Perhaps I might add that often people are not familiar enough with the tool. Sometimes we need to invest in learning our tools. David Sparks has created an excellent field guide to using Obsidian for those less familiar with this powerful tool.
2 Likes
Reiterating the point that Application A may require/benefit from certain UI/features that don’t necessarily apply to Application B, here’s a short-list of Obsidian features that I regularly (as in daily) appreciate:
- Multiple windows/panes open at once, nearly endless options for splitting, stacking, folding, and layering windows. My workflow demands that I hop to and fro between several windows. This is one area in which I’m slowed down in Tbx.
- each pane/window has its own backward/forward navigation arrows.
- The active text editor window offers a form of ‘auto preview’ view (for example, markdown URLs, headings, etc are rendered live while in edit mode, except for the current line the cursor’s on).
- Renaming Notes instantly re-updates the entire vault (database); internal/external links remain globally active.
- Support for audio/video content. Recording within the interface is offered (the data file is a linked .webm)
- Full complement of markdown formatting accessible via menu. The app is otherwise surprisingly light on menus.
- Notes are locatable via unique URL or URI
- Search panel is pretty good and highly robust, and remembers previous/current searches. It’s also stand-alone, which is very useful when you’re editing and moving data between multiple open panes.
- Same as above with the Tags panel.
- Same as above with Recent Files panel.
- Robust File/Folder pane - nothing as elegant as Tbx, of course. But fine for navigation and organization.
- File/Folder structure conforms to the OS’s file directory system - (invaluable for Tbx Watch Folder use).
- Saveable/Loadable workspaces - immense time-saver.
- Fully customizable hot-key preference menu. Allows me to use my favorite key combinations for incessantly-deployed short-cuts.
- Skins. I went through several before settling on the one that I use. Very helpful especially for those of us who use specific text/heading formats as visual aids.
These are what I can think of for now.
6 Likes
Thanks for a really useful summary.
Aside…
Do you use (stand-alone) note windows at all? I’ve found these useful in such a circumstance, albeit not in Obsidian (but only as I don’t use it).
2 Likes
I actually don’t! I recall you suggesting this a couple weeks ago. Will look into it. Although, it’s not a deal-breaker for me these days given that most of my tossing to-and-fro of data takes place in Obsidian. Besides, I really like the “everything in one window” approach, whether it’s in Tinderbox or Obsidian.
Nice list @archurhh
A few features of Obs that I appreciate:
- The recently added “bookmark” feature that bookmarks documents (whole
.mdfiles), or sections, or even text selections. Searches can be saved as bookmarks. Bookmarks can be put into folders for organizing them. - The backlinks / unlinked mentions panel in the sidebar is indispensable when organizing large numbers of notes, or when adding text from external sources that contains text that might link to existing notes in the vault. In the latter case, unlinked mentions suggests the possible link which can be added to the new text with one click.
- The sidebar itself – contains useful tools. Here’s my sidebar, with links, left to right: the tags browser; the outgoing links view (current document); the backlinks view; highlight links in the current document; calendar view – especially useful for navigating daily notes; the ToDo plugin view; outline of the current document (based on headers); view properties table for the current document, view table of all properties in the document.
- My Obsidian vaults are synced in the background with my iPhone and iPad. The iPhone instance is not pleasant (form factor of the device), but the iPad instance is great. I can slip a small iPad into a case, do some work away from my office, and it’s all back on my desktop when I open Obsidian there.
- I rarely work in Preview mode in Obsidian where the document is fully rendered with all images, etc., but I work in Live Preview mode where the rendered document is fully editable. This mode works the same way on every platform (desktop and mobile).
My main use of Obsidian is research notes for projects that have spanned years. I have several hundred markdown documents in a vault with long detailed notes and original source extracts. The notes link to other notes about personalities, concepts, events, etc. Obsidian makes managing this database simple and straightforward, including linkages between notes. Because all the notes are independent files in a set of folders that I can access in the file system without any software other than macOS, I trust the system I’ve created with Obsidian. Trusting the system is essential for any software. Sure, I trust Tinderbox, but I don’t care for XML. But without the app, I wouldn’t want to waste my time dealing with the XML.
6 Likes
There are two things missing in Tinderbox that hold me back from Obsidian.
I simply cannot manage text without a fully functional outliner interface. One with foldable bullets and the ability to move bullets (nodes, or whatever) around. For me, this is just second nature in writing and managing text. Yes, Tinderbox has “lists” with bullet points, but it is NOT an outliner.
