It pains me to say, but it's probably too little, too late. Logseq remained a buggy mess, is now on an unmaintained (thus insecure) version of electron.
And now after several years of complete stagnation, the supposed improvement is a database format to fix their technical issues, so I can no longer keep all my data as markdown files? At a time when half the edits are done by Claude and tracked with jujustu, this is just not useful for me.
All I wanted was the original vision, but with less bugs and more quality of life features.
I agree, I truly love logseq as it fits the way my brain works in a way the few other tools seem to be able to replicate. Unfortunately my notes being in plain text is a non-negotiable for me. This will probably be the push I need to transition over fully to org-roam. My logseq files are already stored in org format anyway.
I also went back to Org-mode some years ago (most recently via Howm-mode). I loved what Logseq had to offer, and setup monthly donations for a while,
but after the long period of apparent stagnation I lost faith and jumped ship.
It’s sad because Logseq felt like a more focused tool than either Emacs or Obsidian, and really nailed the UI/UX that I wanted. But the interface was slow and buggy, and both the Org and Markdown backends are sufficiently non-standard that I didn’t want to continue writing my notes in that unless I believe Logseq is going to be around for a while. And I’m not at all excited by the large investment in the database backend, given that being backed by plain text is their largest feature from my point of view.
I love the concept of logseq, but the userbase is just too small and in turn the speed of change is too slow. .
Over the last few weeks, with the help of Claude Code I've finally been able to dive into Obsidian and build out the second brain I've always wanted. With the power to auto-sort small thoughts jotted down on my phone with minimal interruption and some automated maintenance & sorting.
CC has really reduced the friction to getting started with Obsidian that's held me back for years.
How are you using Obsidian (and the LLM part if you want to expand on that) to build a second brain? I’m using Obsidian but more as a replacement for Apple Notes because it supports Markdown. My vault is just a collection of notes somewhat organized into relevant folders. I know there’s a lot of functionality I’m not utilizing.
Also used CC to help me build some complex Apple shortcuts to let me capture stuff easily. Either by sharing it or hitting the button on the side of my phone and jotting it down (that Claude didn't do quite as well at, but it got me 75% of the way and helped me learn how to make complex branching shortcuts)
There is one basic function Obsidan lacks - some variation of rollups to link fields in different notes in a structured way. It's where I really did like Logaeq better. I’m going to try using Claude to "reconcile" that stuff on a recurring basis.
To some extent I've probably tried to make Obsidian into Notion. But it's more flexible and free.
I'm just in the toying and evaluation phase with Obsidian and so far I like it, but I'd like to understand why an AI is needed or even useful to begin with it? So far I just see a powerful text editor, what did you benefit from with AI use?
Short and sweet: it built out the structure, template layout, and tables in dataview.
Could have just done it without it? Certainly, this just helped me build something more scalable than I knew how to on my own, and then I learned from it. And on an ongoing basis it'll help organize the things in daily notes and inbox and place them appropriately.
To put it another way, it helped me get from 0 to 1 and will do some of the routine maintenance required to move things from my second brain's short-term memory to long-term.
Sadly, these are my thoughts as well. I've got so much already in logseq though, and I really like the model. Right now I'm thinking I'll just stay on version one as long as possible. Not being able to use Claude or codex anymore to write or update pages is a real deal breaker for me.
Does anyone know of a fork a version one that plans to continue?
Some people have placed their LogSeq DB inside a Obsidian Vault and .. moved on.
While I like using .md files, I can understand the perspective of needing database level syncing.
I haven't kept up with it, not sure why the existing Logseq didn't quietly start using a database internally, and also output .md files too to have both worlds.
Syncing text files can, does and most often will break given enough complexity and multi-device usage, especially with the most basic use case of using a daily note on multiple locations at the same time.
I still use Logseq and conceptually it’s still a great method for building a second brain. It fits the way my brain works.
But it has been dormant for years and early attempts at syncing didn’t work well. I paid to support the sync effort but we saw nothing for years. That’s a painfully long time.
Yeah I felt the same about the decision when they decided to move to database structure. If it had this structure from the start it could've built up an ecosystem like Obsidian's but now it's hard to justify going for it.
