> If your opinion is biased, as you said, why do you even share it?
I think I may have something interesting to say given that I'm writing one of these apps myself, and mentioning for example that in Joplin tags aren't indefinitely nestable but notebooks are is not like I'm making stuff up, if I weren't writing one of those note-taking apps that wouldn't really change that fact.
> Just be honest that you want to advertise your (commercial) product.
Partially my comment was prompted by the opportunity to target new potential users, i.e. people reading this thread are people interested in Joplin, which is an app very similar to mine.
Partially I want to share what I think about Joplin from my perspective.
> Your "comparison" is just a long list of what you think if bad about Joplin
Well, I started my sentence with: "Joplin could have been my go-to note-taking app", meaning there's a lot about it I like, mentioning that I like that it supports Markdown is not an interesting point to make I think, plus I'm actually praising some things, like the ability to edit a note in a third-party editor, is mentioning an ever more powerful way to implement this (i.e. notes stores as plain files on disk with metadata in the front matter) not interesting?
And not all the things I don't like about Joplin are even solved in Notable, some are though, obviously, or Joplin would have been my note-taking app too.
> as if there could not be a single good thing about it
As I said that sentence started with "Joplin could have been my go-to note-taking app", which I think implicitly says a lot of good things.
> there's nothing neutral or fair about any of it.
Ok, what's not fair or neutral about stating the fact that tags aren't indefinitely nestable?
Or maybe your point is that since I'm working for a competitor app I can't talk about this?
> You're just denigrating competition and advertising your own stuff.
I don't think that's fair to say, obviously I wouldn't have made my own note-taking app if I thought Joplin didn't have any important shortcomings.
Would my comment have been fairer if I didn't mention I'm developing Notable? I mean I'm a person who tried Joplin and there were some things I didn't like, how am I supposed to be talking about these things then? How would you have phrased my comment?
> I guess it's to be expected from someone whose tagline is "the app that doesn't suck", yet heavily copying features from all these other apps, which presumably, suck.
If the very first calculator did only additions it would have sucked, if any later calculators _also_ did additions that doesn't imply that they must suck as well.
Plus that's kind of a cheeky tagline that's meant to say the following: I tried other note-taking apps, I couldn't find one that I really liked, so in this sense they sucked for me.
Like if you absolutely need a web-clipper I guess Notable would suck and Joplin would not suck _for you_.
I think I may have something interesting to say given that I'm writing one of these apps myself, and mentioning for example that in Joplin tags aren't indefinitely nestable but notebooks are is not like I'm making stuff up, if I weren't writing one of those note-taking apps that wouldn't really change that fact.
> Just be honest that you want to advertise your (commercial) product.
Partially my comment was prompted by the opportunity to target new potential users, i.e. people reading this thread are people interested in Joplin, which is an app very similar to mine.
Partially I want to share what I think about Joplin from my perspective.
> Your "comparison" is just a long list of what you think if bad about Joplin
Well, I started my sentence with: "Joplin could have been my go-to note-taking app", meaning there's a lot about it I like, mentioning that I like that it supports Markdown is not an interesting point to make I think, plus I'm actually praising some things, like the ability to edit a note in a third-party editor, is mentioning an ever more powerful way to implement this (i.e. notes stores as plain files on disk with metadata in the front matter) not interesting?
And not all the things I don't like about Joplin are even solved in Notable, some are though, obviously, or Joplin would have been my note-taking app too.
> as if there could not be a single good thing about it
As I said that sentence started with "Joplin could have been my go-to note-taking app", which I think implicitly says a lot of good things.
> there's nothing neutral or fair about any of it.
Ok, what's not fair or neutral about stating the fact that tags aren't indefinitely nestable?
Or maybe your point is that since I'm working for a competitor app I can't talk about this?
> You're just denigrating competition and advertising your own stuff.
I don't think that's fair to say, obviously I wouldn't have made my own note-taking app if I thought Joplin didn't have any important shortcomings.
Would my comment have been fairer if I didn't mention I'm developing Notable? I mean I'm a person who tried Joplin and there were some things I didn't like, how am I supposed to be talking about these things then? How would you have phrased my comment?
> I guess it's to be expected from someone whose tagline is "the app that doesn't suck", yet heavily copying features from all these other apps, which presumably, suck.
If the very first calculator did only additions it would have sucked, if any later calculators _also_ did additions that doesn't imply that they must suck as well.
Plus that's kind of a cheeky tagline that's meant to say the following: I tried other note-taking apps, I couldn't find one that I really liked, so in this sense they sucked for me.
Like if you absolutely need a web-clipper I guess Notable would suck and Joplin would not suck _for you_.