Trigger: https://www.outlinersoftware.com/topics/viewt/9177/0/thebrain-12--beta-testing-started

After reading, and reviewing, the threads mentioned below, I then tried to check their page http://old.thebrain.com/support/tutorials/display-options/expand/ , but immediately, a chat window opened up, so I got tempted to get into some conversation: some coochy-coochy in perspective? Acknowledging that PB's/TB's PROMISE is exceptional, I also tried to be as constructive as the situation allowed for (Matt's try to end our chat occurred at 24:58 (1 o'clock in Continental Europe i.e. midnight in the U.K.) so was probably legitimate); I invite you to check the threads mentioned: without citing posts therein, I can assure that many brilliant ideas (and "necessary" requirements) are to be found there - conceptional stuff that is. And when Matt says, "popular", well: I think the chat here will indicate what I think: (together with stored filters / layouts), it's not one of several happy features, but it's the CORE of the promise of what some IDEAL PB/TB could do... the "promised one", in fact... the "paid for", for people who got their "subscription". (And, let's be clear about this, their "subscription" "would pay" (and would be justified: the amount of coding work, if well done for the graphics, would be tremendous indeed) if they lived up to our* expectations.) ((*="our"=not people in this forum, but people being aware of what PB/TB should deliver, and thus posting in their forum threads mentioned below)

Chat:

Hi. Thanks for visiting! Can I help you in any way?
Matt C.

Hi.
Me

Hello
Matt C.

Hi again! As you probably see, I'm on the TheBrain Tutorials - Expanded View. This feature went off with v. 8.5, then was promised for 9, then for 10, then for 11 (I suppose), then for 12 (I suppose); I just checked a lot of discussions within your forums. So, what we have: v. 9, 10, 11, 12, i.e. FOUR paid updates WITHOUT this functionality. I am very aware of the fact that the visualization of this, being really high brow, is very, very difficult, but then, that was the USP of TheBain (ex Personal Brain), so I'm really very unhappy about this non-development (i.e. development perhaps behind the scenes, but, as said, 4 paid updates now without this CORE functionality). It's a deal breaker for me, and for legions of other prospects. Are you aware of this fact, or do you even deny it? The USP of TheBrain would be, "you can have not thausands, but a 7-digit figure of elements, and always see the picture, though", and that's not possible currently; Expanded View, with stored filters & stored views are a NECESSITY for TheBrain to live up to the expectations it creates. (Btw., then it would very probably become a class in itself, provided your IMPORT functionality gets MUCH better than it is now, considering most prospects who would be interested in such a (prospective) ACE program will very probably have got a 5- or (as in my case) even (high) 6-digit number of elements to be administered, and thus, to be imported into TheBrain, to begin with! So, could we expect something exceptional, in v13, at least? ;-)
Me

[after some minutes:] Some intermediate reaction?
Me

Thanks for writing in. I'm aware of the v8 Expanded View feature and I do know that it was very popular. It has been replaced with MindMap View, which does allow users to see the full picture of a large Brain. Still, I'm aware of the differences between the two.
We've always said that we do hope to bring the classic Expanded View back in the future, but as far as I'm aware, we have never promised it's return in version 9, 10, etc.
Bringing this view back will take many, many... MANY engineering hours of labor. If we want to bring it back it will need to work properly in our current framework and that won't be a small task.
So again, we do hope to bring it back in the future and I do know the popularity of this feature, but I/we can't promise any updates on this request in the near future.
Matt C.

I fully understand that. And also, I acknowledge you didn't promise the functionality to be back in v9/10, but you implied it should be possible, probably. I'm a developer myself, and I know about the incredible difficulties in this, but then, it was possible within the Java framework up to 8.5, so it should be possible now, and, as said, there have now been v 9/10/11 and now even 12 WITHOUT, so... I want to be constructive, so here's a citation from your forum:
["]An interim thing that would help while we're waiting would be a couple of user-options.Currently, if I open two tabs on the same brain, the "meta-plex" features like the multi-select pane, the time line, and the breadcrumbs bar on each tab are independent from each other. If the mutli-select pane is open in one tab, it isn't open on the other unless I specifically open it. And then the selections are independent.I suggest that there be an option to toggle the meta-plex features to be the same for all tabs of a given brain. That way, it becomes easier to draw links between thoughts that are far away from each other.In other words, I could have one tab opened to Seattle and another opened to Calcutta. The meta-plex features would then enable me to communicate between the tabs.["]
I will need to get the name of the author of that citation (please allow for a moment), but he gets it right, I think: in-between, there should be SOME intermediate solution to our* problem. (*=our meaning users and prospective users; as I said, I'm currently not a user but a prospect, also b/of the "import" problem.)
Me

Very interesting. I can see the benefits and I'll document this request.
Matt C.

It was: wordmuse[ ]Apr. 24, 2017, in the thread https://forums.thebrain.com/post/brain-9-no-expanded-view-8417935
Me

:+1:
Matt C.

And, as said, better import IS necessary. I have got a high 6-digit number of items to import, and they are in .rtf format, originally, but of course, within tree structures; they can be exported into a html format, with special divider characters between the pages, and preserving the hierarchies. Currently, TheBrain does NOT provide any means to import such html structures. It goes without saying that none of such tool can provide import facilities for ANY of their contenders, but, very unfortunately, TheBrain lacks "standard" imports, so that even most of 2-pane outliner structure EXPORT formats can NOT be imported into TheBrain, and this situation always has been exactly this way, so most of the prospective market (and even before and incl. v. 8.5) remains closed to TB because of impossibility of import; I really wonder if your management never has thought of this? Again (and with Expanded View re-introduced), many (most?) TB prospects have already assembled very LARGE bodies of material, so the need import, even with some scripting, but import which, with some scripting, then would really work, PRESERVING their hierarchies, and that's never been the case with TB, not today, not in the past - and that's the reason why I hadn't been a customer even before v. 9... but very much regretting it, y'know? ;-)
In fact, TB's import functionalities always have been among the poorest on the market, whilst lesser contenders had worked out this area much more, i.e. tools into which import was and is not really "necessary", provided import, whilst TB never did.
Me

I appreciate the feedback. It sounds like *maybe* your content could be converted to a properly formatted text outline for import. If not, you could send a sample file into support@thebrain.com and we'll take a closer look to see if the format you currently have is common enough that others would use it too and an update would be worth implementing.
Matt C.

