Is anyone planning to use OG version indefinitely?

Questions & Help
1

Now that the OG version has officially been spilt off from the DB version and put in maintenance mode, is anyone planning on continuing to use the OG version?

I first started using Logseq through the DB version, but it is just too unreliable for me to depend on. Plus, the OG version has more of the features I need, like the whiteboard. It feels like it has been abandoned at this point, and even though it is in maintenance mode, it feels precarious to invest in using it full time even though it is more stable than the official “Logseq” (DB version) which is still in beta. I really liked using the DB version, but it doesn’t seem like a good idea to rely on it in its current state, and there’s no telling when it will get to a stable state with mobile sync, a whiteboard again, etc.

I’m kind of bummed because I really like Logseq, but it feels like there’s not a reliable way to use it currently other than using the OG version which is not being developed.

8 Likes
2

Personally I like to use markdown text files before a database. I migrated to Logseq from IA Writer which is based on markdown files. I like Logseq a lot but I’m not so sure I will migrate to the DB version. IA Writer syncs very fast and reliable using iCloud.

3 Likes
4

I’m new to Logseq, coming from Obsidian.

I migrated because I was looking for a reliable and open source software, to be able to keep using it for years, at least.

The reason I chose Obsidian was the usage of plain Markdown files, because I need to be able to read them using a simple text editor. Moreover, using a simple open source software like Syncthing, I can synchronize my graph between my computer and my phone without using a third party server.

Logseq DB uses Sqlite to store data. It’s seen as a single file by the operating system and makes synchronizing really bandwidth and time consuming.

So, I will stay with Logseq OG, definitely. Open source software never dies when people uses it.

I’m using advanced queries right now, learning basics about ClojureScript and DataScript. So many things can be improved in Logseq OG.

Moreover, Obsidian shows us that moving from Markdown + index to DB only data storage is not necessary to improve UX speed. You just need to keep the software simple and well tested. Some plugins make Obsidian startup so slow !

4 Likes
5

Probably not. I will likely check the DB version (hopefully soon seeing what work they are focusing on these days), I’ll see how I can work with it and then decide what I want to do. But for MD, I probably won’t stay with an app that was put into maintenance mode during its beta. Remember initially they wanted to have both versions coexist, seeing the mood around the DB version I don’t know if even that won’t be dead on arrival.

Outlining is great, and there is no great local first alternative yet (well one, Emacs). I’ve even learned to work around Logseq’s bugs and quirks, but in the end the alternatives might be better. Funnily considering the guy ahead just bolted from it, but I played a bit with Obsidian and it felt more snappy (despite also using Electron), has good built in Vim bindings, more functional front end (has even this cutting edge tech called tabs), and got a lot of improvements since I last checked it. New apps pop-up as well, including outliners. IMO the case for using MD is weak.

2 Likes
6

I’ve been using Logseq markdown version for ~5 years. I’m probably in the minority here by not expecting any updates to markdown version and being okay with it. Logseq is a shining example of a “done” software. I don’t need any more bells and whistles than what it currently already has. I don’t depend on any network-related services/plugins for me to worry about security issues.

The team’s intention to split DB and OG versions is IMO a particularly sane decision. Rather than trying to shoehorn DB features into OG version, which would’ve been a nightmare, they’ve decided to keep these two things apart. You could argue that a software which goes into maintenance mode is signaling that it is no longer reliable, but you have to also consider that it is a note-taking software. There really shouldn’t be a need to keep adding “features” to it, just for the sake of it.

I’ve tried to switch to Obsidian multiple times in the past but I’ve always come back to Logseq in the end. There really is no other software which does Outlining so well. The fact that in the end I’m just writing markdown files, allowed me to build a native android app which solves my major headaches with the mobile app. I don’t need anything more.

There is a possibility of Logseq OG no longer running on major OS upgrades in future, but I trust that we’ll find a community solution for it. Until then, I still find joy writing into my daily journals and using the software and will continue to do so for the foreseeable future.

10 Likes
7

I will definately stay with the OG Version for the Freedom of other Tools to traverse my Graph. The use of plain Markdown Files is, what brought me here.

7 Likes
8

I would just like to mention one small thing in case anyone here doesnt know this: there is now a feature called “Markdown mirror” in the Logseq DB desktop app which mirrors your DB graph to markdown notes, and keeps it updated. There is a plan to have 2 way mirroring, so basically write in Markdown notes and this gets mirrored to a DB graph (this is in the roadmap and there is already a PR for it)

6 Likes
9

Was this announced somewhere and I missed it? The repo doesn’t appear to be obviously in maintenance mode.

2 Likes
10

We’ll continue maintaining Logseq OG with:

  • Security fixes and patches

  • Electron and dependency upgrades

Our focus will be on maintenance and reliability rather than new feature development, allowing us to move faster on the database version.

