Tinderbox is too expensive. It looks useful and complex but it is too expensive for what it is.Devonthink as it correct with pricing. Annual pricing of nearly £100 is ridiculous.

Possible, but since perceived value depends on one's personal utility curve and it is hard to judge that for complex software without hands on experience, I would personally reserve judgment about "ridiculous" until doing an in-depth trial. Also, the intersection between Tinderbox and DEVONthink is, I would guess, maybe 5% or less of the feature sets for those two apps. Just my opinion. Don't shoot.

apb123 wrote:

Tinderbox is too expensive. It looks useful and complex but it is too
expensive for what it is.Devonthink as it correct with pricing. Annual
pricing of nearly £100 is ridiculous.

I would just add a reminder that the $98 per year isn't a subscription or a requirement. Tinderbox keeps working for you just fine after the year is up. Many Tinderbox users don't resubscribe until a feature in a new version comes along that they really want.

Paul Korm wrote:

Possible, but since perceived value depends on one's personal utility
curve and it is hard to judge that for complex software without hands on
experience, I would personally reserve judgment about "ridiculous" until
doing an in-depth trial. Also, the intersection between Tinderbox and
DEVONthink is, I would guess, maybe 5% or less of the feature sets for
those two apps. Just my opinion. Don't shoot.

apb123 wrote:
Tinderbox is too expensive. It looks useful and complex but it is too
>expensive for what it is.Devonthink as it correct with pricing. Annual
>pricing of nearly £100 is ridiculous.

I was one of those who was a very basic user of Tinderbox, but whose pride in being able to figure out a couple of valuable uses outweighed (probably irrationally) the sinkhole of time it took to do so. The help of people like Mark Bernstein and Mark Anderson is amazing. I made the matter moot by switching to Windows, but I had become increasingly aware of potential legacy issues in becoming increasingly dependent upon highly bespoke artisan software produced by an individual or very small company -- especially as I little confidence in being able to figure out exporting my data. I still felt a pang when I read about the new version -- I would have enjoyed sinking even more time into playing with it.

Beck wrote:

but I'm
less likely to consider your point of view when it is communicated in a
way that feels insulting.

I am sorry if my statement feels like that. I was trying to warn the people are thinking to jump to the app; was not thinking about you when made the comment.

I want to warn people because I genuinely regretted the time I spent tinkering with Tinderbox. As much as I want to learn from the mistakes of other people, I also want other people to learn from my mistakes. When I do the cost-benefit analysis (the time wasted and the time saved), I learned that I am losing big time with the use of TB.

In defence of Tinderbox, let me say this. It's the only note-taker I've come across that allows me to (a) just get the data in without having to think *at all* about organisation or structure in advance, (b) find or create structure afterwards and (c) use multiple different structures for the same data.

Any other app I've used (OmniOutliner, Ecco, CPN, Curio, various mind mappers, Notes, Agenda etc etc etc) either demands that I make some structure decisions before adding any data or leaves me with no structure and dependent on searches, filters or whatever to make sense of what I have.

I only scratch the surface of Tinderbox - I don't have the patience or the will to get under the hood - but as a means of just getting stuff down with a minimum of fuss and effort, I find it hard to beat. On the occasions where I do want to do something "clever", I can usually find a way quite quickly.

I also value the fact that it forces me to keep my notes separate from my files (they go in Devonthink) - I've caused myself trouble in the past trying to keep it all together in one place (CPN)

I think that one of the misconceptions around it is that you *have to* spend loads of time getting to grips with the underpinnings to use it (I think there's also probably a sense that "surely there's some piece of magic here that I need to understand otherwise why is it so expensive"). My experience is that you don't. I also think that it's easy to slip into trying to get TB to do things that other apps can do quicker and easier.

That said, if you don't spend a lot of time on the mechanics, you may well argue that the price isn't justified - for many (most) people, it probably isn't, especially when the market is full of low-cost, very well-built alternatives. I've tried lots of them. In the end, I come back to:

TB for making and collecting notes (or transcribing from a paper notebook)
Devonthink for collecting supporting data
Curio for planning

They work for me

Excellent points by NickG, there. It's true, there aren't many apps that are ideal for just dumping any old info any old how.

I've looked at Tinderbox with interest, especially in light of the enthusiastic support on this forum, but having evaluated what it does vs. what all my other apps do, have never felt the need to invest in it (and you know what an obsessive CRIMPer I am!).

Clearly it's a tool that works brilliantly well for many people. Different mindsets see the light in different ways. The fatal mistake we, as humans, always make is to assume that our own mindset is somehow a definitive template of human experience. It really isn't - people are so, so different. Social mores are what help us pretend we're all "more or less" equivalent. But after you've read a few works of science (or fiction, for that matter), you start to realise that human beings really don't think/feel/cogitate/invent/ideate/emote/prioritise etc. etc. in a "standardised" way at all. There are certain major crude levers that can be pulled (see: populist politics), but even there, the impact on individuals will vary enormously.

As has already been said: Tinderbox, it seems to me, is a set of interesting tools that really, really appeal to some people. And that's cool.

You're all cool. Keep being cool, darlings!

