Human mind is very complex machine.
I had an experience recently trying to buy small plot. I had more than 12 viable choices. Narrowing them down to smaller numbers need a lot reasoning--the pros and cons of each plot--, the missing information about one plot that could change my decision, if that plot can reduce in price, if that plot X can have all the papers, if that plot Y is bigger....so many factors involved.... why I exclude choice X over Choice Y, needs a lot of complex thinking.

Scapple seems much better than any other mind mapping app since it puts no constrains on how I put my ideas; how I connect and map them.

For a short, and fast thinking, it even seems much better than Tinderbox because of the nature of the maps. The maps in Tinderbox normally hide information. You need an editor window on the side to write (on the side where you read the other notes).

Scapple, you just have it all in one plain page, without the limitations of the paper (you cannot have as large paper to network complex ideas).

What is do you think?

Now that Scapple has labels for the links, it may be. (I haven't been able to use this feature, because the new version isn't up on the App Store yet.) But Tinderbox is hard to beat. You can write a lot of text as the note's name, so you don't really need the note pane open. You can add badges, which may be useful for visualizing. The adornment feature can be very helpful too. I use Tinderbox's map view to build timelines (eschewing the actual timeline view, which I find unusable). And the fact that you can switch to outline view is a big plus for Tinderbox. Scapple is simpler and probably quicker. I personally would take either one over a standard mind mapping app.

Steve Z.

Tinderbox maps can do everything Scapple maps do -- plus several dozen additional features not possible at all with Scapple.

Scapple's minimalist feature set is nice, but I would never consider it for complex modeling. The recent update (coming three years after the last, minor, update) provides a few minor tweaks. Eastgate, on the other hand, produces a dozen or so feature upgrades annually. Scapple has always seemed like an afterthought to Scrivener -- not exactly abandonware, but not a core product either. If Scapple eventually incorporate's Scrivener's custom metadata it will be a contender -- but on the other hand, custom metadata has been part of Tinderbox maps since inception.

Alternatives to Scapple include Tufts University's VUE (which requires an outdated version of Java), and the excellent Cmap Tools from IHMC -- which has been around for about the same amount of time as Tinderbox. Cmap is the only tool in the class that is cross-platform -- Windows, macOS, Linux and iOS -- and it has more features than Scapple.

I agree, both VUE and Tinderbox are much more superior products.

But, the complexity of the applications seems to put some kind of mental barrier to use them for small things: for fast thinking.

I love Tinderbox for everything it offers. But, I tend to pull it for my academic works, and for projects that I will be working for longer times on.

For fast and efficient thinking, the things I need to do to make it functional for specific project, setting adornments, or event changing of the colors of the notes is just a barrier for putting down ideas.

That is why I find Scapple incredible efficient replacement of actual paper than any other software.

I also don't want to use it for longer and bigger projects because exporting the data is a mess.

Cmap is the only tool in the class that is cross-platform—Windows, macOS, Linux and iOS—and it has more features than Scapple.

I am hoping to add a free placement mode to Hyper Plan. It should then be able to do most of the things that Cmap, Vue and Scapple can do (and a lot more besides). We only support macOS and Windows though. I don't think there is enough demand for a Linux version to make it commercially viable. And the limited screen size of iOS devices isn't a good fit for Hyper Plan (I suppose it would be possible to come up with some very cut down version of Hyper Plan for iOS, I don't know how useful that would be though).

Andy Brice

But, the complexity of the applications seems to put some kind of mental barrier to use them for small things: for fast thinking.

This is exactly right. When all I want to do is what a tool like Scapple offers, then bloating the feature set diminishes the value. I don't think Literature and Latte designed Scapple to compete with the heavier tools mentioned here. Scapple has a specific, narrow purpose, and does it well. That it *doesn't* clutter its feature set is a good thing. Scapple vs Tinderbox, HyperPlan, etc. = apples vs oranges.

Scapple is very nice for the reason it's simplistic. A conventional mind map will have a central node that may be of no use beyond tying like nodes together.

But, like most mind map utilities, put 3,000 nodes into it and clutter may become a problem. Link up 1,000 different combinations of 10 nodes each and the spiderweb of lines may become difficult to navigate.

I agree it's pretty neat, though. For brainstorming creative writing, it's quick and easy. Magnetic background shapes are nice.

Another white board app that compares to Scapple is Curio. Of course, like Tinderbox, Curio is much more than a concept mapping app. But it does that Scapple-like work pretty well. It is more expensive, so if all you want is what Scapple does, stick with Scapple.