Second, I use a lot of inline and separate line math equations and need the ability to enter these equations in LaTex syntax.
1 Like
As others have commented above, this is not really the case. Arguably, the “big jump” for Obsidian came around two years ago with the development of the Dataview plugin (GitHub - blacksmithgu/obsidian-dataview: A high-performance data index and query language over Markdown files, for https://obsidian.md/.). The developer is presently working on an improved version called Datacore: (GitHub - blacksmithgu/datacore: Work-in-progress successor to Dataview with a focus on UX and speed.). The Dataview plugin basically changed an Obsidian vault from a collection of Markdown files into a database.
To me, Obsidian has always seemed very quick and “frictionless” in use, and certain of the affordances of Dataview provide an example of this. On one occasion I was typing some data into a note and it occurred to me that I ought to be recording some metadata that I had not thought of before. So I merely typed a carriage return, typed “invoice-sent” and followed it with two colons. Those two colons turned the text into an item of metadata that could be queried using Dataview. Speaking as someone who is getting older, and whose working memory is not as good as it was, the ability to create an “attribute” on the fly before I forget what I wanted to do is invaluable. (Sadly, I can have an idea, stand up from my chair to do whatever it was, and have to spend the next two minutes standing there trying to remember what it was. And I can’t always remember …) For me, one of the advantages of using Obsidian is that it is “all there on the page” – YAML front matter, tags, Dataview queries, etc. – all of them are instantly visible and editable, with no menus, pulldowns, and so forth (though much can be hidden if desired).
A further useful feature of Obsidian is that it is “open”, in that it is just a folder of Markdown files. I know that some people use the command line to tinker with their files, and I myself have used VS Code to make batch changes to files. In addition to that, it is possible to use applications like HoudahSpot to find things, and DEVONthink to index an Obsidian vault, should one need to use the advanced search that DEVONthink offers.
When it comes to plugins, I am stupefied by what some people can create: Excalibrain (GitHub - zsviczian/excalibrain: A graph view to navigate your Obsidian vault) is a way of getting a view of your files that mimics TheBrain (https://www.thebrain.com). It even works on your phone, which may not be that useful, but is still mind-boggling to me.
With all software, it is a case of swings and roundabouts – they all have pros and cons. But something that isn’t often mentioned, it seems to me, is how people feel about a certain program. In my case, I have simply enjoyed using Obsidian, which is not something I can say about many programs.
5 Likes
In a Tinderbox forum, we should really make sure that we discuss the software in comparison or collaboration with or to Tinderbox. A list of why is software XYZ sooo great somehow doesn’t fit here.
Obsidian is a competitor to Tinderbox. Users who work with Obsidian will hardly be motivated to use Tinderbox - the advantages of one or the other solution only become apparent later anyway. If we want to preserve the community around Tinderbox, we should really consider whether we should spread this hype about yet another simple notebook software here.
As I said - I have spent a few hours with the software and prefer Drafts for my spontaneous notes and Tinderbox for all notes that require structure. But first of all I don’t want to do things twice. If I set up my notes and build a structure around them, if I think about how to retrieve the things I need later: why should I do it in software A if I’m going to use the notes later in software B? If App A is only there to collect raw data (Drafts) that’s no issue, but if I start to work with my notes, format them, arrange them, tag the notes: I will not leave this environment later. So if I look into Obsidian it has to be with one question in mind: is Obsidian better for my workflow than Tinderbox and should I switch. For me, the answer is no. But that’s just my personal view.
2 Likes
As long as I’ve been a member of this forum, and its predecessor forums, free and open discussion of software or methods that readers find useful, usually in the “tools for thought” category, has been the norm. This aspect of the community is admirable.
Not infrequently Eastgate has noticed a feature or technique mentioned here that other software supports, and has used that information in enhancing Tinderbox for the rest of us.
So, no, there’s no wall here. It’s easy to ignore or mute a topic that isn’t interesting.
5 Likes
I think you meant that Obsidian has “lists with bullet points”?
@webline, I hear you, but then again, I think the whole thread is compare and contrast. Tinderbox does not stand alone in the sea of apps. Also, some people may not have the nuanced familiarity with Tinderbox to make such a comparison. Their comment about one app is useful as it may trigger someone else response about the other.