Even if it was something people wanted, and it wasn't clear that it was even before the advent of CC, abandoning the mainline product for years was a terrible move.
Hopefully they at least got something out of it for themselves from that VC money.
I wanted to use Logseq to replace NotePlan's workflow on Linux, but it's nowhere close that. What's worse, I was barely able to setup something remotely close with Obsidian.
I'm sympathetic to Logseq here. My guess is that many things are true but do not sum attractively to an audience right now.
The db probably is the cleaner place for Logseq's note storage, but invites comparison to Obsidian, whose fundamental unit of information is already a document, where Logseq's is more like a bulletpoint. Logseq being open source where Obsidian isn't could maybe blunt the edge of moving to a less-portable format, but a user can also understandably look at the status of two-way sync and see an unsexy "In-progress" and figure that's not good enough. Logseq also carries some baggage wrt instability, and the argument that the db is the pro-stability move unfortunately needs to be proven over time. Overall seems like a rough spot to be in.
I dunno. I like Logseq and wish them a good launch.
I've been using Logseq DB (this new version, as a nightly, for a year) and it's a really great concept, way better than anything I tried for notes and organisation. You can apply tags to blocks, which make them a kind of thing (a project, an author, a quote, a thought). It is very fast, and easy to learn.
I switched to it from Apple Notes + Obsidian (I've used logseq MD in the distant past). I have to say though that there are still some rough edges in the current developments and many concepts are still half-baked (Assets, Library).
I still use it because with it, I take more notes and retrieve them better, which is really convenient. The barrier to jotting something down is very low. I think the dev have really hit a sweet spot so I hope they can polish this application as it should be.
>You can apply tags to blocks, which make them a kind of thing (a project, an author, a quote, a thought).
Possibly worth pointing out that this is a Logseq thing in general, and not specific to the DB version. And I agree it's pretty great - I don't use it often, but it is very handy when I do. Much more usable than YAML frontmatter, which requires dedicated pages for everything.
I do version control by exporting the .edn (a serialized file that contains all nodes) and using git.
All of that is very alpha (to be honest, I don't understand them releasing a beta now). You need to hang in the discord from time to time to make sure you do not miss a thing. I think my note app being open-source is pretty important to me that I still deal with that.
Though because of this tagging thing, it seems very "AI-ready" in the sense that queries are naturals as some block have an identity.
An example: I have a tag called job-application which has a status (like a checked box) for applied, in-process, awaiting-input, discarded, ... and I have a tag for the pages that corresponds with my research projects, with status (published, chased, forgotten, ...) and some information (GitHub, collaborators, ...).
there are views that summarize this (all projects, all jobs application)
When I mention a person in my journal, it's very easy to see how my last meeting with them went and all.
I don't use sync, I've been told it works really well.
EDIT: I forgot to say you can enable a markdown-mirror and have one way sync (DB->MD) which is very convenient for agent, or if you like markdown.
I originally came from Roam and was really happy to find an offline alternative in Logseq. I've since moved to Obsidian, though.
Obsidian works well, but I still feel like my brain works best with the outliner-style workflow that Roam and Logseq offer.
I have heard of https://outl.app/ but when I tried it out, it still seemed in a very early stage (and heavily vibe-coded, which I also don't enjoy).
I've found it lacking, especially with kinda buggy interaction with the vim keybindings.
Obsidian's data model, a huge selling point to some, really hinders it too. Logseq's new db format let's you treat any block as a page, metadata and all which can be super helpful.
You might want to try this new logseq though, if the devs have not burned all your goodwill. You can use it with a markdown mirror (it's a feature under settings) so you keep you same notes in markdown as well.
It's open-source, really well designed, local, you can even self-host sync...
But: the devs make questionable decisions that makes the development roadmap quite bumpy. It should ease up.
It's not exactly like logseq but I really like SilverBullet (https://silverbullet.md/). It's self-hostable and really hackable (plugins, dynamic categorization via embedding custom queries, etc.). Browsers are the first class platform. I really dislike how logseq/Obsidian etc. try to push you towards local fat clients or web clients that only use browser local storage. I _want_ everything stored on a central server so I can just pick up on any device without having to sync.
Same. And it's been fascinating to watch the genuine gap between people in our camp and people who really, really want "local-first" (which, to me, translates to inconvenience and otherwise unnecessary sync requirements).
