Curio for macOS has a significant new release out today, with some very interesting new features.

https://www.zengobi.com/curio/#whatsnew

The big deal is that Curio now can incorporate markdown (a basic version) in any "figure" on the canvas -- text, lists, mind maps, and so on. A Curio document or page can be exported as a markdown document or the markdown interpreted for export to PDF, RTF, etc.

Zengobi is always generous about trial periods.

I've been working with Curio 12 throughout the beta period and find it very stable.

Sorry, the name of this thread got truncated -- should be "Curio 12 is released"

Thanks, Paul. I was wondering if a new version was due. The markdown is a nice addition. Also the OmniOutliner and TaskPaper import/export (haven't tried either of those yet, but if they work, that would be handy).

Steve Z.

A TaskPaper document with the @tags that Curio 12 supports (see the documentation) when pasted to Curio will create Events or ToDos in Curio. If you configure a project file (document) to sync from Curio to calendars, then those items show up in the designated event or reminder calendar, respectively.

George has built up Curio to be a very useful application for planning with the calendar sync, status shelf, and other features. I rely heavily on it.

Stephen Zeoli wrote:

Thanks, Paul. I was wondering if a new version was due. The markdown is
a nice addition. Also the OmniOutliner and TaskPaper import/export
(haven't tried either of those yet, but if they work, that would be
handy).

Steve Z.

Yes, I agree. At first sight it looks expensive by the standards of some other desktop tools. But it has such a breadth of features that it can if required replace or supplement several other applications in one's digital toolbox (in a way like a physical whiteboard, its closest real-world equivalent).

I tried it many times and dropped it. I just get blocked what to do with it. My mind just freezes.

for Tinderbox, my choices are just two: Outline or map. I always go with the maps.
Scapple; just a map; no other option even exists.

Curio is just a conglomerate of features: I find it very hard to chose which of the moods to use at a point. Many features give users the choice. It also causes some kind of pain for a beginner. The psychological term for the kind of problem, I recently learned, is called "decision fatigue".

Shall I write them as lists, or as outlines, or mind-maps? which one is the best for the task? which works best with other application? I often keep on asking these question still freezing in front of the big panel. This is no a problem with the application per se. I just experience this weird psychological barrier with this application so often that I finally gave up even trying.

But, I love Curoita. it has remains so important part of my workflow.

I always felt bad for using Curiota without paying for Curio. He developed Curiota for users of Curio. I snatched the free app, and, never paid for Curio.

I don't think George Browning minds people using Curiota without buying Curio... if he did, he could have made Curiota part of Curio, not a separate app. I'm sure he hopes one day you'll be enticed to buy Curio.

Dellu wrote:

I always felt bad for using Curiota without paying for Curio. He
developed Curiota for users of Curio. I snatched the free app, and,
never paid for Curio.

I understand what you're saying. I have that problem with Curio as well. Blank canvas. So many choices of how to start. Makes my brain freeze up sometimes.

But I've been reading the lamenting about OneNote going cloud-only, and Curio is an excellent replacement for the Mac version of OneNote. In fact, in my view, Curio is a far superior application for Mac users than ON is, unless you need cross platform options. Curio integrates with your calendar. It has some nice features for working with PDFs. You can attach a full-featured note to any of the figures you put into Curio. And, of course, you can make your pages beautiful... if you care about that.

On the other hand, OneNote is sort of free, while Curio isn't.

Steve Z.


Dellu wrote:

I tried it many times and dropped it. I just get blocked what to do with
it. My mind just freezes.

for Tinderbox, my choices are just two: Outline or map. I always go with
the maps.
Scapple; just a map; no other option even exists.

Curio is just a conglomerate of features: I find it very hard to chose
which of the moods to use at a point. Many features give users the
choice. It also causes some kind of pain for a beginner. The
psychological term for the kind of problem, I recently learned, is
called "decision fatigue".

