As one of the Beta Testers, I had the opportunity of trying first hand the new version of ConnectedText 3 that is about to be released. In addition to many incremental improvements (in the editor, spell checker, etc.), it will have some highly significant changes:

1. Perhaps most important for the members of this forum an improved OUTLINER that can do check boxes now (and outlines can now be embedded in topics so that they open them with a double-click).

2. Lightning fast (not to say: instantaneous) SEARCHES. This makes possible "Smart topics" or the equivalent of "Smart folders" in Zoot (based on queries with very complex expressions).

3. New SEMANTIC EXTENSIONS enabling markups of Predicates and Attributes (like in Wikipedia) that significantly extend CT's meta information capabilities.

4. A new (additional) backup option that saves every entry of CT as a separate UTF8 text file in a separate directory. I does not just allow one to reconstruct the database, if things should go wrong, it also creates a concurrent TEXTUAL RECORD that could be indexed by another indexing program. All the information in CT is thus available in text, and it can just as easily be be used outside of CT as in CT. Anyone who trusts only plain text should find this appealing.

A long time ago (in the old forum), I compared Zoot and ConnectedText, concluding that Zoot had the edge over ConnectedText with regard to SMART FOLDERS. I now think ConnectedText is better in this regard as well.

There is no other desktop wiki (nor any two-pane outliner) that comes even close to this feature set.

I admit that I am prejudiced, but, I would like to add, it isn't uninformed prejudiced. Since you are all (almost all?) crimpers, what do you have to lose by taking another look. (In any case, it's the only thing that keeps me from using my Mac Notebook more than I do.)

Manfred

Hi Manfred, thanks for the heads up; I will definitely take a new look at Connected Text. Actually, I had joined its mailing list when I previously tried it and just received a message from the developer about the upcoming version.

According to the message: "users who purchased ConnectedText version 2.0 can upgrade to Version 3.0 for free. If you haven't purchased yet do so! Purchasing now you will receive Version 3.0 when released for the price of Version 2.0!"

My main reservation about Connected Text (which I think is definitely the easiest to use and most powerful personal Wiki around) was that it has almost no tools for importing existing material; it is assumed that one will do most of their writing within CT. I hope this has been addressed, though it's not clear from the announcement.

Cheers
alx

Hello Alexander,

thanks for your reply. I have been using ConnectedText since about the middle of 2006, and I have upgraded to version 2.0 already. In any case, I swear by it.

I am not sure when you used ConnectedText, but the recent version imports:
* text files
* HTML files
* Rtf files, and the new
* cbk files (which are the Utf8 text backups of ConnectedText)

The only thing I would have wished for when I imported (all) my stuff into it, would have been the ability to import one large files in segments identified by a delimiting character in the file (like the "~" that InfoSelect uses or used in exports).

Manfred

Manfred wrote:

I admit that I am prejudiced, but, I would like to add, it
isn't uninformed prejudiced. Since you are all (almost all?) crimpers, what do you
have to lose by taking another look. (In any case, it's the only thing that keeps me from
using my Mac Notebook more than I do.)

Sold to the guy in the tweed jacket :-). I've been meaning to give it a proper outing, and the temptation to register my copy was too much for me - especially given the free update to v3.

Derek

Derek Cornish wrote:

I've been meaning to give it a proper outing, and the temptation to register my copy
was too much for me - especially given the free update to v3.

The license price is very reasonable, but mounts up significantly for multiple computers. I regularly use 3 (one at home, one at office and one laptop) and most other programs I use have accomodated this with a single license.

This time, CRIMP will wait for a full evaluation :-)

alx

I'm also attracted by the ConnectedText upgrade. It's obviously a quality product.

However, what is putting me off (like Alx) is the pricing structure. I would want to use the USB version but this is priced at nearly three times the cost of a single desktop licence.

IMO a flat-rate single user (not PC) licence would be more attractive.

Jack

Derek,
I hope you will find it as useful as I do.
Manfred

Manfred wrote:

Derek,
I hope you will find it as useful as I do.