Workflowy's never-ending delays for an API make Logseq look fast.
Truth is, it's been nearly a decade since I used Workflowy and nothing has ever been as good. But the inability to email notes to it or otherwise push data to it from other sources was such a deal breaker. Particularly as mobile became a larger and larger part of my life.
Then there was Moo.do, the next best infinite-outline tool I could find. Their rebrand as Legend was strange, made it hard to find the app, and, from an SEO perspective, was an odd choice.
One of these days I should return to either Workflowy or Legend. My issues were silly and now are much more surmountable.
EDIT: WOW, Workflowy has really gotten with the times! Seems to be iterating much faster and even has an MCP server.
That's what I started with originally, but it's not offline and stores all data on their servers.
Something like Workflowy but offline or self-hosted would be brilliant.
Am I missing something? I get 100 bullets per month unless I subscribe? There are so many alternatives that are free. I'm using Capacities right now which seems way more feature rich and I haven't hit any limits on the free plan.
I really dislike this style of development: abandon the current version and start a perpetual beta that you're expected to use as your daily driver, as that's the only version that's also getting updated and QoL improvements. If you stay on the older version, expect breaking changes when/if they release a non-beta version, and have bugs unfixed. Or expect bugs/breaking changes if you use the perpetual beta and perhaps some of the previous bugs fixed (see: finamp, linksheet, and lawnchair, as a few examples). Applications that follow this development model are hard to recommend.
Despite enjoying logseq a lot it has stagnated for so long (and the mobile app is atrocious) that I ended up moving to obsidian. It was frustrating to see "new" versions get updates, bug fixes, and QoL improvements that I couldn't use unless I was willing to run an unstable build (plus they didn't update the mobile app during the beta, so it felt half-baked anyway). Even now, it's still a beta. Its such a shame.
Funny because a couple weeks ago a colleague showed me his Obsidian based note taking for work, and I decided to start trying that and Logseq out, side to side, learning their ins and outs as replacement of Keep for Android note taking.
So far I liked them both, Logseq is quirkier but I can live with quirky in FOSS. Confusingly enough though, now a new rework is announced and switching away from Markdown... One improvement I want from Keep is to have notes synced to my Linux PC and grep over them, so this news make the decision easier I guess.
For the people commenting on the inability of using LLMs for managing their graphs due to the more away from markdown files, the DB version comes with a fully-fledged CLI bundled with the desktop app that can be used to interact with the logseq graph using Claude code or codex
After Logseq moved to an app focus and abandoned the "edit anywhere" convenience of being browser-based, I lost interest. I liked the original Logseq/Roam/Athens model, and I couldn't find anything similar elsewhere, so I just wrote my own. Markdown, git for versions, remote backup, themes (using the Tinted Themes repository of base16 themes), optionally encrypted notes. Lives in a browser, editable from anything with a browser and an Internet connection. Absolute note-taking heaven (for me). No more fooling with sync solutions or not being able to install an app on certain devices.
I'm sorry to have said goodbye to what used to be a great community project, but they've been following the classic enshittification model, albeit slowly, for a while now.
Aside from not wanting to take notes on a test subdomain, it's still local to the machine. I can fire up my notes from literally anywhere, any device and see a consistent state without having to sync anything.
I donated $15/month for from mid-2022 to early-2023 to try Logseq Sync when it was in beta. I thought I'd support them while they got it over the finishline then pay for the feature. It's still in beta. What a joke.
Logseq is a mystery to me. They used to have a web version that they discontinued to "concentrate on the product", and that's where they lost me. I assume they "concentrated" on the app and the desktop version, presumably to get some revenue from their sync service, which is understandable, but it could have been executed better. Fast forward a couple of years and I see they're incomprehensibly pivoting to split the product in two. If it's strategy, I can't understand it.
People's obsession with privacy and desktop only in this space is a little lost on me.
I'd much rather have my information on the go in the cloud. None of this is so important I'll need it in 10 years or so secret I can't let the cloud service see it.