Shall I write them as lists, or as outlines, or mind-maps? which one is
the best for the task? which works best with other application? I often
keep on asking these question still freezing in front of the big panel.
This is no a problem with the application per se. I just experience
this weird psychological barrier with this application so often that I
finally gave up even trying.

But, I love Curoita. it has remains so important part of my workflow.

Dellu wrote:

I tried it many times and dropped it. I just get blocked what to do with
it. My mind just freezes.

for Tinderbox, my choices are just two: Outline or map. I always go with
the maps.

I am a user of both Tinderbox and Curio, they have both become indispensable to me, but fill slightly different needs. I understand your "decision fatigue" with Curio, plenty of options always available at hand.. I think the solution is to just not overthink it too much , that's what they call "analysis paralysis" :-) .

Just start with what your instinct tells you at first, knowing that you can always convert it to another format later if you feel it more adequate , outline to maps, maps to outline , etc.. that's the beauty of Curio. The right format to use often reveals itself to you briefly after you start developing your ideas, but you've got to jump into the water and start putting down your ideas into any format first.

Being afflicted with the CRIMP malady myself, I tried to cure it by forcing myself to choose between Tinderbox or Curio, but not both. In the end I ended up keeping them both. While Tinderbox is superior in filtering, organizing, analyzing etc.. it is very much oriented towards written notes and doesn't handle images too well, unlike Curio which is very much multimedia oriented. When some of my brainstorms need to incorporate images, web archives, pdfs, soundbites,.. I usually turn to Curio first. Sure, it doesn't have the ( sometimes exhaustingly ) complex organizing features of Tinderbox, but it is the right tool for me when a project/brainstorm doesn't fit too strictly into a straightforward map or outline format, but needs a bit of everything.
Another thing , once I have layed down a somewhat complex map in Tinderbox, zooming in or out on it is often problematic, as it doesn't keep everything in proportion but tends to reformat both the spaces between notes and the visible portions of text in the notes themselves according to some mysterious rules that escape me. . Curio on the other hand just zooms in/out in a very straightforward manner, like you would do on a PDF or a web-browser.

PS: sorry about my strange grammar, english isn't my first language ( not even my second actually )

Dellu wrote:

Shall I write them as lists, or as outlines, or mind-maps? which one
is the best for the task? which works best with other application?
I often keep on asking these question still freezing in front of the
big panel.

I've followed Curio since it came out in 2004 (and watched with curiosity as it focused on edu sales). If I lived completely in my Mac today I'd take a closer look at its features but I do so much on the run that I really need a product/service which offered access and editing on iOS.

But more generally, for me any list can live inside an outline, so my choice is usually between an outliner (OmniOutliner, Cloud Outliner Pro) and a mindmap (Mindnode Mac/iOS usually, though I own iThoughts/Mac too), sometime with light free-tier kanban use.

Unfortunately, I'm just not satisfied with the Mac/iOS outliners I've used, and don't want to pay monthly/yearly for a Workflowy/Dynalist/Checkvist solution, though I might ultimately end up going this route in the end because these services look useful and powerful and they offer OPML import/export.

I'm intrigued by Zenkit's approach of being able to instantly switch list/checklist views into kanban into mindmap into table views (but not into an outline), with notifications, and with integration with Google Calendar as well as access to Zapier connectivity. If they offered a real outliner (and OPML to import/export) it would be a killer option for me.

Skywatcher wrote:

Being afflicted with the CRIMP malady myself, I tried to cure it by
forcing myself to choose between Tinderbox or Curio, but not both. In
the end I ended up keeping them both. While Tinderbox is superior in
filtering, organizing, analyzing etc.. it is very much oriented towards
written notes and doesn't handle images too well, unlike Curio which is
very much multimedia oriented. When some of my brainstorms need to
incorporate images, web archives, pdfs, soundbites,.. I usually turn to
Curio first. Sure, it doesn't have the ( sometimes exhaustingly )
complex organizing features of Tinderbox, but it is the right tool for
me when a project/brainstorm doesn't fit too strictly into a
straightforward map or outline format, but needs a bit of everything.
Another thing , once I have layed down a somewhat complex map in
Tinderbox, zooming in or out on it is often problematic, as it doesn't
keep everything in proportion but tends to reformat both the spaces
between notes and the visible portions of text in the notes themselves
according to some mysterious rules that escape me. . Curio on the other
hand just zooms in/out in a very straightforward manner, like you would
do on a PDF or a web-browser.