Well, html format is quite common, and as for the encoding of the hierarchy, that could be scripted, user-side. As I understand, currently, TB expects individual files, 1 file per item, and would be able to "read" the hierarchy of those files within the (here: Windows 10) folder structure, right? So, if I wrote a script, getting my items, from within their html hierarchies, into a folder hierarchy, import would be possible indeed? (I admit I only had this thought in this moment, and it would technically possibly to do so.) - As said / implied above, it's NOT possible to "manage" almost 1 million items within TB, currently, the missing "Expanded View" preventing this, and the "cutting up" your data set into several "brains" (which, technically, would be possible) goes against the "philosophy" of "being able to connect everything, even items coming from very different categories" - so, if I'm not very much mistaken here (?), I could resolve my import problem, but the "management" problem will only be possibly "resolved" when "Expanded Views" and - STORED!!!!! - filters are re-implemented? Do I miss some aspect here, or would you say I'm right here?
(And my "around 1 million items" is not a lie; most prospects would have large amounts of data, within 20,000, 50,000, 100,000 items already within their data set, and they all will need the discarded functionality, in order to not get "lost" within their TB "hyperspace".)
(You know, as a data management "specialist", I'm very well aware of the "conceptional superiority" of TB - which is one of the reasons I'm so unhappy of its current "crippled" state!)
Me

You are correct that a file/folder system can be imported into TheBrain. Each folder becomes a thought and any files within will be attached to that thought. Folders within become sub thoughts, etc.
Matt C.

Oh, my! I would need FILES as items, the folders determing the hierarchy?
(Probably, what you say was the reason I didn't even buy TB before v 9, become that weird concept seemed impossible to me to be followed?)
(This was years ago, so my memory fails me here.)
(i.e. even then, I wasn't able to devise a way to import)
In Windows, a folder doesn't have data, it's a container for files. In TB and any other outliner and such, an item corresponds to a NTFS file, contains data. Thus, the concept, that a folder equals a TB item, seems, pardon me, aberrant?
And thus, the "natural" way to do things, is to have files which become items, and folders which determine the structure = hierarchy, correct?
(And, as said, I'm able to cut my html hierarchies into folders and files... which most prospects would not be able of... you see the problem for the majority of prospects, when their "original", current "outliner" or whatever does not allow for exporting into folder structures?
(as does mine, neither, but I could overcome this barrier)
Me

We do have a feature request for imports to treat individual files as thoughts, however, it does not work that way at this time.
Matt C.

Oh, my! "at this time" means some 15 years after the introduction of TB - isn't your management aware of the importance of import? I don't want to sound mean here, but I'm just aghast!
You know, on your site, you have several, very impressive, "monster brains", but WITHOUT "hybrid subsets", and creating "hybrid subsets" (i.e. subsets with deep links into other "item families") would make 90 p.c. of the power of TB (and seems to have been possible before v. 9) - you see the "interest" in re-introducing "Expanded View, with stored filters"? And does your management see it? Ditto for import, and it's "late", better import could have been done so many years ago indeed! What about transferring our chat to your management, and with my mail address? (I'd be happy to provide it in this case)
(I have read the following threads: https://forums.thebrain.com/post/brain-9-no-expanded-view-8417935 and https://forums.thebrain.com/post/expanded-view-ever-coming-back-3520-10087896 and https://forums.thebrain.com/post/expanded-view-maybe-9954028 and https://forums.thebrain.com/post/feature-request-v10-with-expanded-view-amply-documented-on-other-threads-9830835?pid=1305270589 )
Me

Happy to take it if we have any further feedback or update for you. FYI, it is possible to copy a portion of a large Brain into a smaller "topic specific" Brain...
thebrain.com/support/tutorials
This should demo the process...
Matt C.

This would not be a resolution of "our" problem, neither of mines nor of the various problems of the posters in the threads I mentioned, since, as said, it's really and all about creating "hybrid brains", i.e. plexes which incorporate "thoughts" (i.e. items) and "sub-trees" of DISTINCT "areas" - at the end of the day, this is the "promise", the original USP of TB, which, intermittently (i.e. for v. 9, 10, 11, 12 (?), 13 (???)), has not been met anymore. Exporting "sub-plexes" (if I understand your try of help well) is a totally other concept! Again, not willing to sound mean here, just trying to make my point.
("sub-plexes" = "families")
(= "intimately connected"
Me

I'm simply letting you know the features that are currently available. Hopefully, you can find a way to make it work for your environment. If not, we document it as a feature request for future consideration.
I do need to be logging out soon. You may be transferred to another rep. If I can get your email I'll add it to our documented feedback.
Matt C.

And the "live" aspect is highly important: AFTER such "export", it would not be possible anymore to find, and to designate / incorporate other, "loose", "far-away" connections. - Reading your intermediate answer: No, my "environment" is, more or less the "ideal" one, once promised by TB, and considering the fact that my items amount to near 1 million (no lie), that's understandable, I think. - Considering your second intermediate answer: no problem: So let's finish here, for the time being, and you transfer our chat to your management, ok? My mail address: [my name] i.e. [my mail address]
Me

Thanks [my name]! I appreciate your feedback.
Matt C.

Ok, so please have a nice after-shift, and thank you for your patience! Btw, I'll publish our little conversation, without your name, notwithstanding, so in spite of your missing promise to transfer our chat, I think TB management would have an interest to get into these matters. Good bye!
Me

TLDR; You want better import and that you can expand thoughts over multiple lines of hierarchy. Import is restricted and expand does not exist.

First to import. You say you are fine with writing a script based import, but can't reorganize your existing data to have a folder=thought, file=attached structure?
Ok i see the problem that you can't add thought notes then. You can, if they have would find some designated file like ".notes" in this import data". This you should ask.

No expanded thoughts? Thats indeed a missing feature. As a programmer i don't know what is so difficult to implement it. It's done manually anyway.
But it's always the problem that the feature you want might have a different priorities for the company. In the end thats why feature bloated software exists, because different people need different features.

Oh, and for the large 1 million thought database, well "The Brain" is not advertised as a database. So it's your problem, even when i believe a good modern computer should not have a problem with it anyway.