>None of this is so important I'll need it in 10 years or so secret I can't let the cloud service see it.
then you're a pretty unusual note taker because personal notes frequently cover anything from medical, financial, work-related or simply dates, addresses or other personally identifiable information none of which I would ever remotely trust with an online cloud service. In particular not in an ecosystem of haphazardly abandoned and rebooted projects that are maintained in a Discord channel.
The reality a is a small percentage of my data in any of those spaces will be needed in 5 years let alone 10
Medical history is all in Epic. And I’m struggling to think of much of anything in my personal digital life from 10 years from now I’ve ever looked at. I guess long term investments I’ll need the cost basis when I sell. That’s in my brokerage account.
And if Epic or my broker abruptly disappear I’ll have larger issues. As will society.
It pains me to say, but it's probably too little, too late. Logseq remained a buggy mess, is now on an unmaintained (thus insecure) version of electron.
And now after several years of complete stagnation, the supposed improvement is a database format to fix their technical issues, so I can no longer keep all my data as markdown files? At a time when half the edits are done by Claude and tracked with jujustu, this is just not useful for me.
All I wanted was the original vision, but with less bugs and more quality of life features.
I agree, I truly love logseq as it fits the way my brain works in a way the few other tools seem to be able to replicate. Unfortunately my notes being in plain text is a non-negotiable for me. This will probably be the push I need to transition over fully to org-roam. My logseq files are already stored in org format anyway.
I also went back to Org-mode some years ago (most recently via Howm-mode). I loved what Logseq had to offer, and setup monthly donations for a while, but after the long period of apparent stagnation I lost faith and jumped ship.
It’s sad because Logseq felt like a more focused tool than either Emacs or Obsidian, and really nailed the UI/UX that I wanted. But the interface was slow and buggy, and both the Org and Markdown backends are sufficiently non-standard that I didn’t want to continue writing my notes in that unless I believe Logseq is going to be around for a while. And I’m not at all excited by the large investment in the database backend, given that being backed by plain text is their largest feature from my point of view.
I'm somewhat willing to entertain the possibility of using FUSE to access my files again as such (as files), but man, what a downgrade!
It also means the file based syncing I use is not going to work anymore, which... On the other hand... Is maybe right out for me.
I love the concept of logseq, but the userbase is just too small and in turn the speed of change is too slow. .
Over the last few weeks, with the help of Claude Code I've finally been able to dive into Obsidian and build out the second brain I've always wanted. With the power to auto-sort small thoughts jotted down on my phone with minimal interruption and some automated maintenance & sorting.
CC has really reduced the friction to getting started with Obsidian that's held me back for years.
How are you using Obsidian (and the LLM part if you want to expand on that) to build a second brain? I’m using Obsidian but more as a replacement for Apple Notes because it supports Markdown. My vault is just a collection of notes somewhat organized into relevant folders. I know there’s a lot of functionality I’m not utilizing.
At first I was using the plugin Claudian. Now I just opened the folder in Claude Code.
It's not quite done yet, but when it is I think I'll anonymize it and share it on GitHub. In the meantime, here's a pretty screenshot without anything personal: https://snipboard.io/tyRYEJ.jpg https://snipboard.io/mryYKe.jpg
Also used CC to help me build some complex Apple shortcuts to let me capture stuff easily. Either by sharing it or hitting the button on the side of my phone and jotting it down (that Claude didn't do quite as well at, but it got me 75% of the way and helped me learn how to make complex branching shortcuts)
There is one basic function Obsidan lacks - some variation of rollups to link fields in different notes in a structured way. It's where I really did like Logaeq better. I’m going to try using Claude to "reconcile" that stuff on a recurring basis.
To some extent I've probably tried to make Obsidian into Notion. But it's more flexible and free.
Can you check those links? They don't work
Both worked for me in private mode. Strange.
Did this work: https://limewire.com/d/lxbCj#HqQOJwUfCE
Now they do, thanks! :)
I'm just in the toying and evaluation phase with Obsidian and so far I like it, but I'd like to understand why an AI is needed or even useful to begin with it? So far I just see a powerful text editor, what did you benefit from with AI use?
Short and sweet: it built out the structure, template layout, and tables in dataview.
Could have just done it without it? Certainly, this just helped me build something more scalable than I knew how to on my own, and then I learned from it. And on an ongoing basis it'll help organize the things in daily notes and inbox and place them appropriately.
