fertvi.blogg.se

1. Joplin vs qownnotes software#
2. Joplin vs qownnotes code#
3. Joplin vs qownnotes license#
4. Joplin vs qownnotes free#

Joplin vs qownnotes software#

I want you to know that I love this software and what follows below is just me putting forward my opinion and is in no way demeaning anyone else’s opinion. I have made around 20 interrelated notes for now and made a presentation on a paper using this. I have nothing but love and admiration for the developers for creating this beauty called “Obsidian”. The developers have created an intelligent and exceptionally polished application. I came across Obsidian a week back and trust me this brilliant software was love at first sight for me. Also, do correct me if I’m wrong on any points.

Joplin vs qownnotes free#

If anyone responses to my post here feel free to mention any and all alternatives, there may be ones I’ve yet to find. I’m aware of certain other alternatives that I may also check out, such as logseq.

Joplin vs qownnotes code#

There are other software offerings which do a similar thing to what I’m describing Vivaldi (chromium-based proprietary Web Browser) does release the source code for viewing, but prohibits modification. This is desirable because it validates that the software one runs doesn’t have hidden backdoors/what-have-you within the binary blob. The reason I believe most here are asking for open source, is for the ability to examine the code, and/or personally compile the software for themselves. (Even though that goes against FSF/GNU philosophies).

Joplin vs qownnotes license#

It’s their code after all, and I do believe there are means to license their software in a way that prohibits distributing forks. If the developers don’t wish to maintain documentation, or manage code contributions, that’s fine. It seems to me that the developers have a misunderstanding of open source in general (or at least, their views differ from my views on open source). I did skim through some discussion on this topic, including some developer responses. This eases lock-in concerns, but doesn’t fully resolve the issue of the software itself not being open. I really appreciate how obsidian stores its notes–Joplin stores the files as hashed filenames making it prohibitively difficult to browse notes through the filesystem. It is unfortunate that this software isn’t open source. Previously I used Joplin for this task it’s pretty good, but is more aimed at simple note taking–and my notes have expanded to a point where I need to link knowledge together. I’m currently trialing this program for my college study notes. I’m new btw, just installed obsidian a few days ago. I am happy with Obsidian and especially want to thank the community for the amazing plugins and themes. trillium was built to be hacked and both the front end and backend are scriptable. Qownnotes has a small but useful set of plugins and the developer is very active. Joplin was very late to add plugins and they still are far behind this community. I had previously been using Joplin, Qownnotes and trillium. I think that that commitment would make a lot of users who have expressed concerns here feel a lot more comfortable. Having said that I would like to suggest to the devs that they make a commitment to the community: if the decide to stop developing/supporting this product that they will open source the code. I’ve used things that have been open source and then abandoned and being open source doesn’t mean any software can be easily picked up by others and even if it can, many times the quality and responsiveness seem to suffer. Between the app itself and the community of users and plugins I think there is nothing better. I usually try to stick to open source but wanted to support the developers so this app keeps going. After a few weeks of use I paid for the license. I am someone who has used pretty much all of the open source apps in this category before I found Obsidian.