I get one good thing out of your posting: You made clear that i will never offer a chat as support on my company website.

Matt C., I feel your pain.

In broad daylight now

(As said above, at 1 o'clock in the morning, I had been after further info, not after chatting, but since they presented me with their chat window, even though their current page's url (which they certainly "get") contained an "old" substring (see above), so I just got the spontaneous idee of some titillating, but then, for JUST coochy-coochy, my time appeared too valuable to me, even after midnight...)

TB Import - Pics

I regularly use html export, by scripts, to extract info, just like I would do with xml export (which I don't have): > html > csv > Excel > timelines and other charts (once you get the "template", input of "new" data will be smooth).

(Sidenote: I just trialled "TimelineMaker Pro" (150 bucks plus VAT), both "manually" and with csv import: Big deception, it's much LESS powerful than the respective functionality in Excel is, so you probably pay the price for this "specialized" tool, then "get" that you can't even do what you can do within Excel... End of purchase service.)

But I never tried html export for my "regular" stuff (about 10, 15 p.c. of my 1m items contain (little) pics, too).

So I would probably need rtf export > import anyway, or additional scripting, in order to extract the pics, store them as files, create the necessary links... (Wasn't aware of these additional problems, due to the late hour.)

TB Import - Folders vs. Files

Didn't grasp the probable "info behind the info", at 1 o'clock. Most 2/3-pane outliners allow for any item to be parent of other items, AND have "content" (content pane, for text, etc.); NTFS (= Windows file system) does not: It's either "parent to" (=folder) OR "content" (=file) - leaving alone here the fact that even folders can have ADS in which I suppose you could cramp some "content" indeed.

I said "most outliners" since some do not; I know of (workgroup-ready) MemoMaster (from jbsoftware.de) which makes the same distinction as NTFS does; I suppose this will greatly hamper its sales.

TB works like most other outliners here, and I understand its "text field" (or whatever it's called) has been greatly improved lately, had trialled it in Java times and commented then how bad it was.

Now, what Marc probably tried to tell me, was, TB html import will import the TITLES of your items, and that's it. (?) (Of course, I could write a scriptlet that extracted all the titles, for building up just a folder structure, instead of writing a script that differentiates here, together with doubling the "parent" items into folder AND "first" file within that folder.)

It goes without saying that "just title import" of their existant data set would be worthless for almost any possible prospect.

TB - API

I'm also aware of the fact that you cannot expect retrieval (by my script, yes, but then, not by the target tool also) of "third-dimensional" links, of items or sub-structures ("cloning"), upon import, but since I'd easily get those "out", by scripting, I would then expect the "target application" being "open" to some external script processing (here: for "link item ID x to item ID y as "oncle" or whatever), in order to not to have to do all this manually, after import; it's obvious such an API would greatly improve any such tool - lately, more and more file managers allow for external macro processing which would NOT have to proceed by the GUI (and which is systematically unreliable, apart from being extremely slow).

TB - Pricing / Number of implementations

Last night, I spoke of "update costs" when in fact, it's become even worse, I think: You either rent TB ("subscription"), or you pay full price for every "update" = higher-up version you'll be interested in, so "update" isn't the correct term here anymore.

If they don't have the "personpower" to re-implement their "Expanded View", in 9, 10, 11, and now 12 (re-read Marc on this: its re-introduction does NOT seem to be imminent...), in spite of their pricing, that could imply they don't sell/rent* too many licenses, after all, so the necessary funds are simply not there (yet)? *=it's not "rent", since I think that after "renting", you will then preserve the tool, with it functionality at the end of the rent period. (Sidenote: Jetbrains (=software for developers, in high demand) tried to do "real rent", and their users were so appalled by that that they then reverted to a scheme, IF I understand that well (or then, their wording is just incredibly bad), "when your annuel rent ends, without renewal, our tool on your pc will revert to the state it was at the BEGINNING of the year you paid us" - incredible! With TB, it's the state of affairs at the END of the year, though, and if I'm not greatly mistaken.)

TB - Promises, Promises

So, at the end of the day, it all comes down to the fact that TB, in perspective, is something truly exceptional, whilst currently even having been crippled down from its earlier stages, and in CORE functionality in that - of course, fanpersons could deny that, as they systematically deny anything Apple does against its user base ("it's not aggression, it's a feature!" - that's sometimes highly amusing!), but I invite you again to (re-)read the discussions within the threads linked above, and their unhappiness REFLECTS, I think and suppose, the (relative) lack of funds available to TB staff.

If you don't look after "real help" with the "overgrown graph complexity", other, lesser-priced, even free tools are available; if you want a presentation tool, "everyone" already has the one which takes about 90 p.c. of that market (I suppose), so TB, unfortunately, currently doesn't deliver where it would be without any competition indeed.

I'm aware of the probable fact that a main co-reason for not delivering, for the time being, may be their willingness to not just replicate what had been there in Java times, but to do it even better now... and now they got stuck...

And yes, it's not just the graphics: A very powerful (and, from the user perspective, easy, fast!) way of filtering out (and "getting into") the (live) subset would be needed, too - graph tools allowing to quickly get lost within hyperspace abound already, no need to rent TB for that.

(And yes indeed, for years at least, they advertised TB with monster "brains" and for corporate use, and their current db should be much more robust than their Java age one. As for the structure import, it may be possible that Marc was mistaken in his wording - it was 1 o'clock after all, and he was at the end of his shift.)

Oh, sorry, that was Matt, not Marc. (I had abbreviated his family name from the chat where it had been written out.)