To put it another way, it helped me get from 0 to 1 and will do some of the routine maintenance required to move things from my second brain's short-term memory to long-term.
Sadly, these are my thoughts as well. I've got so much already in logseq though, and I really like the model. Right now I'm thinking I'll just stay on version one as long as possible. Not being able to use Claude or codex anymore to write or update pages is a real deal breaker for me.
Does anyone know of a fork a version one that plans to continue?
Some people have placed their LogSeq DB inside a Obsidian Vault and .. moved on.
While I like using .md files, I can understand the perspective of needing database level syncing.
I haven't kept up with it, not sure why the existing Logseq didn't quietly start using a database internally, and also output .md files too to have both worlds.
Syncing text files can, does and most often will break given enough complexity and multi-device usage, especially with the most basic use case of using a daily note on multiple locations at the same time.
I still use Logseq and conceptually it’s still a great method for building a second brain. It fits the way my brain works.
But it has been dormant for years and early attempts at syncing didn’t work well. I paid to support the sync effort but we saw nothing for years. That’s a painfully long time.
Yeah I felt the same about the decision when they decided to move to database structure. If it had this structure from the start it could've built up an ecosystem like Obsidian's but now it's hard to justify going for it.
Even if it was something people wanted, and it wasn't clear that it was even before the advent of CC, abandoning the mainline product for years was a terrible move.
Hopefully they at least got something out of it for themselves from that VC money.
I became so old waiting for usable non-lazy loading for long form notes that I ended up using Emacs for everything
i begrudgingly switched from logseq to obsidian.
I wanted to use Logseq to replace NotePlan's workflow on Linux, but it's nowhere close that. What's worse, I was barely able to setup something remotely close with Obsidian.
I'm sympathetic to Logseq here. My guess is that many things are true but do not sum attractively to an audience right now.
The db probably is the cleaner place for Logseq's note storage, but invites comparison to Obsidian, whose fundamental unit of information is already a document, where Logseq's is more like a bulletpoint. Logseq being open source where Obsidian isn't could maybe blunt the edge of moving to a less-portable format, but a user can also understandably look at the status of two-way sync and see an unsexy "In-progress" and figure that's not good enough. Logseq also carries some baggage wrt instability, and the argument that the db is the pro-stability move unfortunately needs to be proven over time. Overall seems like a rough spot to be in.
I dunno. I like Logseq and wish them a good launch.
I've been using Logseq DB (this new version, as a nightly, for a year) and it's a really great concept, way better than anything I tried for notes and organisation. You can apply tags to blocks, which make them a kind of thing (a project, an author, a quote, a thought). It is very fast, and easy to learn.
I switched to it from Apple Notes + Obsidian (I've used logseq MD in the distant past). I have to say though that there are still some rough edges in the current developments and many concepts are still half-baked (Assets, Library).
I still use it because with it, I take more notes and retrieve them better, which is really convenient. The barrier to jotting something down is very low. I think the dev have really hit a sweet spot so I hope they can polish this application as it should be.
>You can apply tags to blocks, which make them a kind of thing (a project, an author, a quote, a thought).
Possibly worth pointing out that this is a Logseq thing in general, and not specific to the DB version. And I agree it's pretty great - I don't use it often, but it is very handy when I do. Much more usable than YAML frontmatter, which requires dedicated pages for everything.
I think they are talking about the new newtags feature: https://discuss.logseq.com/t/introducing-newtags-with-exampl...
I'm curious, do you do version control, sync, or work with AI agents? If so, how does that work (for you)?
there is a CLI that gets installed when you install logseq, I just past the documentation (https://github.com/logseq/logseq/blob/master/docs/cli/logseq...) and codex knows what to do. Then I can summarize my journals over months and all.
I do version control by exporting the .edn (a serialized file that contains all nodes) and using git.
All of that is very alpha (to be honest, I don't understand them releasing a beta now). You need to hang in the discord from time to time to make sure you do not miss a thing. I think my note app being open-source is pretty important to me that I still deal with that.
Though because of this tagging thing, it seems very "AI-ready" in the sense that queries are naturals as some block have an identity.
