this post was submitted on 12 Aug 2023
429 points (95.9% liked)

Asklemmy

44198 readers
1292 users here now

A loosely moderated place to ask open-ended questions

Search asklemmy ๐Ÿ”

If your post meets the following criteria, it's welcome here!

  1. Open-ended question
  2. Not offensive: at this point, we do not have the bandwidth to moderate overtly political discussions. Assume best intent and be excellent to each other.
  3. Not regarding using or support for Lemmy: context, see the list of support communities and tools for finding communities below
  4. Not ad nauseam inducing: please make sure it is a question that would be new to most members
  5. An actual topic of discussion

Looking for support?

Looking for a community?

~Icon~ ~by~ ~@Double_A@discuss.tchncs.de~

founded 5 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[โ€“] finestnothing@lemmy.world 3 points 1 year ago

Tbh, it's a different philosophy for taking notes. There is overlap in features, but also a lot of differences.

In obsidian, everything is file based, you manage the folder system, and you primarily link files together.

In logseq, it's more based around blocks which are indented portions of the content. You can still make files and link to the file itself rather than a block, but a lot of your notes will be on your journal pages and link to other blocks/days/content/tags, etc. I prefer logseq to obsidian, but it's a very different file setup type than normal since you normally don't worry about individual files and keeping track of them, you can just link to the content later. You can still make separate files though, and they work well. The focus is just on blocks rather than files

Both have note linking and embedding (logseqs is better imo), graph view, searching, plugins, themes, etc. I'd say they're on par in terms of features, it's just whichever notes system you prefer and work better with tbh