PS: sorry about my strange grammar, english isn't my first language (
not even my second actually )

This is interesting. My work also involves PDF files most of the time. But, I never bring them to Tinderbox (except linking them in some cases). I always read my PDF files in Skim or PDFexpert. I sometimes export the summaries and annotations. But, often times, I keep a Tinderbox window on the half of my screen to write notes while reading the PDF with PDFexpert.

- I honestly didn't know that conversion between maps and outlines in Curio was possible.

One major problem with Tinderbox is that it's XML package is not suitable to search with Spotlight. I have to constantly export my notes to Finder to be able to search them with Spotlight.

is Curio's package searchable with Spotlight?

Skywatcher wrote:

PS: sorry about my strange grammar, english isn't my first language (
not even my second actually )

Your English is excellent.

Spotlight does not search within packages. It's a Spotlight limitation, not Curio's. DEVONthink gets around this by (optionally) creating a metadata file for each document in a database package and storing that file in a cache that Spotlight searches. Curio does not use that procedure.

Dellu wrote:

is Curio's package searchable with Spotlight?

In fact, from version 11.1, you can choose to store Curio assets alongside the project file (rather than within the package) to make them searchable from Spotlight. There is some useful discussion about trade-offs over in the Zengobi forums.

Paul Korm wrote:

Spotlight does not search within packages. It's a Spotlight limitation,
not Curio's. DEVONthink gets around this by (optionally) creating a
metadata file for each document in a database package and storing that
file in a cache that Spotlight searches. Curio does not use that
procedure.

Dellu wrote:

>is Curio's package searchable with Spotlight?

Dellu wrote:

- I honestly didn't know that conversion between maps and outlines in
Curio was possible.

It's one of the things I love about Curio - I can pick a format at the start and chop and change as I go. Among other things, it's a great way of being able to repurpose content - one format for my thinking, another for inclusion in a report, maybe a third for a presentation.

I admit, I do spend far too much time wondering whether my deathless prose would be even more deathless if I changed the format. But that's me - displacement activities have always been my strong point :-)

True - though with limitations. Storing “assets” (files added to a Curio “project” — PDF, RTF, etc.) does make the item searchable in Spotlight, but clicking it does not open the Curio project they are associated with. And Spotlight does not search “figures” (lists, mindmaps, tables) created inside a Curio project.

NickG wrote:

In fact, from version 11.1, you can choose to store Curio assets
alongside the project file (rather than within the package) to make them
searchable from Spotlight. There is some useful discussion about
trade-offs over in the Zengobi forums.

Paul Korm wrote:
Spotlight does not search within packages. It's a Spotlight limitation,
>not Curio's. DEVONthink gets around this by (optionally) creating a
>metadata file for each document in a database package and storing that
>file in a cache that Spotlight searches. Curio does not use that
>procedure.
>
>Dellu wrote:
>
>>is Curio's package searchable with Spotlight?

Paul Korm wrote:

True - though with limitations. Storing “assets” (files
added to a Curio “project” — PDF, RTF, etc.) does make
the item searchable in Spotlight, but clicking it does not open the
Curio project they are associated with. And Spotlight does not search
“figures” (lists, mindmaps, tables) created inside a Curio
project.

thank you for the clarification Paul.
I like Devonthink's approach.
The interesting part of Devonthink is that, even if Spotlight fails to search the cache, the package internal files can be manually searched using other search tools. Devonthink puts the files within the database in a very meaningful and transparent way. I index the pdf files of my Devonthink database to Foxtrot. I also create aliases of the RTF library just to open them up in finder when Devonthink is not running.