Yes, please feel free to discuss any app on this forum that you use in conjunction with Bookends.
Jon
Sonny Software
BE and note taking software (Scribe)
I don't think I have much more to add in the way of note-taking for DT beyond what I have said. Your main choice is whether to take all your book notes in DT or BE. For notes on a text, I stick in BE. But once I am working topically, I switch over to DT. DT is very feature rich so it takes some experimenting to find a style you are used to. The BE notes field is like post-it notes you would stick in your books (or write in the margins) while DT is your filing cabinet for everything else.
I (loosely) use the Allen GTD method for personal productivity. My DT database's top folders are alphabetical with topical subfolders within those, and with 1 folder at the top called the Inbox. I can send text with quicksilver from any app to my inbox (chosen in the prefs), as well as send html pages and pdf pages from DEVONAgent (a web browser). Every week I clear out my DT inbox and put the items in the correct place. My BE attachments folder is indexed in DT, with an updating apple script attached to it (provided by DT).
_________
Jon, is it really that much of an ad-hoc solution if it is potentially serving more than one purpose? It would allow for easier iPod syncing as well as DT syncing and possibly other database programs as well.
It seems we have reached an impasse with this which is really frustrating for me. As much as I love DT, if a program like Yojimbo was suddenly able to work seamlessly with Bookends and Mellel I would have no qualms with bidding fairwell to DT. The reverse is also true though- if a word processor and bib.manager worked seamlessly together and with DT I would also seriously consider switching. As much as I am attached to the BE and Mellel combo, it is incomplete as a suite of tools, and there is nothing filling the gap as a note-taking/storage database. As my library grows and I continue on with my studies and into academia, the problem is growing bigger.
The problem frustrates me even more when I hear my PC friends rave about Nota Bene. It is a true suite of writers tools that does the work of Mellel, BE & DT in one package. And on a PC of all things! That Mac doesn't have a similar package is a little shameful.
Hope I don't sound to mad, none of this is any of the developer's faults. All of them make great products. But as to this specific problem and an at least temporary situation, I can't think of anything else beyond my suggestion. I asked on this board before if someone could build an applescript to automate an export in .bib but no one has responded (Apple system scripts definitely won't work).
But Jon, is this on your agenda and radar? I'll be honest with you, I can't think of much that will make Bookends any better, it is simply fantastic and outperforms any of its competitors. What else is on the horizon? In my mind anyway, integration (with whatever db. software you choose) is the next big step. Except for continued small enhancements, what else is left? There are some issues with Mellel integration that need addressing, but it sounds like they are in the works (i.e. WYSIWYG citations, pageless references in the bib. palette, etc.)
Jon, I know you have asked DT and they are not interested. This, well blows, cause DT is the best I think and its AI searches are unmatched by others. Still, the others are decent. Have you asked Yojimbo or SOHO notes? It would be a dream of many users to have a note-taking database manager enter into the partnership of Mellel and BE.
There is my random thoughts, sorry I blathered on for so long.
Danny
I (loosely) use the Allen GTD method for personal productivity. My DT database's top folders are alphabetical with topical subfolders within those, and with 1 folder at the top called the Inbox. I can send text with quicksilver from any app to my inbox (chosen in the prefs), as well as send html pages and pdf pages from DEVONAgent (a web browser). Every week I clear out my DT inbox and put the items in the correct place. My BE attachments folder is indexed in DT, with an updating apple script attached to it (provided by DT).
_________
Jon, is it really that much of an ad-hoc solution if it is potentially serving more than one purpose? It would allow for easier iPod syncing as well as DT syncing and possibly other database programs as well.
It seems we have reached an impasse with this which is really frustrating for me. As much as I love DT, if a program like Yojimbo was suddenly able to work seamlessly with Bookends and Mellel I would have no qualms with bidding fairwell to DT. The reverse is also true though- if a word processor and bib.manager worked seamlessly together and with DT I would also seriously consider switching. As much as I am attached to the BE and Mellel combo, it is incomplete as a suite of tools, and there is nothing filling the gap as a note-taking/storage database. As my library grows and I continue on with my studies and into academia, the problem is growing bigger.
The problem frustrates me even more when I hear my PC friends rave about Nota Bene. It is a true suite of writers tools that does the work of Mellel, BE & DT in one package. And on a PC of all things! That Mac doesn't have a similar package is a little shameful.