An example: I have a tag called job-application which has a status (like a checked box) for applied, in-process, awaiting-input, discarded, ... and I have a tag for the pages that corresponds with my research projects, with status (published, chased, forgotten, ...) and some information (GitHub, collaborators, ...).
there are views that summarize this (all projects, all jobs application)
When I mention a person in my journal, it's very easy to see how my last meeting with them went and all.
I don't use sync, I've been told it works really well.
EDIT: I forgot to say you can enable a markdown-mirror and have one way sync (DB->MD) which is very convenient for agent, or if you like markdown.
Thanks!
Any good outliner alternatives out there?
I originally came from Roam and was really happy to find an offline alternative in Logseq. I've since moved to Obsidian, though. Obsidian works well, but I still feel like my brain works best with the outliner-style workflow that Roam and Logseq offer.
I have heard of https://outl.app/ but when I tried it out, it still seemed in a very early stage (and heavily vibe-coded, which I also don't enjoy).
Obsidian's "Outliner" plugin is really pretty good. Esp. assuming "Editing view" and "Live Preview" editing mode, (which combine for WYSIWYG).
I appreciate the standard, intuitive keyboard shortcuts for creating/removing bullets, indenting/outdenting, moving lines up or down, etc.
Also, you can use the built-in syntax for block references to kinda-sorta recreate the Roam block-based setup.
I've found it lacking, especially with kinda buggy interaction with the vim keybindings.
Obsidian's data model, a huge selling point to some, really hinders it too. Logseq's new db format let's you treat any block as a page, metadata and all which can be super helpful.
You might want to try this new logseq though, if the devs have not burned all your goodwill. You can use it with a markdown mirror (it's a feature under settings) so you keep you same notes in markdown as well.
It's open-source, really well designed, local, you can even self-host sync...
But: the devs make questionable decisions that makes the development roadmap quite bumpy. It should ease up.
Take a look at Kosshi. I like it so far.
https://kosshi.app/
It's not exactly like logseq but I really like SilverBullet (https://silverbullet.md/). It's self-hostable and really hackable (plugins, dynamic categorization via embedding custom queries, etc.). Browsers are the first class platform. I really dislike how logseq/Obsidian etc. try to push you towards local fat clients or web clients that only use browser local storage. I _want_ everything stored on a central server so I can just pick up on any device without having to sync.
Same. And it's been fascinating to watch the genuine gap between people in our camp and people who really, really want "local-first" (which, to me, translates to inconvenience and otherwise unnecessary sync requirements).
Workflowy.
Workflowy's never-ending delays for an API make Logseq look fast.
Truth is, it's been nearly a decade since I used Workflowy and nothing has ever been as good. But the inability to email notes to it or otherwise push data to it from other sources was such a deal breaker. Particularly as mobile became a larger and larger part of my life.
Then there was Moo.do, the next best infinite-outline tool I could find. Their rebrand as Legend was strange, made it hard to find the app, and, from an SEO perspective, was an odd choice.
One of these days I should return to either Workflowy or Legend. My issues were silly and now are much more surmountable.
EDIT: WOW, Workflowy has really gotten with the times! Seems to be iterating much faster and even has an MCP server.
That's what I started with originally, but it's not offline and stores all data on their servers. Something like Workflowy but offline or self-hosted would be brilliant.
I created a version for personal use a month ago.
https://github.com/SharifIsmail/tendril
Feel free to give it a try. Agents can also directly interact with it.
So, Obsidian?
Maybe someone can put Claude Fable on it
Workflowy is not free. If you are willing to pay, Obsidian > Workflowy. If you are not willing to pay, Obsidian > Workflowy.
Same, was trying this again today. I like the parity of web and TUI.
bike, if you are on macos https://www.hogbaysoftware.com/bike/
Workflowy is awesome.
Am I missing something? I get 100 bullets per month unless I subscribe? There are so many alternatives that are free. I'm using Capacities right now which seems way more feature rich and I haven't hit any limits on the free plan.
I really dislike this style of development: abandon the current version and start a perpetual beta that you're expected to use as your daily driver, as that's the only version that's also getting updated and QoL improvements. If you stay on the older version, expect breaking changes when/if they release a non-beta version, and have bugs unfixed. Or expect bugs/breaking changes if you use the perpetual beta and perhaps some of the previous bugs fixed (see: finamp, linksheet, and lawnchair, as a few examples). Applications that follow this development model are hard to recommend.
