1. When I tried it before, Web saves were unacceptable. What is the situation now?

2. You say that info can be added in rtf, which is then converted to html or mht. What if one wishes to add to this info? Is it automatically converted back to rtf with NO changes from the original?

3. What facilities exist to export all or part of the stored info to standart rtf, html, mht, etc. files?

Thank you.
-c

Hi Cassius,

1- Web capture has been greatly expanded, including a now available FireFox extension. You can grap web clips and entire web pages. See this documentation book page:
http://www.sqlnotes.net/drupal5/index.php?q=node/120

2- The rich text pane (aka HTML pane) uses HTML, not RTF. It supports many modes:
- View a web page
- View / edit an HTML local file
- Enter content directly as in a word processor
- Grab web content (see point 1 just above). Content is editable
- At any time, the content can be converted between MHT and HTML and back, with no or minimal loss of formatting
- MHT content can be edited using an external editor (MSWord or Blocknote).
- Internal editing of MHT is planned, but not yet implemented

3- The HTML Export is quite extensive, supporting both automatic generation of the HTML and using a template file for user-defined formats.
See:
http://sqlnotes.wikispaces.com/Invoices
(that aspect of the doc. will be expanded)

I hope this help.

Cassius wrote:

1. When I tried it before, Web saves were unacceptable. What is the situation now?

2.
You say that info can be added in rtf, which is then converted to html or mht. What if one
wishes to add to this info? Is it automatically converted back to rtf with NO changes
from the original?

3. What facilities exist to export all or part of the stored info
to standart rtf, html, mht, etc. files?

Thank you.
-c

Pierre Paul Landry wrote:

Hi Cassius,

1- Web capture has been greatly expanded, including a now available
FireFox extension. You can grap web clips and entire web pages. See this
documentation book
page:
http://www.sqlnotes.net/drupal5/index.php?q=node/120[/snip]

I've been experimenting. This works like a charm here except for (some) secure sites, ex: confirmation page from Chase Bank. Also other htts pages.

I'm a FF person & w the clipping/copying problem solved, if only Pierre would add a copy xpi from Thunderbird as I now have from Ultra Recall, I would probably seriously think about the process of switching over to IQ. I'm not sure what the advantage is of building an email client into the program is as -- to me -- it sort of smacks of re-inventing the less perfect wheel w/o filters, etc.

Copying email from Thunderbird to UltraPro is a one click affair & turning it into a task or dated reminder, etc is another click or two. It just saves me LOTS of time.

--
Jan Rifkinson
Ridgefield CT USA

The instructions for installing the latest version of InfoQube state that one should firse delete previous versions of it (=SQLNotes) by using the Control Panel's Add/Remove function. Unfortunately, neither SQLNotes nor InfoQube are listed there for my version, 0.9.23.7i, nor can I find an installer in its program file or a listing of what it installed or modified.

What do I do?.

Cassius wrote:

Unfortunately, neither SQLNotes nor InfoQube are listed there for my version, 0.9.23.7i
What do I do?.

Version 0.9.23.7 was a portable version. So no installation, and no uninstall. Overwrite it with the new one, or delete the folder, or install the current version in a different folder... you decide.

The current version (0.9.24 pre-rel3) is available in portable and installable. I recommend using the portable one (as it is used by more users) if using XP or Vista. Win 2000 users must use the installation one.

I hope this clarifies it !

Jan Rifkinson wrote:

I'm a FF person & w the clipping/copying problem solved, if only Pierre would add a copy xpi from Thunderbird as I now have from Ultra Recall, I would probably seriously think about the process of switching over to IQ.

I'm working on it right now. Expect it in 1-2 days :-)

Just a note of support to Pierre; I think that he's done an admirable development job and I am also impressed by his providing a forum integrating several interaction tools for users to give feedback -- my own questions and suggestions on this regard will be reserved for the IQ user webspace which I feel is more than enough for a developer to have to keep an eye on!-- as well as to contribute to the the program's knowledge base and new user documentation.

Regarding the latter, it has been stated here repeatedly that InfoQube's 'weakness' is its non-intuitiveness and lack of 'how to' documentation. I'm sure that some of it can be improved, but overall I would note that many of the programs praised here are far from intuitive. In fact I would risk the hypothesis that the most powerful programs --those that can become our information management companions- are the least intuitive and easy to grasp.

Was GrandView intuitive? I doubt it. Zoot has been notorious for its learning curve but its regular users swear by it. Many here have commented that they "don't get" Brainstorm --but I personally never write a text longer than a paragraph without it. Others have praised MaxThink on a similar front but I haven't as yet grasped many of its concepts, let alone integrate it in a workflow.

So I am now investing in learning InfoQube (questions and suggestions on this regard will be reserved for the IQ user webspace which I feel is more than enough for a developer to have to keep an eye on!) because in terms of features and specifications I think that it is currently unequalled. Moreover, I think that it responds to a known market need --'integration'- in a novel and most effective way.

Many programs that try to integrate information management, try to 'take over' our regular activities, such as e-mail, web browsing, RSS --i.e. everything but the kitchen sink. I'm thinking of Omea Pro, Info Select, Do Organizer etc. I think this is a lost cause, as all-in-one solutions will never be as powerful as dedicated applications. (Apparently the Mac environment solves this dilemma by facilitating interoperability).

Others --the more successful ones- stick to information management and provide many ways to import or link to external information wherever it may be. I'm thinking UltraRecall, Zoot, Personal Brain and many more. (Zoot6 apparently will have integrated e-mail and I can't say that I am as enthused as other users.)

