Forum Posts Feed
Roam v. Obsidian
< Next Topic | Back to topic list | Previous Topic >
Posted by NickG
May 25, 2021 at 08:20 AM
Roam local uses the browser cache - it’s not a full, file system-based implementation. So you can’t, for example, select a local location for your database and then access it from other apps.
Data is in a proprietary format, can be exported as Markdown or JSON, but has its own peculiarities so can’t be guaranteed t work as expected in other apps. And, as I noted above, you can’t access it directly - has to be exported first.
Roam has many attractive attribute, but there’s no doubt in my mind that some of its core implementations are half-baked, local being one. It’s very much work in progress, not yet a fully formed service. They charge a premium price for the service, but don’t yet provided a premium service.
Christoph wrote:
Luhmann wrote:
>>Note: originally Roam made storing your files offline a premium
>feature,
>>but they lately lifted all restrictions so anyone can have as many
>>offline databases as they like.
>
>Sounds interesting. Are offline databases in Roam as functional as those
>in the cloud? Are they in a proprietary format or can they be easily
>processed by tools other than Roam? (Obsidian uses only Markdown files
>which can be easily processed and used outside of Obsidian.) Removing
>the ability to have local notebooks was the final straw that made me
>move from Evernote to Obsidian.
Posted by Luhmann
May 25, 2021 at 11:26 AM
I can’t argue with that. I signed up early on and they allow early adopters to use their existing databases for free, although I can’t create new databases. I’m not sure I would be using it if I had to pay. Still, it is important to mark the difference which is that Roam is a database, with each “block” (paragraph) having its own unique identifier. That means it can do some things that a plain text system cannot (although Obsidian has been impressive in mimicking many of those features).
NickG wrote:
Roam local uses the browser cache - it’s not a full, file system-based
>implementation. So you can’t, for example, select a local location for
>your database and then access it from other apps.
>
>Data is in a proprietary format, can be exported as Markdown or JSON,
>but has its own peculiarities so can’t be guaranteed t work as expected
>in other apps. And, as I noted above, you can’t access it directly - has
>to be exported first.
>
>Roam has many attractive attribute, but there’s no doubt in my mind that
>some of its core implementations are half-baked, local being one. It’s
>very much work in progress, not yet a fully formed service. They charge
>a premium price for the service, but don’t yet provided a premium
>service.
>
>Christoph wrote:
>Luhmann wrote:
>>>Note: originally Roam made storing your files offline a premium
>>feature,
>>>but they lately lifted all restrictions so anyone can have as many
>>>offline databases as they like.
>>
>>Sounds interesting. Are offline databases in Roam as functional as
>those
>>in the cloud? Are they in a proprietary format or can they be easily
>>processed by tools other than Roam? (Obsidian uses only Markdown files
>>which can be easily processed and used outside of Obsidian.) Removing
>>the ability to have local notebooks was the final straw that made me
>>move from Evernote to Obsidian.
Posted by Lucas
May 25, 2021 at 02:49 PM
Luhmann wrote:
>Still, it is important to mark the difference which is that Roam is a
>database, with each “block” (paragraph) having its own unique
>identifier. That means it can do some things that a plain text system
>cannot (although Obsidian has been impressive in mimicking many of those
>features).
>
True. Although it seems to be that the goal should be to have the best of both worlds: plaintext/markdown plus some kind of database overlay. I would say that, if anything, Logseq goes even further than Obsidian in implementing such an approach, giving every block a unique identifier, etc.
Posted by Anthony
Mar 16, 2022 at 03:37 PM
The article seems to be updated very recently. It includes now also Logseq, besides the other two applications mentioned in the title.
Good comparison on the different areas, with a “winner” for each of them.
Reading the article one gets a rather comprehensive idea of what they do and what they don’t.
There is a test (12 questions) to help finding the right tool according to your needs and preferences. It asks an Email at the end, but the result of your answers is in the same following page.
Posted by MadaboutDana
Mar 17, 2022 at 09:32 AM
Thanks for the update, @Anthony – it’s prompted me to read the article and take a good look at LogSeq (although their little questionnaire-thingy decided to assign me to the Obsidian group and they then sent me lots of info on their courses for Obsidian…). I’m actually rather impressed by LogSeq.
Cheers,
Bill
Anthony wrote:
The article seems to be updated very recently. It includes now also
>Logseq, besides the other two applications mentioned in the title.
>Good comparison on the different areas, with a “winner” for each of
>them.
>Reading the article one gets a rather comprehensive idea of what they do
>and what they don’t.
>There is a test (12 questions) to help finding the right tool according
>to your needs and preferences. It asks an Email at the end, but the
>result of your answers is in the same following page.