Despite enjoying logseq a lot it has stagnated for so long (and the mobile app is atrocious) that I ended up moving to obsidian. It was frustrating to see "new" versions get updates, bug fixes, and QoL improvements that I couldn't use unless I was willing to run an unstable build (plus they didn't update the mobile app during the beta, so it felt half-baked anyway). Even now, it's still a beta. Its such a shame.
Funny because a couple weeks ago a colleague showed me his Obsidian based note taking for work, and I decided to start trying that and Logseq out, side to side, learning their ins and outs as replacement of Keep for Android note taking.
So far I liked them both, Logseq is quirkier but I can live with quirky in FOSS. Confusingly enough though, now a new rework is announced and switching away from Markdown... One improvement I want from Keep is to have notes synced to my Linux PC and grep over them, so this news make the decision easier I guess.
For the people commenting on the inability of using LLMs for managing their graphs due to the more away from markdown files, the DB version comes with a fully-fledged CLI bundled with the desktop app that can be used to interact with the logseq graph using Claude code or codex
After Logseq moved to an app focus and abandoned the "edit anywhere" convenience of being browser-based, I lost interest. I liked the original Logseq/Roam/Athens model, and I couldn't find anything similar elsewhere, so I just wrote my own. Markdown, git for versions, remote backup, themes (using the Tinted Themes repository of base16 themes), optionally encrypted notes. Lives in a browser, editable from anything with a browser and an Internet connection. Absolute note-taking heaven (for me). No more fooling with sync solutions or not being able to install an app on certain devices.
I'm sorry to have said goodbye to what used to be a great community project, but they've been following the classic enshittification model, albeit slowly, for a while now.
https://test.logseq.com is the new version in browser, I think they plan to keep it around
Aside from not wanting to take notes on a test subdomain, it's still local to the machine. I can fire up my notes from literally anywhere, any device and see a consistent state without having to sync anything.
Well. Time to look for a new editor again. Ain't no way I'm giving up my dumb file syncing that works for decades.
Maybe this time I'll find one with a sane extension system, so it isn't open-season for malware.
I donated $15/month for from mid-2022 to early-2023 to try Logseq Sync when it was in beta. I thought I'd support them while they got it over the finishline then pay for the feature. It's still in beta. What a joke.
I am still on a very old version of logseq. Why update?
Significantly better performance if you have a lot of notes. Better sync if you use that.
NewTags is pretty sweet: https://discuss.logseq.com/t/introducing-newtags-with-exampl... <-- MASSIVELY improved my meeting notes.
Bunch of reasons.
You don't have to, though. If the old version works, just keep using it :)
Logseq is a mystery to me. They used to have a web version that they discontinued to "concentrate on the product", and that's where they lost me. I assume they "concentrated" on the app and the desktop version, presumably to get some revenue from their sync service, which is understandable, but it could have been executed better. Fast forward a couple of years and I see they're incomprehensibly pivoting to split the product in two. If it's strategy, I can't understand it.
People's obsession with privacy and desktop only in this space is a little lost on me.
I'd much rather have my information on the go in the cloud. None of this is so important I'll need it in 10 years or so secret I can't let the cloud service see it.
>None of this is so important I'll need it in 10 years or so secret I can't let the cloud service see it.
then you're a pretty unusual note taker because personal notes frequently cover anything from medical, financial, work-related or simply dates, addresses or other personally identifiable information none of which I would ever remotely trust with an online cloud service. In particular not in an ecosystem of haphazardly abandoned and rebooted projects that are maintained in a Discord channel.
The reality a is a small percentage of my data in any of those spaces will be needed in 5 years let alone 10
Medical history is all in Epic. And I’m struggling to think of much of anything in my personal digital life from 10 years from now I’ve ever looked at. I guess long term investments I’ll need the cost basis when I sell. That’s in my brokerage account.
And if Epic or my broker abruptly disappear I’ll have larger issues. As will society.
The writing is on the wall for PKMSs the moment LLMs are powerful enough to drive agentic workflows.
No mention of a migration guide from V1 to V2, even in the "Big Update" post? What the heck