Forum Posts Feed
More InfoQube answers needed
< Next Topic | Back to topic list | Previous Topic >
Posted by Pierre Paul Landry
Nov 28, 2008 at 06:06 AM
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 :-)
Posted by Alexander Deliyannis
Nov 28, 2008 at 10:50 AM
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.
Posted by Stephen Zeoli
Nov 28, 2008 at 12:31 PM
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.
Posted by Jan Rifkinson
Nov 28, 2008 at 12:50 PM
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?
Posted by Jan Rifkinson
Nov 28, 2008 at 12:53 PM
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.