(To further answer this "not advertised as" thing, even in this forum, some users, over the years, have always pretended that they use TB as others would use UltraRecall, e.g., i.e. as a repository for all their stuff, the graphical representation on top - but it's futile, it's obviously not me here who pretends TB doesn't live up to its "stuff repository" promise. In UR, a very high number of items will not break it (as I have said several times; have never trialled its work group suitability though), and, for example, MemoMaster claims to be suitable for work groups with several hundreds seats. I always (mis-?)understood TB's claim as "just like UR, but so much better since you get the pic!" - It's not me who pretends here, "TB is sort of a hybrid offer which then doesn't really fulfill any of its different claims", but from what that poster above pretends, in combination then with what real, unsatisfied users say in the discussions linked above, people could, wrongly, infer exactly that - I don't mislead people... Totally futile, as said. TB's problem is, highly probably, not failing robustness (anymore), but that they very probably have a clear picture of what TB should attain, representation-wise (as I have, and those users have - citing them here would extend too much what I wanted to give as immediate info here, and since it's all there and available...), but without having the coding means to get there quickly. Competing, in the meanwhile, with MindJet - which, from the coding efforts, is much more "available" to them indeed - is a dead end, as those threads clearly show. And then, I'm not forced to give third-party "sources" to ANY of my opinions; allegations being another category.)

(And to go even further into the depths of "meta": Chat: because that unwanted window was OVER the info I wanted to read; Chat publication: because of Matt's obvious not wanting to transfer the chat to TB hierarchy; "Never offer a chat thing": first have the means, then get the manpower... or not: it's unlaid eggs anyway, for the time being. If then you decide for, not against: don't follow the strategy of holding users/prospects at arm's length by it, as so many do. It's not the tool that's bad, it's it specific kind of deploy - I'm surprised I have to remind of that. But as said, all this is futile "meta", nothing to do with what I had been trying to say. But de-constructing the constructive, that's today's standards - de-industrialization of the Western World, anyone? Yeah, it's difficult to get to the arguments, when most of your efforts are forced to go into futile sidelines - or you just ignore them, and then the casual readers will get wrong impressions... Gosh, it's really arduous, to get thru even tiny bits of info, nowadays.)

And finally, without parentheses again, when I said, "Hopefully not yet" in my title, I was serious. For the time being, NO ONE has implemented CORRECT "info management", "info" employed here in its broadest sense: Since the CORE of that "IM" being "live management": sub-parts of "info 1" also belong (now, or in the future: so, how to get them there in the future? "tagging"?: haha! AI? well... if those "9 AI hopes" do it, they also will have all our "info": aware of that, too, yes?) to other "subjects", "projects", "cases", "developments", "elaborations", "strategies", whatever, and those sub-parts, they are chang(l)ing, too, in-between... and after their "external use", within those other "projects", etc., so 2) how to cope, with all that, and 1) to begin with, how to make AVAILABLE POSSIBLE but probably useful (single or compound) "elements from even far away"? (And, as said, those "compounds" changing all the time?)

Within my chat, I "discarded" lots of very smart observations from those threads BUT I cited an intermediate, very partial (! but well... better than nothing!) solution for at least facilitating, as little as it gets, "connecting", and to say it all, this "connection window", in UR (see above) e.g., is, unfortunately, VERY substandard... whilst being the best "offer" you currently get.

Some years ago, the UR developer told me (citing from memory here), "UR already has got lots of lists/panes"... well, no.

(But that's things people who utter, "I feel with you, Matt" will never grasp.)

You could say your "knowledge" base is "plastic", and worse, that's true for the possible "sources", as for the finalities / evolving targets / "cases"/"projects"/whatever "info" / ideas / whatever could be helpful in. TB's "plex", then, is some sort of a promise you could "HANDLE" this never-ending task ("it's all before your eyes"... or then not... and there are no "flags" arousing your interest...), whilst in fact, it can't do it for you, and btw, most of "crimping" is motivated by the not-acknowledged but always pre-conscient truth that for the time being, no software tool really helps you with this, so you replace one with another, pure "change" becoming a substitute for progress...

First of all your writing style is highly confusing, thats why nobody participates in this discussion. You write like someone who recovers from a recent stroke. Whatever i have to agree with this one

in my title, I was serious. For the time being, NO ONE has implemented
CORRECT "info management", "info" employed here in its broadest sense:

Make this "knowledge management" and i agree.
There are lots of studies that neither searching nor tagging is what people do.
They just browse so links and info organization are the most important management feature for knowledge.


I recommend this book "The Science of Managing Our Digital Stuff " from 2018.
https://www.amazon.de/-/en/gp/product/0262035170/ref=ppx_yo_dt_b_asin_title_o06_s00?ie=UTF8&psc=1

future? "tagging"?: haha! AI? well... if those "9 AI hopes" do it, they

AI is the most futile and overhyped technology i have seen, doing very very few things a little better. Enough things to make Orwell look modern but not for the intelligence part of it. But it's where investors spend money so companies are hyping it.

No AI is going to save you. Its pure manual processing of information and will always be, because if AI helps you too much (which it will not) it will take your HI (human intelligence) away.

And to TB. Yes i would call this short release cycles renting, i've been bitten by Curio which totally failed to be useable on MacOS Catalina. And no side won't fix it. Just buy it again.

Most Software has just become way too expensive under this conditions. Especially everything in Apple Land because Apple doesn't give a fuck about breaking, people are rich and should just buy again and pay Apple again 30%. There is no incentive for this evil Tim Crook company for long term preservation of anything.

Final comment: MindJet is not a competitor for The Brain, neither is Tinderbox.

Lothar Scholz wrote:

And to TB. Yes i would call this short release cycles renting, i've been
bitten by Curio which totally failed to be useable on MacOS Catalina.
And no side won't fix it. Just buy it again.

Most Software has just become way too expensive under this conditions.
Especially everything in Apple Land because Apple doesn't give a fuck
about breaking, people are rich and should just buy again and pay Apple
again 30%. There is no incentive for this evil Tim Crook company for
long term preservation of anything.

Final comment: MindJet is not a competitor for The Brain, neither is
Tinderbox.

I didn't expect being with Mr. Scholz (why gratuitious, feckless aggression? just for the group dynamics? why getting some additional insight, instead?), but I am. (I'll have to read comments on the previous pages though.) Btw what Apple, Google, and even Amazon do, is called, in German biz speak, bring in "Renten" - im not sure if the english term of "annuities" is the right one (it means income from a market position, not from the value of your services), but it seems the Trump government has finally grasped this should end since it's, obviously, against public interest, i.e. the interest of the people. ("grandiose word", yeah...) (and that is, worldwide...)

MJ of course is not a competitor for TB, but, as the discussions linked by me show, TB tries to compete with MJ, in lack of better things to offer, for the time being (i.e. when it's, by necessity albeit, "crippled" (cf. infra))... and also because there's a big corporate market over there, but that's illusionary, for TB...