In addition to these information managers, other programs focus on providing 'writing environments', i.e. what to do with the information once you have it: structure it, organise it, change it, combine it in novel ways. Such are the ventures of Brainstorm, Maxthink, Notemap etc. (i.e. mostly one-pane outliners).

In my opinion, InfoQube is a powerful information manager that doesn't try to take over dedicated applications, but also offers a powerful writing environment, providing quite brilliant ways to manipulate the gathered information --whether it is words or numbers. Interestingly, the SQL power has already been there in the infrastructure of many information managers --but none really provided the user with access to its full power. This IQ does, and does admirably.

Alexander Deliyannis wrote:

... it has been
stated here repeatedly that InfoQube's 'weakness' is its non-intuitiveness and
lack of 'how to' documentation. I'm sure that some of it can be improved, but overall I
would note that many of the programs praised here are far from intuitive. In fact I
would risk the hypothesis that the most powerful programs --those that can become our
information management companions- are the least intuitive and easy to grasp.

Was
GrandView intuitive? I doubt it. Zoot has been notorious for its learning curve but
its regular users swear by it. Many here have commented that they "don't get"
Brainstorm --but I personally never write a text longer than a paragraph without it.
Others have praised MaxThink on a similar front but I haven't as yet grasped many of its
concepts, let alone integrate it in a workflow.

Alexander,

I agree with your basic premise here, that the more powerful the application the more likely it is to been difficult (or at least time consuming) to learn. This is especially true of one of my favorite programs, Zoot, which does take time to master. However, with just a few basics, you can begin to use Zoot effectively. What -- in my opinion -- sets Zoot above so many programs is that as you master its concepts, you can apply them to your data, but you don't need to know all of these techniques for Zoot to be an effective information gatherer and repository. I remember when I finally realized that Zoot's folders were only "virtual" folders -- I'd been using the program aggressively for over a year! I think it took at least two years before I understood how to create "folder columns," but when I did, that opened a whole new realm of power.

My reluctance to master InfoQube's learning curve is not a criticism of the program, but more an acknowledgment of my own limitations. There is just so much of my time I can devote to mastering various software. Perhaps in a few years, once IQ has been officially released and has received raves from this group, I will see that an investment of my time will be worth it.

As for GrandView... one of the things I always appreciated about it is how intuitive it did feel. Perhaps part of this is due to the fact that the whole concept of computer outlining was new to me, so I didn't have any pre-conceived notions. Nevertheless, building an outline always felt really easy to me... keystrokes all made sense. I could create an outline and re-organize it with all my concentration devoted to the structure and virtually none devoted to recalling the proper keystrokes. Yes, some of its other powerful features needed exploration and mastery, but they never felt too overwhelming. Again, however, I think this was as much a matter of it all being new territory for my brain, so that it wasn't a matter of unlearning something.

So, though I've commented on IQ's non-intuitive feel, I wouldn't want to imply others shouldn't check it out for themselves to decide if it is the right program. Pierre certainly seems committed to its development and open to suggestions. I definitely wish him well.

Steve Z.

Pierre Paul Landry wrote:

Jan Rifkinson wrote:
>I'm a FF person & w the clipping/copying problem solved, if
only Pierre would add a copy xpi from Thunderbird as I now have from Ultra Recall, I
would probably seriously think about the process of switching over to IQ.

I'm
working on it right now. Expect it in 1-2 days :-)

wooo woooo, thank you. See how little it takes to excite me these days?

Alexander Deliyannis wrote:

Just a note of support to Pierre; I think that he's done an admirable development job
and I am also impressed by his providing a forum integrating several interaction
tools for users to give feedback [/snip]

Agreed.... + his customer support. You have no idea how much I have my fingers crossed for Pierre & the future of InfoQube.

RE: Alexander Deliyannis comments.

I was thinking the same thing yesterday. Either Pierre has a team of programmers supporting him or he is a tireless superman with superhuman programming abilities. (Having done a bit of programming many years ago, I know that when one thinks 30 minutes of programming has passed by, one finds that it was actually 3 hours.)

On GrandView: The outlining part was not too unintuitive, but category/assignment/column part was, at the time, highly unintuitive. I spent much time learning it and then remapping the keyboard commands to closely match similar commands in WordPerfect, my word processor at the time.

The secret to successful learning and teaching is to do it step-by-step, starting with the simplest first, such as, "how do I type information into IQ and then store it?" Simple examples are also very helpful.

-c

Cassius wrote:

RE: Alexander Deliyannis comments.

I was thinking the same thing yesterday.
Either Pierre has a team of programmers supporting him or he is a tireless superman
with superhuman programming abilities. (Having done a bit of programming many years
ago, I know that when one thinks 30 minutes of programming has passed by, one finds that
it was actually 3 hours.)

I have the feeling Pierre sometimes wishes he had a team of programmers but I don't think that's the case. AFAIK he works alone like Tom Davis (Zoot) & Hert (IDImager), all of whom are articulate, helpful, smart.

Jan Rifkinson wrote:

You have no idea how much I have my fingers crossed
for Pierre & the future of InfoQube.

Some would cry "Jinx." ;)

Stephen R. Diamond wrote:

Jan Rifkinson wrote:
>


>You have no idea how much I have my fingers crossed

>for Pierre & the future of InfoQube.

Some would cry "Jinx." ;)

Some would ;-)