4 Likes
11

I use logseq with a flatpak. Which means it has all it needs in the pack and is unaffected by OS upgrades. The fact that markdown allows for good interoperability and data re-use is decisive. And I agree with what @ZenArtist said. I’m NOT looking for additional features and on flatpak, Logseq is reliable. I sync my phone via rsync. If there’s a problem, I can use diff. All those options vanish with the database. That database has advantages, but I realized that I don’t need those advantages.

1 Like
12

I am using Logseq for about 3.5 years, but just made an account, because so far I was pretty much okay with Logseq as it was. I’m here after noticing the 2.0.0 release, and read the release notes about the new DB version.

The app of course is very slow, and will stay slow both on Windows and Android, thanks to being based on Electron. Makes sense that it’s slow if it has to start a new browser every time it starts, and browsers are among the most bloated and complicated software that exist. Development-wise they both seemed almost abandoned in the past 1-2 years, but now it makes sense that I see that the dev team poured all their efforts, resources and funding in abandoning the cornerstone (from my perspective) of the software and rewriting it.

From the update post, I see why that is. Their vision for it is completely different than what mine is, namely:

We’re building a platform for learning, collaboration, and creativity

For me Logseq is a frontend to edit a bunch of markdown files, and follow links between them, show relevant tagged blocks on named pages. I am using it to store my own notes (so I don’t need collaboration), I can handle the syncing myself using Syncthing (which again seems like a huge focus where a lot of effort went into). I guess even the most simple text editor can be used for “learning and creativity” so there I also don’t see the point.

I see the mention of the eventual 2-way sync of markdown files, but this is just an unnecessary complication from my perspective, so I’ll keep using the markdown only version as long as it works.

I looked at all the open source projects, but I simply don’t find any good alternative with the same simple basic idea of just using markdown files as the source of truth and not trying to be too much. I specifically use Logseq so that I am not locked in to a custom data format. I feel like having the 1.x relegated to maintenance mode is somehow worse than abandoning it, as this way the will to fork it and keep developing it will be a lot lower. However this is not too bad, it’s still open source and available.

As @ZenArtist says, it is good enough, “done”, so I’ll just keep using it. There’s a long standing bug on Android where the bottom icons are not visible until I open and close the hamburger menu, but otherwise it is usable for me. Though it seems his FastLog Android app would fix both the slowness and the issues with search, so I’m looking forward to maybe switch to that on Android, and keep using Logseq OG.

Ps.: I think calling it Logseq MD would have made a lot more sense, rather than calling it “Logseq Original Gangster”, but it seems our vision is different on this with the dev team too. :stuck_out_tongue:

5 Likes
13

I’ve said in a few places and I stand by it that the DB version is a “breaking change” for my ability to use Logseq. It’s for a different kind of brain than mine. It’s for a Notion-style brain, and I have spent dozens of hours desperately trying to make Notion make sense, only to lose jobs over it when companies make it required. I don’t know what the disconnect is with my brain. I just know there is one, and I have found the DB version completely unusable.

That said, the only thing I really wish is that they’d ever kept their promises to build PDF and/or plugin support for the Android app. That’s the only feature of the existing OG version that I’ve really wanted and been waiting for, but I guess I’ll end up forking it and throwing Claude Code at it to see if it can fix it to “good enough.”

2 Likes
14

I’ve tried to use the database version, but find it difficult to sync via my own web drive.. Besides, the Graph View of db version seems slower and hard to use for now. So now I’m back to OG version, and may stay here for a long time.

1 Like
15

OK, so I guess it means to me: I’ll stick to the OG version until this “two ways mirroring” works.

2 Likes
16

Yep not moving to DB version, whole point of using this is the org-mode files also work in emacs.
If its locked in a DB its no use.

2 Likes
17

Very true, as you correctly said > “ve tried to switch to Obsidian multiple times in the past but I’ve always come back to Logseq in the end.”.

The same thing happened with me also. I am also using Obsidian (I migrated after hearing a news of DB version) but still writing something in Logseq. The sheer joy of writing in a simple software is beyond words. I will keep using the old version , till time permits

1 Like
18

Yes, I intend to use the “OG” version. I’m happy with it, and I neither need nor want sync through the cloud. I see MD files as a very accessible backup medium and they’re efficient to sync locally (I use SyncThing).

3 Likes
19

It seems like we are all preferring to use simple markdown files. I did a brew upgrade this morning to be greeted to a new window with no indication what had happened to my content. That action is rude, the sort of stuff MS get up to. Clearly no intention of properly supporting the current MD users!

Will stay with the old version until I find a replacement as this place seems not as welcoming as it was, a different agenda, maybe to get more folk using sync via the paid service rather than using good tools like Syncthing.

Obsidian or maybe HelixNotes they are different tools with different use cases, but maybe where I have to go, as I don’t expect this OG version to be reliably maintained for long based on the current experience.

3 Likes
20

Everything i need is on OG.

1 Like
21

I use logseq as a personal wiki with org-mode outside emacs.

I love it and i don’t need the db version too.