well.

Daly



Stephen R. Diamond wrote:

>I think my information is moving away from the outline to a system based on the
infinite possibilities of >groups of categories. The question of cloning doesn’t
even come up because there are no folders. The >categories are essentially
tags.

The more relevant question, I think, is: does a question functionally
identical to cloning arises for tags? The analogous issue for tags is: alre tags are
mutually exclusive? If they are NOT, like the different note flags in OneNote, for
example, then you in substance have cloning into the categories formed from tagged
items. If they ARE mutually exclusive, like the flags in Ultra Recall's Date
Explorer, then you in substance have NO cloning into the categories formed by tags.
IH's innovation was to allow multiple tags to be applied systematically to a given
item. The terminology is different but it is completely isomorphic to the ability to
clone under multiple topics. IH is an exercise in systematic cloning, and from thence
rise its "infinite possibilities."

Ian Goldsmid wrote:

Yup, I have licenses for ContentSaver/Web Researcher, NetSnippets, and
UltraRecall.. Ultimately I found that UltraRecall was and is able to replicate every
web page I throw at it perfectly, looking identical to the original - I really like
that. Also UR provides a much greater range of metadata, or tagging with dirrerent
attributes such as dates of various kinds, keywords, pick-lists, notes and on and
on.. Its extremely well engineered, the developers are constantly improving it at an
impressive rate, they are incredibly responsive to users..... AND Saved Web pages
can be easily mirrored on your hard disk by exporting them.

Just wondering; have you tried Surfulater? ( http://www.surfulater.com/ ) It's much more specialised of course, but it does offer some interesting features, such as integrated HTML editing of saved content, filters etc

I usually don't save complete web content at all, just texts; however, off-line browsing is very useful for presentations and several are planned in the near future.

alx

Alexander

Yes, I do have Surfulater - I bought it about 9 months ago when it looked like the developer was going to be gung ho to develop a lot of new features fast - since then it has been developing at a relative snails pace... Main issue for me is, of course it totally specializes in saving web pages, but for too many web pages, it has problems displaying the saved versions as they appear online... If it saved most web pages perfectly, it might be a nice app for saving & editing them. I suspect it will be at least another 6 months before the developer cracks how to save and display 99% web pages accurately...

One other web page saver I've looked at a few times and been impressed with is Metaproducts Inquiry (there is a Pro version too) http://www.metaproducts.com/mp/Inquiry_Professional_Edition.htm ... It didn't seem to do more than others I already had, but I might have bought it if I didn't already have those alternatives... Definitely worth a look.

Regards, Ian

Alexander Deliyannis wrote:

Just wondering; have you tried Surfulater? (
http://www.surfulater.com/ ) It's much more specialised of course, but it does
offer some interesting features, such as integrated HTML editing of saved content,
filters etc

I usually don't save complete web content at all, just texts; however,
off-line browsing is very useful for presentations and several are planned in the
near future.

alx

Derek Cornish wrote:

I was hoping to use CS/WR for web-capture and browsing -
especially because of its use of virtual folders - but (a) Zoot doesn't handle the
URL-type address hyperlinks to CS/WR properly, so the two programs won't
communicate; and (b) having to export the contents of CS/WR in order for them to be
indexed and searched (especially pdf files - the bane of all our lives) is an awkward
solution to the problem of how to search across one's hard disk. I think I'd find the
same problems with UR.

Just to follow-up on this. The latest Zoot now does handle both CS/WR URL-type hyperlinks and those from Biblioscape. Not sure about Whizfolder alpha's external hyperlinks, but apparently it seems to be just a question of adding the URL address to the registry (I think).

This once again gives Zoot the ability to link to items in third-party programs' databases. Now that this issue is sorted out I may go back to using a Zoot/Web Research combination rather than a Zoot/Net Snippets one - at least for some projects. As with UltraRecall, it is easy - though rather a nuisance - to mirror files held in WR elsewhere on the HDD and index and search them, if that is required.

Derek