I personally wouldn’t recommend obsidian (mentioned at the end of the article), but still, I think the article is worth reading.

  • The Octonaut@mander.xyz
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    14
    arrow-down
    3
    ·
    8 months ago

    “Philosophy” seems a bit grand for something that could be better described as a “tip”.

    • abhibeckert@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      18
      ·
      edit-2
      8 months ago

      No it really is a philosophy.

      There’s a vast difference in approach between software that uses documents and software that uses a database. A document based approach tends to result in work that lasts a long time. A database approach tends to have more features.

      It’s tempting to chase those features, but in my opinion it’s a mistake.

      • TCB13@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        8 months ago

        A database approach tends to have more features.

        Document based solutions can have as many feature as the developer wants, the thing is that it’s harder to build document-based solutions than DB ones.

  • matcha_addict@lemy.lol
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    3
    ·
    8 months ago

    I prefer plaintext writing for a couple reasons:

    • Plaintext is readable everywhere and by anyone. It’s effortless to make an app that views it in different ways or a tool handles it in any way you want (like searching, organization, etc). I don’t have to stick to whatever Microsoft decided as rich format.
    • the baseline IS plain text. I should ask myself, what does this other rich format offer me? Some use cases are justified. But otherwise, you’re adding obscurity for no reason.