![]() In the case of Obsidian, it may not be open source, but it is a superior product made by people with great ethics. Its not the closed source nature of many products that make them ‘bad’ but the ethics and philosophy of the developers. In many cases, I will choose a product with less features in exchange for privacy and configurability. I’d still rather use Joplin than Evernote, Onenote, etc despite the missing features. Despite that, after years of waiting it still hasn’t manged to deliver what I need. It’s really great, has excellent developers, great community and features are added and refined regularly, even quickly. As an example, my favorite note taking app, prior to finding Obsidian, was Joplin. I use Thunderbird, Firefox, Nextcloud over Google Drive or One Drive, Bitwarden for passwords, etc.īut in some cases open source is not better and cannot deliver what’s required, for my purposes, in the time I need it. I have been using Linux (mostly Mint, MX) on all my PC’s for many years because it’s superior in many ways to OSX and Windows. I find that in many cases open source products are better for me than proprietary. I love the idea of free and open source software. ![]() This reminded me that free lunch does not last forever. I especially became conscious about this after spending quite a while migrating CI scripts from Travis across all my OSS projects to GH Actions (unfortunately, they are way more powerful than Gitlab CI and some projects cannot simply move from Github for org reasons but it’s good to know there is an open alternative). Note that all of those tools not only keep the source closed but also have a proprietary note format.įor the context, I am a paying user of Dynalist Pro (I am assuming = Erica at, thank you for Dynalist!) and I am making small donations to for that exact reason: I want to know if the company loses interest in the project (either financial or just sells the company), I will not be left with a broken workflow. ![]() I want the same for Obsidian (both because I am rooting for and and because I want the tool I will use for many years to be sustainable and supported). Everyone lecturing on how to develop a product should look at Evernote, Notion, and Roam, which seem to be doing well. I am happy to pay for Obsidian if I find it to fit well into my workflow. I think the discussion has drifted a bit so I wanted to post a reply specifically supporting this option ( does not mention anything yet.). I think having a privacy statement and a pledge to open up code access if Obsidian discontinues are good ideas, but open sourcing does not make sense given the current circumstances. There are business models that rely and operate on open source but the concept or practice of open source itself, is not a business model. I don’t know a great deal about them (so maybe the comparison would break down at some point) but they’ve certainly been around for while, are focused on longevity, and provide a free and open source note / kb application while operating within a commercial business context (albeit the StandardNotes model provides different services than Obsidian’s). Perhaps there are things they can learn from one another but there’s no sense comparing them as commercial business models since only one of the two fit that description.Īn interesting comparison that might be apt however, would probably be something like Standard Notes ( ). Yes, people can spend the night in both however the scenario and goals of each establishment are completely different. I would argue that it’s akin to discussing how to make money from running a hotel and claiming that a community homeless shelter proves you can’t make money by offering people a place to sleep. Sorry, it’s not clear to me what the rationale could be for comparing Zettlr as a commercial entity.
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |