Why is TiddlyWiki Beaten by Obsidian?

#15

I think that is not the point, because TidGi-Desktop also use plain text files in a user selected folder. And support markdown/wikitext out of box.

Anyway, now I think the difference is mostly on propafanda. Is the stereotype on what is TiddlyWiki.
To many people, Tiddlywiki is just the empty edition, but it should be something better in the future. At least better than Obsidian’s default setting.

3 Likes
#16

Another point may be that the non-hierarchical structure of tiddlywiki feels chaotic. In Obsidian, you have folders and structure, so you can always find back to your note. In tiddlywiki, however, you need to deal with filters, lists and search

Additionally, tiddlywiki requires unique titles. This is not always a big deal but adds some mental load

1 Like
#17

TidGi is a nice piece of software. If you are interested in more feedback (on design, web page, …), a “Show HN” can be helpful: Show | Hacker News

2 Likes
#18

There is no other note-taking software where it is up to the user to find their own saving solution.

With the demise of Timimi, there really needs to be an official, supported mechanism for saving. Asking users to find their own solution is a major speed bump for anyone looking for simple note-taking software.

1 Like
#19

I use both TiddlyWiki and Obsidian daily.

  1. Notion is extremely popular. If you go on YouTube, there is a large number of people who were using Notion who have migrated to Obsidian and made videos about why and how. Don’t underestimate the power of, “Hey this person whose videos I watch every week (or more) is using this new app and is going to show me how. Maybe I should try it too.”
  2. Markdown files ARE a major selling point, because other applications use them too so if you get sick of Obsidian or if another app comes out you can just take your files with you. I have about a dozen plugins installed and everything is still just markdown.
  3. I’ve been constantly trying to get everyone I meet to use TiddlyWiki to the point where my friends make jokes about it. The number 1 reason that turns them off is that in its default out-of-the-box state in a browser is you have to remember to save. NOT having auto-save scares people while the majority of alternatives such as Obsidian or OneNote by default have it. I’ve been making TiddlyWiki’s for years for all kinds of things, showing them to people, sharing, offering to make them for them, etc. and not having auto-save by default is consistently the big “Nope.”
#20

That is also not the point, because TidGi have Folder menu on sidebar out-of-box, and many of its plugin don’t require input the title because I know What's the standard way to not writing Title .

Also TidGi save to folder like Obsidian out-of-box.

That is why we may need to teach new user TiddlyWiki is the Operation System that build the “note-taking software”, it self is not “note-taking software”.
so new user won’t complain it don’t have such thing. And the “note-taking software” TidGi and the upcoming MacOS app from Jeremy may bring all this out-of-box, so there will be no complain.

1 Like
#21

We do have the local storage plugin. We only need to activate it. @jeremyruston since browsers do have an option now, that makes local storage persistent I think we should activate it by default

5 Likes
#22

Most computer user don’t want to have a “learning curve”. They want something that feels familiar to other software they’ve already used. I love TiddlyWiki but I don’t think it is. I don’t think this is a hurdle we can overcome, because I don’t think the applications attract the same kinds of users on average. I could be completely wrong, but I think most TiddlyWiki users at some point actively learn things like filters because they want too. Whereas with Obsidian I bet most only learn the gui’s for a few plugins they use and the most basic aspects of markdown. The difference in those levels of learning are vast, and that’s ok.

We as a community, like any other community are deeply passionate about the thing we love and have a difficult time understanding why others don’t get excited about it the way we do. It’s frustrating. I know the feeling intimately. I get it. TiddlyWiki is not the same as the other applications out there and that’s ok. If we constantly work on making converts from other applications all we’re doing is taking time and energy away from working on the things TiddlyWiki is good at and makes it great. I hate to sound clichéd, but I think we just need to keep being us and not try to make comparisons. All we’re doing is frustrating ourselves. The community might not be as large as others, but it is active, positive, and supportive of its users.

11 Likes
#23

Woa! Nice! - Whaaa? - - I’ve never seen this - let me download,… Looks interesting,…

Hmm - nope?
image

Found it: (removed the “.”)

1 Like
#24

I agree that it’s likely a combination of many features, rather than a single aspect, that differentiates tidgi from Obsidian. I haven’t tried tidgi extensively yet, and it seems like a very powerful tool. However, it is different from Obsidian, and that’s not necessarily a bad thing - just something to be aware of.

obsidian_vs_tidgi
obsidian_vs_tidgi3440×1440 114 KB

Here are a few observations from my first test of tidgi:

  • Many buttons: There are quite a few buttons, some of which can be a bit confusing. For instance, Control Panel and Command Palette sounds very similar. Also, the presence of two search buttons placed very close to each other feels redundant.
  • Many tabs: The interface shows a lot of tabs by default, including one labeled “Folder Menu.” I initially expected this to reflect some kind of folder structure automatically, but it didn’t, which was a bit disorienting.
  • Confusing Plus Buttons: There are two “+” buttons. I first thought the “+ Add” was for adding a new note, which led to some confusion and a bit of time spent figuring out how to actually create a new tiddler.
  • Small Text Field: The text field for creating a new tiddler is quite small, and finding the exact place to write in it isn’t immediately obvious.
  • Hidden Save Button: The save button for a new tiddler only appears when you hover over it. This can easily lead to the mistaken belief that notes don’t require saving (as in Obsidian, where there’s no need to toggle between viewing and editing).
  • Finding Tiddlers: When re-opening tidgi, my first thought was, Where are my tiddlers? While I know they are listed under “Recent” and “More,” they seem to disappear otherwise unless you specifically search for them.