(Here again: Now that Windows (or Apple) laptops / "notebooks" have (when you're willing to spend almost 2,000 bucks, but that's the sum of something "regular" plus a mid-range iPad) reached a weight around 1 kg, why iWhatever, not even mentioning Android devices, so why this real folly with "alternative operating systems", which prevents developers from doing their core work? Is "mid quality" on 2, 3 "platforms" really preferable to highbrow on just one?)
____________________

Some (14? 21?) days ago, a new "contributor" here uttered (I cite from my memory), "I'm very impressed by the highbrow level of discussion here" - which, as we all know, was a lie, since 95 (98?) p.c. of stuff here is descriptions of me-too products, but then, a) he wanted to get some info here, and b), I fully acknowledge the usefulness of those descriptions for crimpers - sorry for not getting along, personally, with run of the mill descriptive discussions; on the other hand, when, some days ago, I have warned anybody reading me here, of buying "TimelineMaker Pro", I was serious, and in fact, I had trialled TMP because it should soon be available on "bits" again, and sometimes, I had bought for a combi of price and my expectations, and then had been promptly disappointed: when now TMP will appear on "bits", for its $90 plus VAT, I will NOT buy it, since indeed, being a "specialized software", which you systematically - but often wrongly - expect to be superior to the "usual things" (here: MS Excel's "charting" capabilities), it's simply not worth it, and for somebody who will have delved in those MS Excel timeline functionalities, it'd not even be worth 20 bucks - we've got here, again, a situation where, yes, the "specialized" tool "facilitates things", but then, comes with very un-expected limitations the "generic" solution (here Excel) has not.
____________________

As implied above, I have never been interested in me-too stuff; on the other hand, "you" (i.e. contributors having been present here for 10, 15, even more years than that) know that with TB, I've got a love-hate relationship: I fully acknowledge its promises, but then, 10 years or more without even "getting by", but including crippling the software, well... and then, with an annual subscription nearing 300 bucks (incl. / counting VAT)... (As said above, I suppose - now! - that their "market penetration" isn't that strong, so that the multiplicator of those 300 bucks minus VAT isn't as high as they would have hoped, and as some of us would have expected... hence their tries (see the discussion already linked, and further in their forum) to "compete with MJ", intermittently...).

Since, we all agree here - I didn't make that point, but various contributors of this forum did - the higher the degree of sophistication, the lesser the "success" for the developer... all this to be explained by the fact that "outliners and such" are expected to be in a price range of 30 to 100 bucks (Ultra Recall, Zoot, MyInfo, Treepad Biz (defunct), MyBase, RightNote... or oven IdeaRover, to remind of one of the truly exotic species...), plus VAT, whilst "corporate software" could easily attain a price of 1,000 or more bucks, plus VAT again, or the respective "rent" prices; so, "crippling" software has been standard, within the last years, in order to reach the "masses"... OneNote, anyone? Or then, Evernote?
____________________

"Crippling", "making it simple", also touched InfoSelect; both IS and TB tried - appeared - to be "something special", by their price. You can buy IS, you can rent it; its rent is in the 2-digit range, which TB's rent is not; bot are "crippled" now, for the time being (and for obvious lack of means) for TB, whilst the "crippling" of IS seems to be permanent.

And now let's face it: Whenever we struggle with our "IM" (cf. supra) tasks, we would EASILY pay $1,000 or even a little more, for some REAL FACILITATION / QUALITY enhancement / speed-up / and similar of our work, right? (We're not the masses, we're people striving for "something special".)

And then, "pricing" is a factor; IS's pricing once was - before its - seemingly (but really?) deliberate - "crippling", and TB's always is - it's got the advantage of the "spacial" (but then, not too-user-influenceable) representation, and then our wishful - no: even MAGICAL! - thinking sets in: It's 3 times the price of the "ordinary", of the usual offerings that is, so it MUST REALLY HELP US in our strivings to excellence - and then not...

("Normfall", 300€ and more, also is one of those exceptions which "do much more than what you are regularly entitled to expect"; *Whizfolders", e.g., now under $30, being almost "dead"...)
____________________

Don't get me wrong here, I'm not trying to bury TB, I'm just saying that I'm unhappy about what we got, and in general (but then, TB's claims are the very most formidable, so...) - some months ago, I trialled Mr. Schmidt's "Notebooks", for Windows, indeed, and it was abysmally bad... in the Apple hemisphere, it seems to be far better indeed...

I would have liked to trial / really use, possibly, ADM (not to be mixed up with the - sorry! - far inferior aml pages) - I was too late, and it seems it's also a question of "correct marketing of the superior" - probably, that's also one of "IQ"'s main problems, together with its abysmal GUI / ergonomics?... I'm not to criticize here, I just mention, with comments...
____________________

25 years ago, I "had", i.e. had totally naturally realized, - very sophisticated - cloning, "2-panes/trees/items-concurrent", "editable", of course, and many, many features more, obviously better, in parts, than IS, unfortunately in that, well, "shit", i.e. not robust (i.e. a question of memory management of the language itself, I was helpless indeed), programming language Gates' co-author, Allen (dead now) had then devised and tried to find his fortune in (i.e. something the like of Adobe's early web programming language, don't remember its name currently: something clearly intermediate, with all that implies), and now, 25 years later, RN even dares come without cloning (but with links to paragraphs, which I had not, and which also MyInfo has (but of which the cloning is ridiculous, and), but which I "succeed" in "bombing", every time I trial it for more than just around three minutes), and MyInfo is, as far as I know, all alone in presenting a second pane, not for a tree, not for editing, but at least for "looking at" -

OMG! And then, more and more developers give in - which isn't quite an incitement for other would-be developers to develop for "Windows only" -, for not having the "manpower" - they're male, after all, and 1-person ventures - to also develop the according iWhatever or Google-Android tool, whilst "customers", in our 1 kg-i7-W-Pro (Apple ditto) age, should ask for really intuitive, functional IM tools, instead of demanding mediocrity, spread over at least 3 "platforms".

