▲ 431 ▼ Which proprietary software do you prefer over their open-source alternatives, and why? (lemmy.ml) submitted 3 years ago by mayflower@lemmy.ml to c/asklemmy@lemmy.ml 638 comments fedilink hide all child comments
[–] FIST_FILLET@lemmy.ml 4 points 3 years ago (2 children) isn’t obsidian open source? permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 4 child comments replies: [–] finestnothing@lemmy.world 8 points 3 years ago (1 child) Nope it's not. It's free, but you can only look at part of the source code and can't look at the proprietary parts. Logseq is completely FOSS though permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] FIST_FILLET@lemmy.ml 0 points 3 years ago (1 child) damn, that’s kind of a bummer since i love it so much. logseq looks exciting, how does it compare to obsidian feature-wise? permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] finestnothing@lemmy.world 3 points 3 years ago Tbh, it's a different philosophy for taking notes. There is overlap in features, but also a lot of differences. In obsidian, everything is file based, you manage the folder system, and you primarily link files together. In logseq, it's more based around blocks which are indented portions of the content. You can still make files and link to the file itself rather than a block, but a lot of your notes will be on your journal pages and link to other blocks/days/content/tags, etc. I prefer logseq to obsidian, but it's a very different file setup type than normal since you normally don't worry about individual files and keeping track of them, you can just link to the content later. You can still make separate files though, and they work well. The focus is just on blocks rather than files Both have note linking and embedding (logseqs is better imo), graph view, searching, plugins, themes, etc. I'd say they're on par in terms of features, it's just whichever notes system you prefer and work better with tbh permalink fedilink source parent [–] PlexSheep@feddit.de 1 point 3 years ago It is closed source. I haven seen any partial source code anywhere either. Licensing is very generous: free forever for personal use, you only need to get a license at 50$ per year if you are a commercial user. There is also a 2 week trial for commercial users. Of course, besides legality, there is nothing stopping you from using obsidian for commercial things, they don't do any checking for that stuff. permalink fedilink source parent
[–] finestnothing@lemmy.world 8 points 3 years ago (1 child) Nope it's not. It's free, but you can only look at part of the source code and can't look at the proprietary parts. Logseq is completely FOSS though permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] FIST_FILLET@lemmy.ml 0 points 3 years ago (1 child) damn, that’s kind of a bummer since i love it so much. logseq looks exciting, how does it compare to obsidian feature-wise? permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] finestnothing@lemmy.world 3 points 3 years ago Tbh, it's a different philosophy for taking notes. There is overlap in features, but also a lot of differences. In obsidian, everything is file based, you manage the folder system, and you primarily link files together. In logseq, it's more based around blocks which are indented portions of the content. You can still make files and link to the file itself rather than a block, but a lot of your notes will be on your journal pages and link to other blocks/days/content/tags, etc. I prefer logseq to obsidian, but it's a very different file setup type than normal since you normally don't worry about individual files and keeping track of them, you can just link to the content later. You can still make separate files though, and they work well. The focus is just on blocks rather than files Both have note linking and embedding (logseqs is better imo), graph view, searching, plugins, themes, etc. I'd say they're on par in terms of features, it's just whichever notes system you prefer and work better with tbh permalink fedilink source parent
[–] FIST_FILLET@lemmy.ml 0 points 3 years ago (1 child) damn, that’s kind of a bummer since i love it so much. logseq looks exciting, how does it compare to obsidian feature-wise? permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] finestnothing@lemmy.world 3 points 3 years ago Tbh, it's a different philosophy for taking notes. There is overlap in features, but also a lot of differences. In obsidian, everything is file based, you manage the folder system, and you primarily link files together. In logseq, it's more based around blocks which are indented portions of the content. You can still make files and link to the file itself rather than a block, but a lot of your notes will be on your journal pages and link to other blocks/days/content/tags, etc. I prefer logseq to obsidian, but it's a very different file setup type than normal since you normally don't worry about individual files and keeping track of them, you can just link to the content later. You can still make separate files though, and they work well. The focus is just on blocks rather than files Both have note linking and embedding (logseqs is better imo), graph view, searching, plugins, themes, etc. I'd say they're on par in terms of features, it's just whichever notes system you prefer and work better with tbh permalink fedilink source parent
[–] finestnothing@lemmy.world 3 points 3 years ago Tbh, it's a different philosophy for taking notes. There is overlap in features, but also a lot of differences. In obsidian, everything is file based, you manage the folder system, and you primarily link files together. In logseq, it's more based around blocks which are indented portions of the content. You can still make files and link to the file itself rather than a block, but a lot of your notes will be on your journal pages and link to other blocks/days/content/tags, etc. I prefer logseq to obsidian, but it's a very different file setup type than normal since you normally don't worry about individual files and keeping track of them, you can just link to the content later. You can still make separate files though, and they work well. The focus is just on blocks rather than files Both have note linking and embedding (logseqs is better imo), graph view, searching, plugins, themes, etc. I'd say they're on par in terms of features, it's just whichever notes system you prefer and work better with tbh permalink fedilink source parent
[–] PlexSheep@feddit.de 1 point 3 years ago It is closed source. I haven seen any partial source code anywhere either. Licensing is very generous: free forever for personal use, you only need to get a license at 50$ per year if you are a commercial user. There is also a 2 week trial for commercial users. Of course, besides legality, there is nothing stopping you from using obsidian for commercial things, they don't do any checking for that stuff. permalink fedilink source parent