Forum Posts Feed
RightNote Pro
< Next Topic | Back to topic list | Previous Topic >
Posted by 22111
Jan 27, 2014 at 05:17 PM
“by throwing together a bunch of OLE controls in tabs.” - No, you correctly identified the prob here. I always said developers had to invest in paid controls / components, but just “throwing together” them isn’t sufficient either (especially so if you don’t even choose real good ones), and RN is a blatant example for that (See also http://www.donationcoder.com/forum/index.php?topic=35633.0 ) : nor enough coding, nor enough thinking before coding, but then, it indexes pdf’s (as UR does.).
I had been interested in RN because somebody in that DC thread had said he switched from UR to RN, so I had thought it had some hidden “qualities” I might have overlooked first time (since UR is a very robust prog, even if its ergonomics and lack of serious development are both awful).
But well, sometimes people make mistakes… into which they’re not necessarily to be followed… ;-)
Posted by JohnK
Jan 28, 2014 at 01:26 AM
I’ll put in a word here in defence of RightNote. I spent a long time searching for a note-taking program that was stable and robust and that offered faithful web page capture with a simple global keyboard shortcut (many note-taking programs claim to offer web page capture—most make a poor job of capturing complex pages).
RightNote satisfies these requirements and all other features I require in a note-taking program. And the developer is responsive. A few weeks ago, I emailed him to ask him to support web page capture in Palemoon (http://www.palemoon.org/—a Firefox-based browser that is now my browser of choice). Support was added in the next RightNote release. And I’m a fan of the TRichView text editing control (http://www.trichview.com/) used by RightNote (also used by AM-Notebook, another program I admire and use - http://www.aignes.com/notebook.htm).
Posted by 22111
Jan 28, 2014 at 02:36 PM
John,
I never put whole websites into any outliner since that contradicts my “purist philosophy” - as said, I’ve got macros to quickly fetch primal info (= url and selection) from them, and then also for adding additional text selections or pics or partial screen shots (for formulas, tables, etc.) to that same item then if necessary.
At the same time, I know perfectly well that 95 p.c. or more people do it otherwise, and so I think that you’ve added very important and relevant info here - since indeed, QUALITY of web pages import is highly important whenever you do such import -, as formerly has done Bill (wsp) by stating its pdf processing is really good.
Also, you are perfectly right in reminding us RN has got a perfectly acceptable richview control, which at a price at 330 bucks (and with no royalties) was “too much” for the developer of Ultra Recall, who likes to have it for free instead, by that making angry almost all his customers.
So let’s hope Real will
- exterminate the obvious search bug
- rethink tagging (both for the curently unscrutable 3-tags-pane thing as for combining tags in filtering for tags),
and I’ll reconsider my stance about RN whole-heartedly. As I said in DC lately, I acknowledge the missing cloning feature as a choice of the developer… and which would become absolutely acceptable the moment the tagging function he implemented instead, will become functional for day-to-day tasks, and this includes filtering for task combinations.
Now, having been (thankfully) reminded of RN’s superior rich view control, I understand possible motivation better of a switch from UR to RN… all the more so since it’s probable that the probs I discovered in RN will not become evident in every trial situation, so that they might not have affected such switching. ;-)