TB always had promised that very special "one thing beyond" - which it had only partly delivered many years ago, and instead of having been progressed from that, they even dared receding - as EN did, where the unique (!) USP seem to remain - if you're willing to spend around 100 bucks p.a. - scanning and character recognition (which both you can get e.g. by Abbyy et al., within the "work space" of your choice...

Mine had been my own thing, up to some 6-, 7,000 items, and then Allen's overlooks stepped in, and that was it for "marketability", and then, ActionOutline, then MyInfo ("not robust", to put it cautiously), then Ultra Recall (which simply wasn't good enough, conceptionally (but robust, yes, so it'd always be my recommendation to anyone, in the meanwhile), and for the last 10 years or so, I have been developing a system out of around 1,500 AO trees plus NTFS, with some 20,000 or more lines of code... and which is the "prototype", an approximation only of what a "REAL", "IDEAL" IM system would have been - it now works far better for me than any "ready-made" tool would have, but considering what we all could have available, if some conceptionally-gifted, "real" developer (or simply one of the latter - UR, anyone? -, had he also had the knack of listening) had done "their work", in-between: it's a real pittance.

(As far as I know, on the Apple side, there's DevonThink and, to a seemingly lesser degree, "Tinderbox" - lots of "conceptional" blah-blah, lesser utility at the end of the day, am I wrong? -, but then, some months ago, DT seems to have abandoned the 3rd pane of its 3-pane user interface: are they all "nuts", simplifying for the masses, and by that kicking their former possible excellence into the...?)

I, too, feel with Matt, but he should not have lauded my suggestions, late in 2020 - his management should have realized them at least 3 years ago, see the linked threads. ;-) I was aware that I overstressed my dialog partner, but then, TB already had me thrown out of their forum 10, 12, was it 14 (?) years ago. - "Good for you", some here will now, invariably, say - but people with personpower not listening - it's all of us here who bear and feel the consequences in our work, NOT really assisted to a point easily imaginable and technically easily attainable, even with today's means - day after day.

No, TB's not my (one-directionally-and-delusionary-declared-or-such) "enemy" or similar: they're just, and provisionally, for the time being, my biggest disappointment in the "industry", both for their (unfulfilled) claims and their (alleged) means.

22111 wrote: a lot

If you want to understand why this is happening in the software world you need more understanding about the programming and the current forces behind it. It totally sucks to be a programmer nowadays. And most components developers for this kind of apps use are either 30 year old or so new and inappropriate for the task. You have to build your own shit from ground up. But sometimes like on windows you have no future proof technology at hand to do it (the lost decade of Windows UWP and C#).

For small companies it's a maybe to huge investment, for large companies it is too hard to explain it to management. So nobody is doing it. So yes all we get is 100 copy cats.

It's hard and i'm now around 50,000 Euro deep in investment in my vision of a perfect Information organizer. I have no idea if this will ever give a ROI but at least i'm doing what i love. In the end: Success is 95% transpiration and only 5% inspiration.

Just one example: Why are people using this terrible inflexible tree control instead of really writing a good one that can also be used for single pane outline editing. Because it's there, so it seems to be wise (and thats what teached in business and programming school) to reuse it. Even if this is essential to your app. So everything looks and feels the same. And it's not only the software industry working like this.

In the days of DOS and GrandView for example it was so simple to write an editor yourself. And thats why GrandView and More is still unique.

Frankly, this is one of the weirdest threads ever on this forum. I think there is a lot more going on here than dislike of progress, etc. (maybe that should be ETC!!!) of TB. It reads like an unhealthy fixation, fueled by possible manic-like tendencies, and in all honesty, I can see how you were banned from their forums. This has been going on for how long? I think whatever is going on with the OP and TB is wayyy beyond our OS forum.

To proceed with my analysis of the market (just read "Donovan" - it's beyond me why people are allowed to name themselves after "celebrities", living or dead ones: that's overly preposterous at least... -: no comment for filth, except that in their time, they deleted LOTS of posts over there, as allegations in the "rest" of the posts indicated, and when I they did that to me, for a post, I considered myself being "thrown out" - since not being able to speak freely is being silenced since from then point on, auto-censorship sets in; so technically, they never threw me out, they didn't have to, I was thru with them - here, I simplified that situation, back 10, 12 years, but it's clear that people who're not ashamed to publicly identify themselves with real artists, real discoverers and the like, jump, as some doggie, onto any sausage you hold in their direction: very amusing!) (Btw, 22111 is a Hamburg, Germany post code...) So...
____________________

TB's naming could be identified as preposterous (, too, albeit probably not "overly", in their case): An item / record is a "thought", and the whole set (by file) is a "brain", or then, "plex"? (I think that's used as a synonym, by them? Probably, at some point in time, "brain" really appeared overly (sic) preposterous to them? ;-) )

On the other hand, those weird (sic) denominations could indicate indeed that initially, TB had been meant as sort of a "think machine for restraint projects" or something (cf. supra Mr. Scholz), but I think they're way beyond that alleged self-imposed limitations of their beginnings, and, as said, they do a lot of marketing speech diverting from such limitations indeed.

Speaking of marketing speech(es) ((on) YT, among those), TB have been very active over some time, whilst, e.g. from IS, "you hear nothing" - ?, not much anyway.
____________________

WHY there is no progress in outliners and similar? (And yes, I think, that should be a core subject in a specialized forum like this.) Let me put some ideas, just implied above, into explicit wordings.

As said/implied/thought-on/whatever, UR hasn't added something "new and useful" for years, its developer trying to "get by, get along" indeed, and there's a phenomenon of interest here, his main work on UR allegedly may be, "how to stay on par with web browser developments"... (Ditto for Outlook, OL "integration" - as far as that gets, with UR?... Or then, he doesn't do so much, after all?)

And, ditto (i.e. for the "has been treated by me above in some way" aspect), Treepad has done the "English leave" (which the Brits call the "French" one): it's gone without saying good-bye, whilst, desktop-functionality-wise, and with its "Business" variant at least, it had been one of the "major" offerings - visually, it had always been atrocious indeed...

MyBase is, by its (again: desktop) functions, a major player, too, but then, people (i.e. web third parties) say it's not stable, or then, has not been stable, even with just a 4-digit number of items per file... (speaking of v. 5 if I remember well, and v. 6 now probably more robust?), and then, there's the "China thing" for some - I won't go into "political" considerations here, but for some, the respective "background" of the developers "counts", it seems, from reading of some "web comments" speaking...

