Forum Posts Feed
Replacing Everything with Logseq
< Next Topic | Back to topic list | Previous Topic >
Posted by Luhmann
Aug 20, 2021 at 08:30 AM
Not sure if I really need or want to replace everything I do with Logseq but trying gives me a good sense of where the fast moving app is right now and what its capabilities are. I ranked Logseq against my current tools using a somewhat arbitrary three point score.
- LS vs. Google/Apple Contacts 3:0. No contest. Having my contacts in Logseq means that I can link a contact to a meeting, a task, a project, a reference, etc. I rarely use my contact app except when I need to make a phone call. Obviously one still needs a phone book to call people on the phone, but I no longer use my phone book for keeping notes about people I meet or work with, that can all be better handled in Logseq.
- LS vs. Todoist 2:1. Logseq is better for me most of the time because all my projects are linked together. I wrote a separate forum topic just about this a few weeks ago, and since then I’ve learned some new tricks to make Logseq an even more powerful task manager. However, I still need some todoist features like better support for different kinds of repeating tasks and notifications. Also, Todoist is still best for collaborating with people who might never use Logseq.
- LS vs. Google Calendar: 1:2 I currently use both. Notifications, time-based events, and sharing are better in Google Calendar, but it is also useful to have stuff show up in my daily notes pages in Logseq. A plugin to integrate the two would be great. I’ve recently figured out a way to show a two week schedule in Logseq that works pretty well for me.
- LS vs. Ulysses 0:3. I just can’t really use Logseq as a writing app right now. The interface, goals, document spanning, and export features of Ulysses seem light years ahead of Logseq for writing. I mostly use Logseq for note taking and project management. However, the developers seem eager to improve this.
- LS vs. Readwise 0:3. While Logseq now has PDF import, it doesn’t pull stuff from my Kindle, Instapaper, Twitter, and Hypothes.is, etc. I can pull in Readwise to Logseq via the Obsidian plugin, but I really hope there will be Logseq support eventually. Or perhaps Logseq will eventually add support for pulling other kinds of annotations? (There is now an official Readwise plugin for Obsidian that can be configured to work pretty well with Logseq.)
- LS vs. Paperpile 0:2 The current logseq Zotero plugin doesn’t really work for me because I don’t use Zotero. I’m still using Paperpile and moving would be a lot of work. But Zotero is seeing a lot of improvement lately while PP development seems to have stalled, so I might consider it if PP doesn’t come through with some of their promised updates… Right now I have a workaround using an Obsidian Zotero plugin that also works with PP’s bibtex export file. This isn’t particularly great, but it works.
Posted by satis
Aug 27, 2021 at 12:56 PM
I read that this summer Logseq was working on OPML import (and already does OPML export of graph or a page). Have you tried this?
Posted by steve-rogers
Apr 1, 2022 at 07:45 PM
The new iOS test release for Logseq triggered me to have a look at the most recent version (after spending time with Roam, Obsidian, Mem, Craft, Legend, others). It’s really great!
Luhmann - how has your experiment to shift everything over to a Logseq-centric approach fared?
Posted by MadaboutDana
Apr 1, 2022 at 10:07 PM
Fascinating, @Luhmann – thanks for that. Yes, I can see how that would work in LogSeq, although I’ve not spent very much time with it.
I’d love to see Craft do the “block embedding” thing (transclusion); that would make it competitive with the Big Three (Obsidian, Roam, LogSeq). But there are some other intriguing little experiments out there, too (on macOS/iOS e.g. Monolog, North Notes, Taio). And of course NotePlan does backlinking and, in some respects (specifically tasks), also block embedding. Noteship does a rather different form of block embedding using shared headers (a very ingenious solution) or shared “fields” (not quite as ingenious, because it still only shows a limited number of records with shared fields, while the shared headers approach seems to be pretty much limitless).
So exciting!
Cheers,
Bill
Posted by 22111
Apr 2, 2022 at 09:58 AM
WHAT?
I thought when discovering this thread title in the list: Voidtools Everything can be replaced by anything? Remind you that it comes with additional command line, etc. tools.
OK then, I had been misled by the (correct) capitalization in the title, and this having become a 99-p.c.-Apple forum, nobody here gives a heck (anymore) about possible confusion with the best free Windows(-only) software of all time (FreeCommander comes next, for its “Favorites” management which is better than all the same in any paid (Windows) file manager, and its bulk rename ditto).
So much then for the most terrible software naming of all time, and yes, exceptional non-capitalization would have helped here, all the more so since if you want to replace really “everything”, and then come up with some existant, specific tool, you could not be serious, right, so your “Everything” HAD to be the specific search tool, nay?
And, btw, that current “recipies” question: Why not use Everything (hehe) with file title tags, and then EV search presets (with constants for the folder your “recipies” (or whatever) are in, or other sub-grouping tags)?
EV’s ultimate beauty lies in the fact that from now on, you can file your files as you like, e.g. in functional groups, spread over the drives as you “really” (i.e. most often) need them in your work (or hobby), not by some other ontological criteria which might appear more “logical” at first sight, but which don’t reflect how you really work (or “work”) with them.
While you could very heavily with links (of different sorts) when all the (relevant) data is on the same drive, smart EV use will be so much more easy and fast, and as soon as the (relevant) data is spread over several, multiple drives, EV will save your day (and your budget).
Example: Hundreds or thousands of 5-gb iso files, let’s say backups of your DVDs (in countries where you own but you’ve bought, which is not the case e.g. in the European Union): Would you really want to group them by directors, or by countries (then by directors), or then rather by genre and even sub-genre, specific (main) characteristics (the most important for you, considering, in this example, the unwieldiness of doing copies, except perhaps in the most exceptional cases), reflecting your “use” of this data wealth?
And don’t speak of hard drive arrays, since they make all the drives run at the same time, which means unnecessary wear at the same time, in most use cases.
These, more special, “spread data” examples are made possible by EV’s capability to also present data of currently non-connected drives, but even for connected data, EV is invaluable, and whilst it cannot replace everything (hehe), it renders almost useless many of specific tools which then force their specific ways upon you, and which, even if, in most cases, they will ultimately let you export / transfer your raw data, will then, in many cases, withhold your painstakingly concocted, organizational “meta” data of various kinds.
Just saying.