As for the Tinderbox-Scapple comparison, here is another benefit of Tinderbox (if it is important to you): You can make clones (aliases) of your notes, so you can simultaneously view them different ways. Arrange them in a timeline and by priority and by cost and by whatever. Also with Tinderbox you can bang out the notes in rapid fire, if you need to. Type the note. Hit return twice and you have a new note awaiting your typing.

Steve Z.

@Dellu

If you search the forum for "concept mapping", "concept mapper" and "concept map," you may find some more examples of non-hierarchical mind mapping software.

Dr Andus wrote:

@Dellu

If you search the forum for "concept mapping", "concept mapper" and
"concept map," you may find some more examples of non-hierarchical mind
mapping software.

But after years of trying different concept mappers, nothing seems to match the speed and convenience of pen and paper as "the best for 'thinking on paper'."

Having research background in a few diverse fields plus commercial experience, And having tested well over 300 related softwares over the last few years of all genres from Outliners, Trees, Notes, MindMaps, DBs, Virtual Boards, Cards, txt/code editors, IDEs, TimeLiners, Projects/Schedulers, my own personal coded apps, RPG platforms, etc etc, all selected down into a ToolChian of about select 15 to 25 building blocks to choose for each task, I can confirm nothing beats pen and paper for brainstorming in a few scientific and creative areas I use them for.

Except: the brain. Visualization techniques in one's "brain" I devised for brainstorming which beat even pen and paper. PLUS memory indexing techniques and mind training routines which are also needed. But it needed training to be able do complex visualizations and more ie: dynamic, like building up muscles. Then it goes into memory index then physically on pen & paper or notes/diagrams . Then several building blocks from the toolchain are chosen to suite the task. I would not call it mental pen & paper because it is not 2D, it is not even just 3D but dynamic and in time or 4D plus interactive. It takes some self training, one can start with a few techniques initially.

Further down the chain, for Mind Mapping, needed for complex structures, I use a couple softwares not mentioned so far in this thread. As for Scapple I replaced it with another software which is actually not of a visual diagram genre. But any extra free features updates for Scapple as promised would be welcome, in case I use it again which I doubt.

Since the theme of the thread is software -- pllease share the names of the "couple of softwares not mentioned" and "another software"

@washere wrote

Further down the chain, for Mind Mapping, needed for complex structures, I use a couple softwares not mentioned so far in this thread.
As for Scapple I replaced it with another software which is actually not of a visual diagram genre.

* For basic to mid-level mind mapping I need something I like UI-wise, on Windows & Android, with enough import/export options, and that can be set to black background/themes. Everything i use is set to black, desktop & even Windows modded themes for black explorer windows etc to Android Substratum black themes which lets me set everything to Black/dark themes. Also I have to like using this as it is used most so I use SimpleMind with black backgrounds & its wonderful color themes for Windows & Android. It is a joy to use, not to mention full of features I need.

* For advanced mind mapping I need import/export to the max incl. .txt/.tab copy & paste. (ConnectedText wiki maker (not a mind map app) is a secondary choice for such txt/tab conversions, but I don't like the spirit of that software. I don't need Wiki makers either, better ones out there). Also I need as much features as poss plus multi format templates etc so for very complex AND Large diagrams the only choice with all the above for me is Mindjet MindManager. Sometimes I use their rivals, XMind & MindGenuis & a few others if there is a prob. About 500 portable apps on my tiny USB+C-Type SD-Card reader which is always on my overcrowded multi tool/gadget keyring switch. So if MindManager can not hack some format, one of the others on the SD-Card will wherever I am, but that need is rather rare.

* I used to use Scapple for fast text listing within nodes, copy & paste, quick re-arrange and then onto bigger tools. Basically as a fast "list maker/re-arranger & multi list topologies" (not for mind mapping) in certain cases, not often, depending on the task. For this "multi list" layout initial hacking in the toolchain, when needed occasionally, I now use TreeSheets. Unique useful features, wonderfully spirited piece of work and also a joy to use.

This may be common knowledge already, but if you have Scapple 1.2, the newer 1.3 version is not yet on the App Store. Apple is still examining it to make sure it conforms to their requirements. However, the trial version is good for 15 days, and Literature and Latte says that Scapple should be posted in the App Store soon.

bobmclain wrote:

I don’t think Literature and Latte designed Scapple to compete with the heavier tools mentioned here. Scapple has a specific, narrow purpose, and does it well. That it *doesn’t* clutter its feature set is a good thing.

I totally agree with this idea.
I think the simplicity in Scapple is on purpose.
And, that is its main strength.