Hope I don't sound to mad, none of this is any of the developer's faults. All of them make great products. But as to this specific problem and an at least temporary situation, I can't think of anything else beyond my suggestion. I asked on this board before if someone could build an applescript to automate an export in .bib but no one has responded (Apple system scripts definitely won't work).
But Jon, is this on your agenda and radar? I'll be honest with you, I can't think of much that will make Bookends any better, it is simply fantastic and outperforms any of its competitors. What else is on the horizon? In my mind anyway, integration (with whatever db. software you choose) is the next big step. Except for continued small enhancements, what else is left? There are some issues with Mellel integration that need addressing, but it sounds like they are in the works (i.e. WYSIWYG citations, pageless references in the bib. palette, etc.)
Jon, I know you have asked DT and they are not interested. This, well blows, cause DT is the best I think and its AI searches are unmatched by others. Still, the others are decent. Have you asked Yojimbo or SOHO notes? It would be a dream of many users to have a note-taking database manager enter into the partnership of Mellel and BE.
There is my random thoughts, sorry I blathered on for so long.
Danny
~I swore to myself that if I ever got to walk around the room as manager people would laugh as they saw me coming and applaud as I walked away~
Hi Danny,
Yes, it is an ad hoc solution, and automating it actually only adds a small amount of value (you can do the export as BibTeX manually at any time, and it's very easy to do: Biblio -> Send to Disk, Plain Text, BibTeX format).
As for working with other developers, of course we're open to that. My experience is that it works better if they approach us, though. If makers of other databases wanted to work with us, I'd be happy to explore it.
As for improvements in Bookends, of course there is always more to do…
Jon
Sonny Software
Yes, it is an ad hoc solution, and automating it actually only adds a small amount of value (you can do the export as BibTeX manually at any time, and it's very easy to do: Biblio -> Send to Disk, Plain Text, BibTeX format).
As for working with other developers, of course we're open to that. My experience is that it works better if they approach us, though. If makers of other databases wanted to work with us, I'd be happy to explore it.
As for improvements in Bookends, of course there is always more to do…
Jon
Sonny Software
I would also favour a solution which allows BE to potentially communicate with a variety of database applications, rather than an integration with one specific application, whether DT or something else. Although the integration with a specific application obviously allows for greater functionality, it also locks users into a dependency on the continuation and upgrading of two applications in order to keep one's workflow intact. This is potentially hugely problematic as numerous incompatibilty issues around the change from Classic to OSX showed, in which one of the two applications could be run under the new OS, whereas the other couldn't.
Hi folks,
has anybody tried Bibliografix? It is a very interesting app for
windows 
only.
www.bibliografix.de
Might be useful if Jon had a look at this.
has anybody tried Bibliografix? It is a very interesting app for
windows only.www.bibliografix.de
Might be useful if Jon had a look at this.
To provide a little overview of what is out there for note taking (apart from a database like DevonThink):
A first category would be software that combines note taking with bibliographic functions a la BE:
Scribe - http://chnm.gmu.edu/tools/scribe/
LitLink - http://www.litlink.ch/index.php?place=wasist
There are also several programs based upon system theorist's Niklas Luhman's Zettelkasten:
Slipbox - http://www.verzetteln.de/synapsen/
Synapsen - http://www.verzetteln.de/synapsen/
Zettelkasten - http://zettelkasten.danielluedecke.de/index.php
(Zettelkasten is currently Windows-only but will become platform independent in the course of the year.)
Synapsen IMHO has a horrible GUI. Zettelkasten has the advantage over Slipbox that it can export data in csv format (and does or will support XML in the future) so one can import data in other programs.
One could also use DT (the sheet function) or even Excel and later import in DT. I am at the moment considering Slipbox or Zettelkasten because i like to use a system where i can attach multiple keywords to specific notes and later easily retrieve them. I find such a system dificult to implement in DT but i am still learning there.
I wonder if anybody has expriences with the above mentioned programs?