I agree with NickG's comments. Tinderbox shines for those projects where you have a lot of material and aren't sure how it inter-relates. The guy who prepared an insightful report on the myriad of insurgent groups in Afghanistan by piecing together little bits of news from various sources collected over the years is a pretty good example of this type of application. Mark Bernstein calls this working with emergent structure.

Its utility also depends on how you like to work. If you're the type of person who shuffles the card view around frequently as an organizational tool in Scrivener or bounces between Scrivener and Scapple, Tinderbox is very much suited to this way of working.

I agree that Mark could do a little better work on his marketing. The Eastgate Twitter account for example is approximately 85% US politics, 5% menus he's cooked for dinner, and 10% Tinderbox, which probably isn't the best way to communicate with the user base, especially for us international users. I do respect the artisanal nature of the product though. Mark's singular vision is part of what has kept it alive and evolving for nearly two decades, while a lot of other tools have come and gone.

Really constructive posts, above, from Bill, NickG, Steve Z, Chris T, Beck T, and many others I'm neglecting to call out (sorry). It is that thoughtful, objective and in-depth commentary -- from different points of view -- which makes this forum indispensable

First, I agree with what Paul just wrote about the indispensibility of this forum.

Hoping to add to that -- at least a little -- I answered my own question about Hyperbolic View in Tinderbox 8 and posted a short blog article about it here:

https://welcometosherwood.wordpress.com/2019/04/15/hyperbolic-view-in-tinderbox-8/

If you're curious and haven't uncovered the (really simple as it turns out) "secrets" to Hyperbolic View, I hope the screencast included helps clear it up.

Steve Z

BTW, I'd add Paul K to this list (and many other folks too).

Paul Korm wrote:

Really constructive posts, above, from Bill, NickG, Steve Z, Chris T,
Beck T, and many others I'm neglecting to call out (sorry). It is that
thoughtful, objective and in-depth commentary -- from different points
of view -- which makes this forum indispensable

I also agree with most of the last two pages of this discussion. My worldview on research and notetaking is to collect information in a somewhat freeform format (this, my past use of notecards), and then finding ways to best organize it.

Thank you for the blog post and video, Steve. I suspect the hyperbolic view will evolve as Mark Bernstein gets comments from users. For me, I'd like to see curvy edges (link lines) instead of straight lines. Curves would underscore the sense that the view is like looking at a graph on the surface of an inflating / deflating balloon.

Stephen Zeoli wrote:

Hoping to add to that -- at least a little -- I answered my own question
about Hyperbolic View in Tinderbox 8 and posted a short blog article
about it here:

https://welcometosherwood.wordpress.com/2019/04/15/hyperbolic-view-in-tinderbox-8/

I love the idea of TB as the perfect tool for tracking emergent trends/situations - that's a really interesting use case.

Of course, tracking one's growing knowledge and any resulting ideas is also an interesting example of an emergent process. Hm, oh Lord, I hope I'm not persuading myself into investing in Tinderbox here!

Eek!

MadaboutDana wrote:

I love the idea of TB as the perfect tool for tracking emergent
trends/situations - that's a really interesting use case.

Absolutely, Bill.

For me, "a tool for tracking emergent trends/situations" is a more accurate description of what Tinderbox is capable of than the more commonly used "tool for notes", which for me sells the software short.

Of course, you can use Tinderbox for simple purposes, such as outlining an essay. But that would be to squander your investment. For me, the description "a tool for tracking emergent trends/situations" underlines several important aspects of the software. When using Tinderbox, unlike, say, when setting up a database, you don't have to work out the optimal structure before you begin; you can do that as you go along. And when the best structure for the data becomes apparent, it is truly "emergent": Tinderbox is genuinely a toolbox with which you can try several different "fits" for your facts. But it's not AI: it's a tool, and you the user still have to apply intelligence to the process.

These benefits seem to me to be as useful for a teacher trying to structure a series of lessons, for a writer trying to carve her most reader-friendly way through clumps of information for a dissertation or plot-points for a novel, for a researcher carrying out some kinds of qualitative analysis - or for anybody trying to make sense of related but disparate pieces of data. (In fact, I'd be prepared to bet that Tinderbox-like pieces of computer software are amongst modern spooks' favourite "toys".)

Good points, Hugh. I suspect that working out "the optimal structure" before you begin" is what can lead to the "all fiddling and no results" concern that some folks have with Tinderbox.

Emergence is an abstraction that can be difficult to grasp. Structure (essential to "meaning" or 'understanding") doesn't pop up out of nowhere -- it takes gradual effort. For example, Bernstein in his chapter on Emergent Structure in A Tinderbox Way writes:

"How can we discover structure that we did not impose, structure that emerges organically from the notes themselves? Moving critical information from your memory into Tinderbox text, and from unstructured text into attributes, is often the key to more effective research and more cogent analysis. This process may be gradual; you don’t need to formalize immediately or completely. Indeed, premature formalization is often mere procrastination.”

Hugh wrote:

When using Tinderbox, unlike,
say, when setting up a database, you don't have to work out the optimal
structure before you begin; you can do that as you go along.