There's Whizfolders, again some "serious offer", judging from start, but then... no "really active development", as "they" call it...

As for MI, it's, as far as I know, the only one, together with RN (all abbreviations in full wordings above), which allows for "linking to paragraphs", which is really, REALLY useful for many - no: MOST! - use cases, but MI's v. 5 wasn't stable in my experience, and v. 6 was even less, vanishing from my screen in less than 5 minutes, with just a handful of items and playing around with its "attributes" / "columns" functionality, not speaking of the fact that its "cloning" feature being a joke - and whilst RN doesn't have any cloning feature to begin with.

MI's developer having announced, some years ((?) now) ago, that he's working on a total re-write, v. 7, which, according to his words, would also allow him to fulfill MI users' expectations to have some sort of a "mobile" version, i.e. on IThings, Android devices... - whilst, as said, and at the very least of individual, non-corporate users, there's mobile (not ??? really ???) Win 10 devices weighting around just 1,000 grams.

I don't speak of "The Journal" and other toys here; "PageFour" 's developer then developed "Atomic Scribbler", and with the most expensive framework he could get... for just then quickly making it available for free, after having seen the relative "lack of response", such things being very, VERY far from being "good enough".

Again, ADM: from what I've read on the subject, too late indeed, it seemed to have been something really good, "with a real perspective", and then again, the developers abandoned it... whilst the developer of "Surfulater", another (but perhaps too much of a?) "special" thing, then went off to a "hierarchical tags" offering, which, as all "hierarchical tag" things, is a dead-end (for the user that is, and anyway, the developer must have made millions of bucks with his editor before, so financially, would allegedly by into the - enviable! - "hobby stage" now.

As for MS OneNote, well... and even on Donationcoder, that "endless" ON thread has come to an end, finally, it seems... Too much crippling a tool is never a good strategy; in the case of EN, the aspect of (outrageous) pricing adds to the problem...
____________________

So, what can we "learn"? Desktop applications are doomed, right? People don't give them the benefit of the doubt anymore, but simply discard them in their buying process?

And while some additional (sic) sales for such applications such as UR are very welcome by the respective developer, no one "in his mind" could, seriously, expect reasonable sales from some new desktop (i.e. desktop-only) "outliner" (or similar, even with group functionality), as "good" as their tool might otherwise be: the time window for marketing such tools has simply been closed, by the "modern" expectation of a) the masses and b) obviously even of those people who have "demands beyond", as for the excellence of their tools, but who obviously are blind of the fact that even for $1,000, they could have a reasonably powerful, reasonably light, full-functional Windows notebook, with the same functionality "on the read" as they get in their office, home-office, whatever resident place of work.

(I leave out, in my considerations, the "multiple-platform" NoteCase Pro, my experience (desktop, always) with it having been just too atrocious, and then, I don't see its having been adopted in big numbers by "professional" users...)
____________________

Thus, "motivation" to "do something from scratch on", "better" or not, nears zero, from the observation of the market, from its successes, its failings, and let alone IM being, obviously, a niche phenomenon which then would need high 3-digit prices in order to be viable (just a reminder: MS Word and "WordPerfect" prices have neared the 4-digits once, for individual seats...), which then would necessitate them to be "almost perfect" from start on, and no individual developer can ensure that.

And then, professional developers have been in very high demand, for some years now, so that their possible motivation to "work on spec" is inexistent, whilst people who hire them will be well-advised to have some "viable" project in hand, also and especially from the marketing aspect which, after all, will make of break the venture.

And then, some will remember that, years ago, I asked for the deeper meaning of EV then having, allegedly, around 150 developers, for such a minimum of output... their alleged mismanagement in that time being an alleged outlier indeed, the question arises though how much development work just some developers can supply, let alone the output of single, lone developers, being qualified in just some areas or not, the area to be "covered" being just too broad:

Lately, I got the info that the developer of a quite simple, "specialized" csv tool has allegedly made more than 20,000 times more than 30 bucks with it, i.e. around 700,000 minus taxes, and for a tool that, again, has lesser functionality than MS Excel (even in that specialized respect, again), but is just "simpler to handle" than MS Excel in this respect, again (see above): people pay for ease of access to some badly needed subset of functionality, not for functionality in the end - IM, on the other hand, incorporates too many fields to be handled by "just some". (Users want browser (i.e. not just text clipping), OL, Pdf integration today... and then, that weird (sic) 3-to-4 "platforms" expectation, or better, 2-to-3 one: Apple users demand iPad, too, whilst Windows users fluctuate between iPad or Android and would like to have both, in the end...

When more and more web applications come out and take over (see the major content of this forum, lately), and just lately, another one of the higher-brow offerings in IM told the press any of its server offerings would only last for some months from now now (Atlassian with Confluence (sic), Jira, Bitbucket: all "cloud" then, and that cloud thing had me discard Confluence early on...): so, and considering the overwhelming success of such "solutions", the question is, do even developers like MI's the right thing still, when they (try to) develop for "several platforms", instead of "going cloud"?

Even at less than 100 (60?) bucks plus VAT, IM software isn't "viable" anymore, as far new developments are concerned, and for some developers, even additional sales in that price range don't "do it" for them anymore, so they close shop - whilst on the other hand, some of us would easily spend 1,000 plus VAT, or even a little bit more, for getting something that really lived up to our expectations, the irony being that "help creation software" is in that price range but can not being used for more general IM needs, unfortunately, and Confluence having gone the web way very early - there again, there had been "promises" though I had been very well aware of as a prospective customer.

So much, for the time being, for my alleged pathological "TB fixation"... It's all and rather about market analysis and why we can't expect much anymore (and why I have not been foolish enough to enter the game a second time, being too late at the table, as anybody else would be), except from the 9 AI corporations, and which will allegedly not leave alone or data though, and yet... they ain't wandering on giving lane either, and as soon as they get what they're after, their further efforts to really "help us" out with our needs will quickly drop...

Like, Hm, falling rain (Donovan 1990).

Wow. Donovan is my last name. Though, with my name I am obviously familiar with Donovan the musician and especially ‘Atlantis’, great song. You’re falsely accusing me of using a pseudo when your name on the forum is a freaking zip code?!? think you need a blog. You obviously like to write...and write...and write...