For example, @MartinBoycott-Brown’s comment about being able to create “metadata” on the fly in Obsidian is a great example. To do this, he is relying on a Dataview addition and plugin. One could do the exact same thing in Tinderbox, but we don’t call it Dataview, we call it action code. An action code could be written to perform exactly the same result that @MartinBoycott-Brown wants, including the creation of the attribute and populating the value. This latter point is why I personally prefer Tinderbox: I’m not limited by what someone else has coded; I can do all the coding myself or borrow from others. In other words, all our action code and template examples are similar to the plug-in developer community for Obsidian, it is more flexible as they are editable and extensible.
2 Likes
Not exactly. “Dataview” in Obsidian is different than action code in Tinderbox, not similar. Different concepts and use cases. The author describes Dataview as “an index over Markdown files that supports live-updating views and metadata”.
One can add “inline fields” to a document, such as name::Poe, which Dataview queries can locate, but these are not attributes of the document in the sense of Tinderbox attributes.
I don’t think that a picture is — always — worth a hundred words, but I enjoy so much the way Tinderbox allows me to view my data and play with digital cards as if I used index cards on a desk. There would be so many serious things to say just about this topic that I can’t resist to show a picture of my calendar, a part of one only file I use to write down all my notes:
7 Likes
Well, in Obsidian you could do all the coding yourself and borrow from others if you want! It seems to be endlessly customizable, a tinkerer’s dream.
But there would be a substantial switching cost, as the tinkering would eat into time for actually getting something done.
It’s the old trade-off: alluring LANA (learn about new applications) vs. sensible STEF (stick to the existing and familiar).
“Coding” in Obsidian (I mean plug-ins, not the adding of metadata and structuring of queries in the body of a note) seems more separated from the user interface, tucked away under the hood, but accessible IF one learns where to look and what to do.
AFAIK Tinderbox is a far more capable outliner than Obsidian, even when Obsidian is souped up with relevant plugins. Loqseq, another tinkerer’s dream, is supposedly an outliner at heart, but that is another story…
6 Likes
The “it’s easy to ignore a thread” argument is an old one… 
I just wanted to point out that from my point of view (!) this discussion is not very helpful for TBX users and that both apps are in a direct competitive situation - simply because the context of use (not the functionality) overlaps a lot.
But I will gladly accept the original tip and ignore this topic here.
2 Likes
Agree – The Tinderbox map is the most intelligent (in many ways) graphical mapping tool available. Especially now with Posters. The complexity and utility of Tinderbox maps is wonderful.
Obsidian’s canvas is more of an afterthought than a useful feature, IMO.
1 Like
I can appreciate this position.
To clarify - I will NEVER use Obsidian as a replacement for Tbx. In fact, as indicated in my earlier post, I eschew most or all the structural aspects of Obsidian. In fact, one could say that I use Obsidian as a Drafts replacement, that would be more accurate. Since my data ends up in Tinderbox anyway, I use Obsidian to gather, assemble, and bundle Notes for import into Tbx. I can achieve this rapidly in a multi-pane, hotkey, outline-enriched workspace that Drafts could not provide.
Of late I find that I use Drafts to gather more random scrap data for which I don’t yet have a specific purpose; it’s like a spare parts bin 
I do agree with the comment above about usefulness of seeing and working with text in a combined Outliner/Editor paradigm - I picked up this habit from TaskPaper, and am loath to abandon it. If there is a single feature I would like to see in Tbx now, it’d be the ability to fold text blocks in a Tbx Note. Attributes can kind of provide some of that, but not really. Obsidian achieves it (as does TaskPaper) by allowing the user to fold any text that’s indented beneath its preceding line. Also, I’m aware I could achieve this by Exploding Notes and/or structuring Parent/Child groups and viewing them in Preview mode, but that adds unnecessary steps (in my case, up to hundreds a day).
I don’t think we’re really worried about defections to Obsidian just now. I always find it useful to look at what other thoughtful systems do. Now, Obsidian’s thoughtfulness is a sort of complex construction, because so much of the product evolution seems to be driven by plugins. But, never mind.
I missed this year’s hypertext conference — where Mark Anderson and his co-author David Millard won this year’s Engelbart Prize for a stellar paper on Seven Hypertexts, in which they describe seven kinds of hypertext over the years. There were a BUNCH of interesting papers in the proceedings; I’ve been reading them with great interest. A lot like the old days…
3 Likes
@archurhh, but can you not accomplish this now. In outline view, if you welcome one ore more notes you can edit them all at once.
