I decide up front: Either I am making an endless canvas for my own sake OR the final layout size/design of my canvas is restricted by external requirements (i.e. printing or presenting or simply clarity).
In the latter case, I turn on the options to show the page boundaries and I add/arrange with the restrictions of the end result already pre-set. I also rarely do the former anymore (use an infinite canvas) because the latter tends to dominate my end-point needs (Oh … I like your layout of the project … Can you send it to me too). So I have pre-defined templates for different types of projects. The one exception is my use of ZoomNotes for the iPad. I use an infinite vertical scroll page as I take/show notes. Afterward, I cut/copy/paste sections of the notes from ZoomNotes to fit cleanly on multiple pages (in Curio).
When I have to convert the former (infinite canvas) to the latter (restricted page layout) … I turn on page boundaries in Curio and re-arrange manually to the best degree possible.
I love Milanote it has great capture ability and collaboration. Here is a sheet that I created a “Concept” Map (@JohnAtl I like that definition!) then not know anything about animation, I got a resource from Spain in Fiver to execute. Bought the license to music and font. The initial Logo was done by 99designs.
I like to do such creative work, I think it is called the Creative Director but lack the expertise to execute the actual designs in this case animation software. We are so fortunate to live where you have access to Global talent. The animation cost around $180.00 then there was the cost associate with music and font license.
Doing some additional animations for a company presentation this week and will utilize both Milanote and this animator.
I think these concept mapping programs are better for these types of projects and collaboration whereas Mind Mapping programs are better for more structured projects such as book/scriptwriting/storytelling and making notes.
I see that Curio has a new model available thru the Mac app store so I will give that a try as well.
I have also been using Miro and that works as well as a concept mapping collaboration software.
Looks pretty cool. I have and have used Curio in a similar fashion.
BTW, that looks like EAGLE in the top photo? I wrote a plugin for EAGLE called pcb-gcode that allows people to use a CNC router to make printed circuit boards.
@JohnAtl Could be I just used it to provide a demo for the graphic designer. I normally used Protel or now Allegro
I took a look at the Tinderbox Software it looks very complex. I think I will put that one on the back burner ffor now and focus on the other apps like Curio, Milanote and CMAP.
Just to say for those that stumble across this post on the forum that the Tinderbox community has been quite active recently. There is ongoing helpful activity in the forum (at http://forum.eastgate.com), there are weekly meetups on Saturdays via Zoom where you can seek advice (also linked in the forum), and there is an amazing series of (by now some 40) videos by Michael Becker on his YouTube channel (https://youtube.com/channel/UCpnj2U37aI108YoO1L8leYw).
So if you’re curious about Tinderbox, these places may well be worth checking out. I find it an intriguing and amazingly useful piece of software, which is very powerful but takes some engagement to reveal its power.
Be aware that Tinderbox is very expensive, and frequently very buggy, very oddly opinionated, and unintuitive. I’ve used it extensively for 15 years, but this is the last year I subscribe. The constant problems with the UI just never get fixed. A new version is coming that has a load of tweaks; none of which are important, IMO.
I don’t have any actual data either way, but I’d expect that the recent explosion in note taking apps has had an impact. Roam Research especially (for al its as yet unresolved issues) has stimulated a rash of new products and has also opened up the area of of emergent structure, which used to be Tinderbox’s USP.
That said, I’ve tried many of the new offerings, but I keep coming back to Tinderbox because it works, is properly document and has professional support (as well as active user support).
Its major weakness - lack of a mobile app - I can address by having it watching Apple Notes folders or Devonthink groups and using them on the move.
I have the impression that the Tinderbox developer and a number for “old guard” regulars supporting Tinderbox are very dismissive of Roam, without quite understanding what they do and why so many people are attracted to that mode of note taking. So they fiddled with Tinderbox to kinda-sorta emulate the Roam-ish features, but missed the point. It was a defensive move, and not one focused on meeting modern customers where they live.