Stephen Zeoli wrote:

You can write a lot of text as the note’s name, so you don’t really need the note pane open.

I have been thinking about this in Tinderbox for a bit. But, honestly, it seems counter intuitive, and against the intention of the $Title of TB. It might be fine to write a few lines of text; but, I don't think writing 5 pages of text on the title would be fine. I mean, you can use that strategy as a means of compromise. But, honestly, I don't think that is a good practice for using TB.

What would be interesting (and, comparable to Scapple) on the side of TB is if direct insertion of $Text on the map would be possible (without an editor window). This has been discussed in TB forum before, I remember. The $Text is view-able on the map, but, cannot be edited without opening the editor. That is really what makes writing in Scapple map much simpler. The map is also fixed and stable in Scapple than in TB. The map is a bit wobbly in TB, I don't know why. You have to scroll around to get the notes (You can tell me to fix that X and Y coordinate: well, that is just one further stuff to twink, another burden on the side of the user.)

I am not saying TB can be replaced by Scapple.
What I am saying is that the map in Scapple is really the most convenient panel just to drop ideas fast and connect them the way you want: closest to paper and pen.

I am not saying TB can be replaced by Scapple.
What I am saying is that the map in Scapple is really the most
convenient panel just to drop ideas fast and connect them the way you
want: closest to paper and pen.

While Scapple recreates a better paper, Tinderbox filters the data and makes it more iteractive.But it requires more careful thought and the judicious use of attributes and agents to reveal the data. Which would be the better tool in evaluating multiple data points? If there is a lot of complex data I think TinderBox’s filtering capabilities are invaluable, rather than brute force evaluation with Scapple. (Ps: thanks for the TB screen casts, Steve - they were very useful to start wrapping my head around TB)

This topic inspired me to create a Tinderbox map showing some of the ways you might use such a map as a thinking space. You can view the screenshot here:

https://www.dropbox.com/s/rm3xfmuxzjwu1yf/Tinderbox%20Thinking%20Space.jpg?dl=0

This is not an attempt to prove Tinderbox's superiority to Scapple in this regard. I don't know which is the better tool, except whichever one works best for you. I just enjoyed this exercise and wanted to share the result.

Steve Z.

Andy Brice wrote:

I am hoping to add a free placement mode to Hyper Plan. It should then
be able to do most of the things that Cmap, Vue and Scapple can do (and
a lot more besides).

This sounds interesting!

A very nice mapping example, Steve. Thank you for creating and sharing.

Stephen Zeoli wrote:

This topic inspired me to create a Tinderbox map showing some of the
ways you might use such a map as a thinking space. You can view the
screenshot here:

https://www.dropbox.com/s/rm3xfmuxzjwu1yf/Tinderbox%20Thinking%20Space.jpg?dl=0

"Thinking Space"? I don't know what that means but there are two separate genres of software which should not be confused. One is "Mind Map" and I believe lit&latte do not call Scapple a MindMap due to the non-hierarchical aspect.

There is a second genre separate from MindMaps, some call it White-Board some Cork-Boards some Stickies (M3, Yellow etc), some Index-Cards etc. I call this second genre "Virtual Boards". These are quite different and I do not confuse them with MindMaps which have a fairly defined definition consensus though some still disagree on that, avoiding a mental hodgepodge of comparative reviews across 2 separate genres.

After testing numerous options, I settled on a few "Virtual Boards" tools and even then, each to suit the task at hand. Can't afford to over-generalize there either. Horses for courses.

Stephen Zeoli wrote:

This topic inspired me to create a Tinderbox map showing some of the
ways you might use such a map as a thinking space. You can view the
screenshot here:

https://www.dropbox.com/s/rm3xfmuxzjwu1yf/Tinderbox%20Thinking%20Space.jpg?dl=0

This is beautiful map Stephen. Tinderbox is damn sexy when maneuvered by the professional!
Thank you.

Here is a map I created in 2013 to represent the relations among my research tools in 2013.
it is totally ugly; but was fast to write and practical.

https://dellu.files.wordpress.com/2013/11/research_workflow.png

I can only imagine how beautifully it could have been done in TB.

It is funny I put Tinderbox and Scapple stuck together on that map.

Nice map. I bet it was also fun to build it.

Dellu wrote:

Here is a map I created in 2013 to represent the relations among my
research tools in 2013.
it is totally ugly; but was fast to write and practical.

https://dellu.files.wordpress.com/2013/11/research_workflow.png

I can only imagine how beautifully it could have been done in TB.