I wonder if migrating to tiddlywiki would be a better option. Mostly writing in Markdown, lightweight, intended for single user, open source & have good mobile web UI.
Migrating from DokuWiki to Obsidian
51–60 of 81 posts
Re: Migrating from DokuWiki to Obsidian
#52This website is a good test of who actually clicked the link, not able to read a thing, coming back to the comments to report the bad experience, and who didn't click the link/is a bot, talking about the article as if nothing happened.
[deleted]
Re: Migrating from DokuWiki to Obsidian
#53I wonder if migrating to tiddlywiki would be a better option. Mostly writing in Markdown, lightweight, intended for single user, open source & have good mobile web UI.
Tiddlywiki or Zim or one of many tools meant for single users.
Dokuwiki seems like overkill for a single user.
Re: Migrating from DokuWiki to Obsidian
#54It's possible to basically avoid the second step ("Convert all text files from DokuWiki Syntax to proper Markdown") by only ever writing Markdown in Dokuwiki to begin with.
To write Markdown in DokuWiki, the "DokuWiki Commonmark Plugin" [0] is pretty great.
To use it, tips are:
- REQUIRED: On the top line of each page, put `` (using the new toolbar button or typing it in). So that Dokuwiki knows the page is in markdown.
- STRONGLY SUGGESTED: In the Dokuwiki Config, set the `maxseclevel` to 0. Since the Commonmark markdown plugin currently unfortunately sort of messes up edit-section.)
That's basically it. Makes the Dokuwiki files that much more immediately-portable, in theory.
Re: Migrating from DokuWiki to Obsidian
#55Obsidian's business model might be genius. Open file formats; closed source. By making a great product, they attract users. Usually the main argument against software like this is vendor lock-in. But by using open formats, there's always an escape hatch. If they decided to squeeze their users, I suspect a decent open source alternative would pop up very quickly. In the meantime, casual open source alternatives are ve…
The third party plugin community is fantastic as well, I use it for GMing TTRPG sessions and I have a pretty powerful workflow built out.
Re: Migrating from DokuWiki to Obsidian
#56Regarding note-taking, an Obsidian plugin that generates Loci's palaces where you get to add all sort of things, using stable diffusion & other new technology (rotable 3D => better spatial memory) would be great.
Re: Migrating from DokuWiki to Obsidian
#57Obsidian's business model might be genius. Open file formats; closed source. By making a great product, they attract users. Usually the main argument against software like this is vendor lock-in. But by using open formats, there's always an escape hatch. If they decided to squeeze their users, I suspect a decent open source alternative would pop up very quickly. In the meantime, casual open source alternatives are ve…
> On the flipside, Obsidian is incentivized to keep their customers happy
I think at this point, it's more about people not making unhappy. Development is already slowing down and focusing on fixing bugs, and the community seems to have shrunk to specific areas of interest. Which is kind of a problem IMHO, because we've already seen many add-ons becoming unusable and dying as a result of updates of the main-application.
Re: Migrating from DokuWiki to Obsidian
#58Obsidian's business model might be genius. Open file formats; closed source. By making a great product, they attract users. Usually the main argument against software like this is vendor lock-in. But by using open formats, there's always an escape hatch. If they decided to squeeze their users, I suspect a decent open source alternative would pop up very quickly. In the meantime, casual open source alternatives are ve…
> On the flipside, Obsidian is incentivized to keep their customers happy I think at this point, it's more about people not making unhappy. Development is already slowing down and focusing on fixing bugs, and the community seems to have shrunk to specific areas of interest. Which is kind of a problem IMHO, because we've already seen many add-ons becoming unusable and dying as a result of updates of the main-applicati…
> Development is already slowing down and focusing on fixing bugs
Yes - because it's stable and powerful. So grateful they care about quality and are not becoming bloatware / chasing random features.
As for the plugin ecosystem, it was always inevitable that a significant portion of them wouldn't be well-maintained and wld become obsolete.
As an Obsidian early adopter and heavy daily user, I have only good things to say about the core software and the handful of high-quality community plugins that support every workflow and use case I desire.
Re: Migrating from DokuWiki to Obsidian
#59Obsidian's business model might be genius. Open file formats; closed source. By making a great product, they attract users. Usually the main argument against software like this is vendor lock-in. But by using open formats, there's always an escape hatch. If they decided to squeeze their users, I suspect a decent open source alternative would pop up very quickly. In the meantime, casual open source alternatives are ve…
> On the flipside, Obsidian is incentivized to keep their customers happy I think at this point, it's more about people not making unhappy. Development is already slowing down and focusing on fixing bugs, and the community seems to have shrunk to specific areas of interest. Which is kind of a problem IMHO, because we've already seen many add-ons becoming unusable and dying as a result of updates of the main-applicati…
I'm of two minds about this. I'm not sure continuously adding features is really necessary or desirable in software like Obsidian. I want new, shiny things but perhaps those should come in the form of optional plug-ins I could buy if I want/need them.
Re: Migrating from DokuWiki to Obsidian
#60Earlier quoted context omitted.
> On the flipside, Obsidian is incentivized to keep their customers happy I think at this point, it's more about people not making unhappy. Development is already slowing down and focusing on fixing bugs, and the community seems to have shrunk to specific areas of interest. Which is kind of a problem IMHO, because we've already seen many add-ons becoming unusable and dying as a result of updates of the main-applicati…
> Development is already slowing down and focusing on fixing bugs Yes - because it's stable and powerful. So grateful they care about quality and are not becoming bloatware / chasing random features. As for the plugin ecosystem, it was always inevitable that a significant portion of them wouldn't be well-maintained and wld become obsolete. As an Obsidian early adopter and heavy daily user, I have only good things to…
> Yes - because it's stable and powerful. So grateful they care about quality and are not becoming bloatware / chasing random features.
Yes, but this is only good for the satisfied users. Users who wait for certain "promised" features, might slowly become unhappy over time. Other will simply not find what they need.
I guess a bit of the problem is that Obsidian exploded in interests far beyond what the devs imaged, and now they are left with multiple different groups which are all not maintained equal well.
> As for the plugin ecosystem, it was always inevitable that a significant portion of them wouldn't be well-maintained and wld become obsolete.
Then remove them. It's not good if you offer the users add-ons which are not even working anymore.