On the other hand, again just my opinion, the Obsidian folks got it and, in a way, said “Roam? That’s cool; we can do better”. And they went ahead and very quickly did better.
Actually, I disagree that Tinderbox is “stuck.” I’ve seen more progress in the last year than in the previous 4 combined. Lots of people are VERY active in the community. Daresay, it’s the healthiest it’s been yet. I myself am finding that it is about to become even more useful to me, largely as a result of Michael Becker’s amazing series of tutorial videos. YMMV, of course, but I think the reports of TBX’s demise are greatly exaggerated. In a very real sense, Tinderbox “got it first” with hypertext.
I think that’s certainly true of some of the “old guard” (or was a year and more ago - discussion of Roam over there has faded away (full disclosure - it was me that started the Roam thread there.
I think the most significant point they missed was that it’s seriously easy to get going with Roam and get some useful payback, whereas TB needs significant effort if you want to get beyond the basics. There was a lot of "but Roam can’t do this, where many most users of Roam didn’t need this.
I think that’s partially true - it was focused on the very niche group of people for whom Tinderbox is the preferred tool - defensive, yes, but more along the lines of “well, there are some useful bits to Roam, so we’ll emulate them in TB”. I don’t think TB will ever become widespread in use - steep learning curve, high initial cost in both money and time and a very idiosyncratic uI - but I think it serves its target users very well.
Yes - a different way of solving a similar set of problems. I can’t get Obsidian - I’ve tried it a few times, but it seems to be wired differently from me - but it works really well and has proper support.
It’s worth noting that after about 2 years, Roam costs about the same as Tinderbox and costs more thereafter (unless, like me, you’re grandfathered in for free). I question the value, but that’s for a different thread
I’m about to dramatically change my career, going from an organization of 15 people to one that is more than 100x that. One of the key requirements of this new org is that I be able to keep track of my new colleagues and what they can do for my clients and what I can do for their clients. And then keep track of what client work I send and receive.
That’s a job for a CRM, clearly, BUT this is going to be a 100% personal CRM that I will not need (or want) to share with anyone. I fully admit that I’ve been a Tinderbox dabbler for years now, but I do feel like its time has arrived! I’ll report back…
Not only this, but Roam remains online-only and with minimal security options. I tried Roam, but honestly, the super fiddly “you must be a dev to customize this tool” ethos makes adoption rough. At least with TBX, I don’t have to roll my own UI elements to get started!
Yes, please do report back! Sounds like a fascinating use case. (Maybe you’ll want to do an interview with Michael Becker for the video series at some point?) And good luck with your new career challenge!
I imagine the Becker videos are useful for getting started. In fact, all the useful documentation for Tinderbox has come from volunteers. Maybe also the same case for Roam and Obsidian, for that matter.
To be clear, I did not suggest the “demise” of Tinderbox was coming. Those are not my words.
This was my experience with TB as well, trying to set up Agents and the like to change properties, or just simply trying to change the font. Using ZipLinks never worked well for me either. But, TB may work well for you, and hopefully that will be the case. Let us know how it goes.
I love both DT3 and Tinderbox. That said, I am not sure from the brief description you gave that Tinderbox is the better of the two for you.
If you are fundamentally curating, filing, and/or managing documents authored by others, then DT3 is better for the job.
If you are fundamentally analyzing content in documents in order to create new content based on the source documents, then Tinderbox is better for the job.
As an outsider looking in who has dabbled with TBX, I could only wish that this, if it is the fundamental light-bulb discovery, would not be hidden so deeply in the adventure or involve so much brick-stacking to bring to realization.
I am curious here. Suppose that I have a set of PDFs … say about 100 … that I want to analyze to create new content. Given this set of documents, how many upfront, undistracted man-days of effort do the experts recommend that I should invest in TBX to learn it in order to realize a RoI of at least those same man-days of effort on future projects that will require culling information from a comparable set of PDFs to create new information?
The question has practical relevance that I can explain in more detail as the need dictates.