Overall, while I understand that I can configure a lot of these things, tidgi does seem a bit less intuitive for beginners compared to Obsidian. That said, it’s clearly a powerful tool!

#25

I agree with what many people are saying. TW does have a learning curve and while there is documentation it is vast and, with TW’s non-linear system, it’s not necessarily the easiest to learn. This can definitely be daunting to the average user. Also, even though there are several ways to save it’s not just built in and transparent. I use Tiddlystow for my work wiki and Tiddlyhost for my home wiki but I’ve been using TW since about 2006-2007 and all average users know are apps, especially phone apps.

2 Likes
#26

Thanks @Mark_S - I’ve looked at Timimi - it’s pretty - but yeah - I am holding off as well.

#27

Yeah - these have been my issue - the understanding of “how” to do something - as well as “how” to ask - - but as I get more into this - it’s getting easier.

I do think that - in time - I might be able to help contribute to the newbie’s - as I sort of think different from the dev’s.

  • I search for things from a non-tiddlywiki user’s point of view
  • Only to find out if I just added a simple word - like “widget” or “train” or something else that’s “esoteric” (but common knowledge to TiddlyWIki Advanced users) I would have found what I am looking for,…
3 Likes
#28

I can’t stress how this is soooo true - - it’s a matter of letting folks know that TW exists.

  • I stumbled into TW - - based on a personalized (and cannibalized) version of Projectify ,…
#29

This is what threw me off of using TiddlyWiki - initially - until I saw a Google Post - showing a tidder that shows you them,…

  • This is what allowed me to stick these in my Day Tiddler (I used to copy/paste - initially) and have a list
  • Now, I am trying to use “tags” for this - to help me see all of them
<<interstitial-ui base:'$(currentTiddler)$' caption:' '>>

-- ''{{!!created}}''

!!!! List of Tiddlies __Created__ Today

<<list-links filter:'[sameday:created{!!created}!is[system]]'>>

---
!!!! List of Tiddlies __Modified__ Today

<<list-links filter:'[sameday:modified{!!created}!is[system]]'>>
1 Like
#30

Welcome @Bearking !

Thanks for showing me Tiddlystow ← I was not aware of it - Nice!

As for the learning curve - most newbie’s (like me) stick with TW since it “just works” - and can handle a large amount of data - unlike sooo many other programs we’ve/I’ve tried.

I agree - we (consumers aka) non-dev’s don’t think like the dev’s - but the TW Dev’s are super helpful (and patient) with us - listening to the same questions - over and over - asked from different perpectives.

Welcome!

#31

Thanks for the welcome @TwN00b. I agree that the devs are helpful and “TW just works” but i can see how a lot of consumers either haven’t heard of TW, due to its not being on an app list, or, if they have, are daunted by it. I don’t think it’s hard to use, especially at a basic level, but someone like my mom just won’t bother too unless they have too. That and saving are probably why more people use things like Obsidian.

#32

I discovered it recently after giving Grok tiddlywiki another try to finally be able to grasp the true power of tiddlywiki. It is almost what I would love to have, but what deterred me for giving a try is not being able to find a portable version.

For Windows there is:
https://portableapps.com/apps/development/portableapps.com_installer
Or
Portapps - FAQ (Not sure if there is a guide on how to use this system)
Or for CLI
https://scoop.sh/

For Linux I think the easiest way is to generate an .appimage (It should be generated with the oldest distro supported so there is no issues with the libraries):
https://docs.appimage.org/packaging-guide/index.html

About TiddlyWiki Popularity, as most people have already mentioned, is the non-trivial way to use plain text files.

For example, Logseq, which is currently the main Obsidian competitor (at least at the tutorial/current popularity metric) does not stop annoying me with all it’s opinionated stuff, besides polluting the plain text files with “-”.

Also I think it’s worth mentioning the Vim Wiki and emac’s Org-mode which also have great ideas to drink from.

And there is also Trilum Notes which felt a bit bloated and had low Markdown support.

#33

Here’s a quick demo that’s more obsidian-like but it’s far from perfect of course, based on the mono theme: https://obsidian-like-theme.tiddlyhost.com/

Note the tree view where the + sign makes children of the tiddler

Edit: Additionally, the same tiddler can be at several places in the hierarchy (just like in trilium). Note that the tiddler caption is used instead of title, and the title is a shortid shown after the caption (in brackets: [[shortid]]) in view mode. It’s not optimal with regards to linking, but at least they are permanent and you don’t have to worry about relinking

#34

The obsidian canvas is seductive for me because it fullfills something I have been waiting for in TW for a long time.
The worst about this wait is that there are a lot of nice attempts which got stuck before they got complete.
TiddlyMap the most complete plugin has had no development since 2016, as @saqimtiaz’ floats and @jeremyruston’s cecily,
@mohammad’s volantis is a great experiment but it still has some issues e.g. where the tiddlers appear.
The @linonetwo’s whiteboard-plugin gives us a canvas, but it is not really an interface to work with tiddlers yet.
Thanks for all the time invested in these projects but it would be great if it was invested in one great common project.
Obsidian shows how productive a solution where the different parts come together could be.

4 Likes