Totally agree. Beck's videos demonstrate exactly this process.

Steve Z

Paul Korm wrote:

Good points, Hugh. I suspect that working out "the optimal structure"
before you begin" is what can lead to the "all fiddling and no results"
concern that some folks have with Tinderbox.

Emergence is an abstraction that can be difficult to grasp. Structure
(essential to "meaning" or 'understanding") doesn't pop up out of
nowhere -- it takes gradual effort. For example, Bernstein in his
chapter on Emergent Structure in A Tinderbox Way writes:

"How can we discover structure that we did not impose, structure that
emerges organically from the notes themselves? Moving critical
information from your memory into Tinderbox text, and from unstructured
text into attributes, is often the key to more effective research and
more cogent analysis. This process may be gradual; you don’t need
to formalize immediately or completely. Indeed, premature formalization
is often mere procrastination.”

Hugh wrote:
>When using Tinderbox, unlike,
>say, when setting up a database, you don't have to work out the optimal
>structure before you begin; you can do that as you go along.

Mark Bernstein wrote:

>"...you don't need to formalize immediately or completely. Indeed, premature formalization
>is often mere procrastination."

Touché :-)

I LOVE this forum!

I HATE this forum!

I was pretty content in my software and workflows until recently when trying to access information while on vacation. I have tried really, really hard not to CRIMP over the past few years, and to consolidate my programs into a few key ones.

As those of us who frequent this forum know, it is almost an impossible task.

I have been happily using DevonThink and TaskPaper for the vast majority of my work, with Reminders for quick input while using my phone or iPad. TaskPaper imports Reminders very nicely. The toughest part is not having a great way to access TaskPaper in iOS (DevonThink shows the files, but without folding they are unwieldy). I have used Taskmator and Editorial, but have had some problems with each, so I try to stay away from using them.

While on vacation Drafts for Mac comes out, and I decided to jump on board again. But hey, it's only one small program and isn't all that expensive.

Then this thread.

I tried TinderBox awhile back and liked it, but thought it was overkill for what I needed at the time (and there may have been other considerations I can't remember). I have always wanted to use TinderBox, sort of how I really want to use Curio more.

Now I find myself once again doing a trial of TinderBox and liking it so far. But the trial does not allow me to enter enough notes to really give it a good run, so I am unsure. The videos from Steve Z. were very much appreciated.

So, even though it won't solve my original problem of accessing information in iOS, I find myself wanting something new. Drafts apparently did not quench that thirst for me. I am sure nothing really will in the long run. It is a battle most of us face.

But I do appreciate this forum and come by to catch up every few weeks or so. This thread was especially helpful (or not depending on whether you are looking at my bank account).

Thanks for all of the great information.

I bought Tinderbox a while back, and I have no regrets. I don't actually use it, but software like this needs support.

Devonthink always draws me back, though. For notes for a story, it's overkill, but it's the same environment as my mutli-thousand entry document databases.

The Brain is very addictive, and I wish Devonthink had a Brain or mindmap view.

When its time to start building a new network of ideas, I start jotting notes in the inbox. The local inbox embedded in the database, usually, but the global inbox will work fine, too.

If I'm in a hurry, I don't even name the files, I just type them in. As the pace slows down, I'll name the files something meaningful, add tags, and move them to appropriate groups. Structure emerges and notes are entered quickly. When I'm planning a story or essay, it's a little like using Scrivener. Maybe a more specific tool would be better, but swiss army knives are cool, too.

I like the tools->show groups & tags feature. Sometimes I don't even navigate in a normal Devonthink window. I'll open windows from the groups & tags pane. Now, if groups & tags could work like The Brain for navigation, that would be cool.

Steve Z. added a nice explainer video about Tinderbox 8's "filter" option for filtering an Outline View tab.

https://welcometosherwood.wordpress.com/2019/04/16/new-tinderbox-8-feature-filtered-outlines/#respond

Nice post, Steve. Thank you. You might want to mention the second half of the filtered view feature: if you click the gear icon to the right of the filter parameter box you can save the filter. Saving is local to the document you are working on. In a different outline tab, or the same, you can then click the gear again and use a saved filter.

(I wanted to post this on your blog, Steve, but couldn't manage to get past the gatekeeper login menus.)

Hi, Paul,

Thanks for the feedback, both about the content of the post and your problems commenting. I am not sure why you would have had that problem. Others comment. I'll see what I can figure out. Meanwhile I'll add your comment myself.

Thanks, again.

Steve

Paul Korm wrote:

Steve Z. added a nice explainer video about Tinderbox 8's "filter"
option for filtering an Outline View tab.

https://welcometosherwood.wordpress.com/2019/04/16/new-tinderbox-8-feature-filtered-outlines/#respond

Nice post, Steve. Thank you. You might want to mention the second half
of the filtered view feature: if you click the gear icon to the right of
the filter parameter box you can save the filter. Saving is local to the
document you are working on. In a different outline tab, or the same,
you can then click the gear again and use a saved filter.

(I wanted to post this on your blog, Steve, but couldn't manage to get
past the gatekeeper login menus.)