Best,
Gerben
A first category would be software that combines note taking with bibliographic functions a la BE:
Scribe - http://chnm.gmu.edu/tools/scribe/
LitLink - http://www.litlink.ch/index.php?place=wasist
There are also several programs based upon system theorist's Niklas Luhman's Zettelkasten:
Slipbox - http://www.verzetteln.de/synapsen/
Synapsen - http://www.verzetteln.de/synapsen/
Zettelkasten - http://zettelkasten.danielluedecke.de/index.php
(Zettelkasten is currently Windows-only but will become platform independent in the course of the year.)
Synapsen IMHO has a horrible GUI. Zettelkasten has the advantage over Slipbox that it can export data in csv format (and does or will support XML in the future) so one can import data in other programs.
One could also use DT (the sheet function) or even Excel and later import in DT. I am at the moment considering Slipbox or Zettelkasten because i like to use a system where i can attach multiple keywords to specific notes and later easily retrieve them. I find such a system dificult to implement in DT but i am still learning there.
I wonder if anybody has expriences with the above mentioned programs?
Best,
Gerben
I currently use Mellel, BE and Notebook (by Circus Ponies Software) for taking notes from different sources.
With Notebook is very easy build a project-oriented Notebook and put in it all pieces of information you need. The app has a very powerful indexing feature, so is very easy retrieve the information you need.
Obviously, it is very different from a bibliographical DB, but using BE is for me useless to have applications like DevonThink.
Nota Bene is a bluff. It is a eccessively complex application suite, that makes nothing more than the above mentioned set of applications. The difference is:
1) price ($ 500 circa)
2) stability
3) easy of use (NB comes with a manual of 700 pgs. If you do not study integrally you cannot make anything)
NB is useful only for critical editions of texts, when you need 3 or more set of different notes on a same text.
With Notebook is very easy build a project-oriented Notebook and put in it all pieces of information you need. The app has a very powerful indexing feature, so is very easy retrieve the information you need.
Obviously, it is very different from a bibliographical DB, but using BE is for me useless to have applications like DevonThink.
Nota Bene is a bluff. It is a eccessively complex application suite, that makes nothing more than the above mentioned set of applications. The difference is:
1) price ($ 500 circa)
2) stability
3) easy of use (NB comes with a manual of 700 pgs. If you do not study integrally you cannot make anything)
NB is useful only for critical editions of texts, when you need 3 or more set of different notes on a same text.
I agree with you wholeheartedly, CP Notebook (and OmniOutliner) are fantastic products. But they are built towards helping with organization and outlining. These things are fantastic, but not what you necessarily want of a research database, not myself at least. These outlining products beat DT hands down when it comes to outlining and even to an extent organization in that they are simple to use.gnoli wrote:I currently use Mellel, BE and Notebook (by Circus Ponies Software) for taking notes from different sources.
With Notebook is very easy build a project-oriented Notebook and put in it all pieces of information you need. The app has a very powerful indexing feature, so is very easy retrieve the information you need.
Obviously, it is very different from a bibliographical DB, but using BE is for me useless to have applications like DevonThink.
Nota Bene is a bluff. It is a eccessively complex application suite, that makes nothing more than the above mentioned set of applications. The difference is:
1) price ($ 500 circa)
2) stability
3) easy of use (NB comes with a manual of 700 pgs. If you do not study integrally you cannot make anything)
NB is useful only for critical editions of texts, when you need 3 or more set of different notes on a same text.
DEVONthink is a different tool for a different task. I'll just take two examples. DT will store and index PDF's. The programs above do not do that. And in a reasearchers world today, PDF articles and essays are the norm. It is simply not enough for me to be able to search for the title and keywords to a PDF, I want to be able to search the PDF itself within the program - and view it - and take notes on it. Second, the well acknowledged superiority of DT is its AI feature. The database is smart and learns from your stuff. Every other outlining program and DT wannabee only search what you type in. DT goes beyond this.
That's why I find it hard to compare these types of programs. You shouldn't compare DT with CPnotebook or OmniOutliner. They are geared towards different things. DT is a research database first and foremost, the others are for organizing and outlining. All great products, but different.
I agree Nota Bene is expensive and a little unstable, but I know several prolific writers (multiple books a year) who swear by it. And again, Nota Bene is not comparable to OOoutliner or CPnotebook.
But it is clearly working for you gnoli, so more power to you!
~I swore to myself that if I ever got to walk around the room as manager people would laugh as they saw me coming and applaud as I walked away~