Re:Show HN: Obsidian for Mobile – Plain-text knowledge base ...
by stevecat on Monday July 12, 2021 @11:53AM
(#27811526)
I'm probably underselling it but for me, markdown support and note organisation simply reflecting the directory structure is what sold me. I can then sync it whichever way I want; I've taken to having a "notes" folder in each project and including it in the Git repository. The notes are then browsable on GitHub too.
I've spent a lot of time trying to find my "perfect" note taking app, and have attempted to build my own a few times, and I'm very happy with Obsidian.
Re:Show HN: Obsidian for Mobile – Plain-text knowledge base ...
by applecrazy on Monday July 12, 2021 @11:51AM
(#27811509)
They're the same in the sense that Mail.app and Outlook are the same.
Apple Notes is great, but can't do things like tagging/graph view and doesn't allow you to export in a standardized format.
Obsidian is a superset of Markdown (with a few modifications for page embedding and wiki-links) and allows you to sync with anything that provides a way for you to upload a folder of text files.
Re:Show HN: Obsidian for Mobile – Plain-text knowledge base ...
by cepth on Monday July 12, 2021 @11:52AM
(#27811521)
It’s a much more fully featured note taking app, probably most directly comparable to Roam Research.
E.g., tagging, graph views, back links between notes, note/document templates.
All docs are (more or less) plain markdown as well, so if for some reason the open source community ever abandoned Obsidian, in theory it’s easy to export/transfer your notes.
Re:Show HN: Obsidian for Mobile – Plain-text knowledge base ...
by murermader on Monday July 12, 2021 @11:49AM
(#27811496)
Well it is open source, is cross platform and is not made by Apple. So, really different.
Re:Show HN: Obsidian for Mobile – Plain-text knowledge base ...
by applecrazy on Monday July 12, 2021 @11:52AM
(#27811518)
It is actually not currently OSS, although the creators have indicated interest in open-sourcing parts of it in the past.
I realize there's technical differences but from a use cases / feature perspective - isn't it essentially the same?