Really, no need to respond. I’m on to other things.
Good luck.

That's funny! There certainly also are people whose real name's Cicero, Einstein, and why not, after all...

Re "Google et al have to been sliced up", very amusing, too: https://successfulsoftware.net/2020/09/17/microsoft-ppc-broad-match-goes-nuts/ and https://successfulsoftware.net/2020/08/21/google-ads-can-charge-you-anything-they-like-for-a-click-on-their-partner-network/ - they obviously do whatever they want now, and if the subject above was rather Apple than Google, bear in mind that with the run into the cloud, especially Google's "business philosophy" will become more and more "important" for the masses and for corporate users as well, so reading about what they do, even on adjacent fields, seems quite relevant to me.

And it's people who, within 5 words or so, think they can invalidate real info, just because the messenger doesn't please them, who, at the end of the day are responsible that most developers out there have left Giving Lane: it's simply not worth it, to make "presents" to people. (And, please, don't bring up Linux - it's WAR over there!)

I don't believe 22111 is a person. I believe it is a prototype model of the Digital Idiotic Chatter Konverter (D.I.C.K.) which takes blather as its input and then spews forth exponentially more blather. If you don't reply to it, the machine soon goes limp and blathers no more.

Wikipedia: "A focused beam of energy [???] (such as a laser) that contains and transmits information [?????]." (Stylishness is not everything, you know, and even Wilde would agree here.)

Speaking of justpromises, I just got the idea that there's worse than justpromises, let me explain:

Above (citations, but in my wording): "yes, TB currently lacks ... and that's not good ..." and "yes, it could be called a rent indeed".

Now, many user "stay with" some product, also financially, i.e. they continue to finance it, more or less, by purchasing updates, or even by paying (strict or simili-) rents, while they are quite unhappy though, and really, (or really) useful new things don't come their way.

They do this, to their individual degree, in the hope of "financing further development", or even, and that's certainly the case for some TB users, in the hope of getting back lost things, allegedly earlier than without their funding, sometimes even in the fear of that shop closing down (, too).

Ok. But there remains the question of the allocation of those funds: Do the developers really, firmly promise to allocate them as their user base expects? Not necessarily, and things "going cloud" - aren't 3/4 or 4/5 of the discussions cloud-(product) centered? -, it's very well possible that developers - speaking in general here, not for TB or other specific products - use those funds, perhaps even to a quite large degree, for (further) cloud development... and that very probably means then that your funds will not really finance elaborate functionality, even in the cloud (the latter being an idea you might well adhere to), but "larger, not deeper things", even marketing expenditures after all.

Thus, if "cloud" isn't quite your thingy, you will even finance their further departure from what YOU want(ed)... to a quite tiny degree, admittedly, as far as you personally are concerned, but then, if there're lots of wishful thinkers opening their purses like you do, well, it WILL make some impact... onto an agenda which isn't yours, to say the least.

Today on spiegel.de: SAP shocks investors, minus 21 p.c. [well, they will recoup...] ... Wegen des noch schnelleren Umstiegs auf Cloudsoftware müssen sich Anleger nun darauf einstellen, dass SAP bis dahin auch kaum Fortschritte bei der Profitabilität machen wird. - The force (!) their switch (!) to cloud software, so that cuts into their profitability race (!) in the meanwhile. (Don't criticize this translation, it's 1:1, fact-wise.)

Then, the "most valuable German corporation" has got to inform people, whilst exotic ventures (TB...) have not, so you're on your own with your expectations, justified or not, and your purchase / financial decisions...

But at the end of the day, when 3/4, 4/5 of customers, prospects do want to go cloud, who are we, flaky warners, to spit in your soup - ey? Just bear in mind that the old adage, "they don't even have the [I said it was old!:] manpower to look into your stuff" isn't true anymore, with all the "big data", AI and that. So be prepared that "they" will make your things work for them - not thinking especially of TB here, but of Apple e.g.: Just imagine you and your things being the apple, and they take a good bite! And who are you, to blame them? After all, they will have told you, from their '77 logo on! (They grew up, in-between, perhaps it should be your turn after all?)

I'm afraid I cannot bear this thread anymore as it induces flashbacks to my college days in the '60s. I am hearing the pontifications of friends on LSD and amphetamines.

Jon

I do agree it's huge shame Expanded View was dropped.

A graph(-style) database, without something like subgraphs, that can also remember the positions of the nodes, quickly become unmanageable.

I've looked everywhere for an app that has a more-or-less functional equivalent of Expanded View / neighborhood / subgraph. The only ones I found:

* iMapping
* TiddlyMap
* yEd (neighborhodd)

And while they all have a lot of strengths (esp. iMapping is so under-appreciated; but I assume you are aware of it, 22111, as you appear to be German?), they also have other limitations compared to TB.

Anyone know of any other apps that have something like Expand View?

Looks like I picked a bad week to stop sniffing glue!

Reading this thread a question which arises for me is whether the likes of Obsidian and RoamResearch in fact make TheBrain less relevant. Both allow linking and back linking (Obsidian recently introduced back linking). Also, Obsidian now allows linking blocks as well as headings. Both have visual representation of how links connect the information contained in these programs.

Obsidian is being developed by the Dynalist team, and for most individual, non-business users is free. Also, unlike RoamResearch, your information stays with you. At least two of the YouTube productivity pundits say RoamResearch is better suited for those people who are primarily interested in collecting information, while Obsidian is for those who want to gather information with a view to using it in the process of creating new writing. After years of my complaining about markdown, Obsidian (my preference) has convinced me of its value. The only drawback with Obsidian is that it's only available on Windows, but in future will be available on Android and other platforms. I am dusting off my Windows laptop.

I should never predict the future, but.... I think Obsidian and RoamResearch (also Notion which I'm not crazy about) will make TheBrain and other outlining programs (with the possible exception of Dynalist) less relevant and viable in the marketplace.

Daly

The only drawback with Obsidian is that it's only available on Windows

I do believe that it's available for other platforms? On their homepage (https://obsidian.md/ it says "Also available for macOS, Linux (AppImage), Linux (Snap), and Linux (Flatpak)."