Thank you, Manfred. I'm going to set aside some time as soon as I've finished doing my taxes :-).

Derek

Alexander,

I do not want really to defend ConnectedText on the way they license their copies. It's their business (and very early on, I tried to tell them that their licensing model probably wasn't the best). But then again, I have come to think that the modular pricing is not all bad.

Just compare it with a license like that of Zoot. You pay $ 99.00 up front (no ifs or buts about it).

CT allows you to start with $29.95. That's one-third. If you then want to use it on mutliple computers, you can buy the USB version, which adds $67.95, so the total cost is $97.90 (about the same as Zoot). And you now have the capability to use it on as many computers as you want.

You could even start out with the USB version that costs 79.95 (and you would have that capability right away. From the Forum by the developer: "If you buy the USB version you can use in any computer but you cannot use it to install CT in a desktop computer (normal license). Note that you can still use the USB in that computer. ... In fact it is not necessary to have a normal version installed in your desktop if you purchase the USB version. We only recommend to have it since a USB sometimes can fail without notice. The most important thing to do is always backup your data."

All that being said, I have just two normal licenses (one for home and one for the office - at 54.95 - I am cheap or. I'd like to think "frugal" even in "crimping"). I use SyncBack and a portable drive (the Freeware version) to keep the two copies (as well as other files) in sync. If I forget the portable drive or the synchronization one day, I just use an editor to write what I want to write, and then e-mail it to myself. The same when I'm on the road (which admittedly happens less and less).

Perhaps a USB version would be better, but I have never really missed it.

Manfred

I bought a license for CT about a year ago. I recall that there was a somewhat arcane and annoying method for registering my copy after I'd bought the license. Assuming this process hasn't been improved, that makes the CT model of licensing -- a new license for each computer -- a real pain... because you have to go through that process to register each computer. I'd rather pay $80 for a universal license, or have the option of buying a single computer license for $30, or $80 for a universal license. That would be more customer friendly, I believe.

Steve Z.

Hi,

I am the developer of ConnectedText and I follow silently the messages posted about CT in the forum. I hesitated before posting this message since I don't want to use such space to promote my product. I just want to clarify one point about product registration. CT uses the same method as any other shareware product. After the purchase an activation code is sent. That's all. We changed the way CT is registered one year ago in response to the feedback of our users. If anyone has questions about it I would be glad to answer. You can send it using the contact page at our site.

Best regards,
Eduardo Mauro
ConnectedText

I finally succumbed to Manfred's gentle persuasion and tried CT. I was so impressed I registered it within a few days.

In doing so, I broke my self-imposed rule of never, ever registering shareware based on a single-machine licence. In an age when most of us use two or three machines on a daily basis (I use three), single-machine licences are clumsy and confusing to manage. Every time I add a new computer to my collection, I don't want to worry about whether I need new licences for my software.

So why did I break my rule? Well, CT is very promising, and I want to use it for an extended period in a serious test. And I figure I'll only be using it on one machine, so I can live with it for now.

But that doesn't mean I'm happy with the licence terms. Far from it. So Eduardo, thanks for posting here, and please re-consider your licence terms. A slightly higher price for a single-user licence would, I feel sure, be preferable for most potential customers.

To everyone else who objects to single-machine licences -- don't just accept them. Explain to the developers that adopting single-user licences would be a benefit.

I don't think I've mentioned it here, but I started a thread on this subject over at DonationCoder (http://www.donationcoder.com/Forums/bb/index.php?topic=12161.0 In the course of that thread I mentioned that I had suggested to the author of PageFour (http://www.softwareforwriting.com/ that he should consider changing to a single-user licence. He agreed, and changed the licence on the next version. I bought it immediately the licence changed. So it's always worth raising the subject.

JohnK wrote:

To everyone else who objects to single-machine licences --
don't just accept them. Explain to the developers that adopting single-user
licences would be a benefit.

John (and Eduardo),

I agree entirely. The single-machine license is very out of date. I too use three machines on a regular basis and I don't want to go through the hassle of licensing a copy of each machine.

Steve Z.