I just noticed that the Logseq forums tend to hide critical posts, so I thought I'd link here the posts where I explained my migration from Logseq to Obsidian, the trouble you'll find and how it can be fixed.
Some background
I loved Logseq and was a subscriber for months, until I got fed up with the data loss, the constant CPU wastage and general unreliability. Around then is when the developers started talking about moving to a DB version instead of the Markdown storage - which made perfect sense (in principle, if not in their approach to reinventing the wheel) but highlighted all kinds of weird stuff in the people. The hiding of posts is just another example of that weirdness.
By the way, the reason why I necro all of this is because I just found a comment by the Obsidian developers explaining why a good outliner needs a DB backend and Markdown can't work well. They posted this back in 2020! And this is particularly attention worthy because these people develop both Obsidian and Dynalist, which is a great outliner. So they know what they're talking about.
Logseq trying to re-invent a distributed DB (one of the most difficult wheels in CS), 4 years later, in spite of things like these warnings is... well, par for the course at this point.
The links
Migrating to Obsidian: https://discuss.logseq.com/t/migration-to-obsidian/26745
Not my post, but still informative of the DB vs Markdown trouble – and also hidden in the forums: https://discuss.logseq.com/t/is-there-still-a-bi-directional-approach-of-db-markdown-or-only-export-to-markdown-remains/26051
I agree with your observations. I always tend to opt for the open-source alternatives, but in Logseq's case, even after 3-4 years of usage, I got fed up with the abysmal performance. The times I've brought up some criticism in public spaces I've mostly been met with dismissive remarks. This idea of migrating to a DB model further pushes me away from the project.
ReplyDeleteI've recently swapped to Obsidian part-time to test the waters and I must say that the upsides far, far outweigh the negatives. The snappiness of the performance in particular was shocking compared to Logseq. The main setbacks I found were adapting to the Obsidian tasks (TODO becomes - [ ] TODO) and the annoying :collapsed: conversion which took some scripting, but at least I can vouch that if you have long-term daily journal notes it is quite easy to move them over.
I still have hope for Joplin but I think it would take some pretty big leaps to reach the other two programs.