Logseq becoming too technical?

I am very happy I found Logseq a few months ago. After using many other note-taking tools, I think Logseq is the best in granular tagging.

I skipped Obsidian when moving from Notion to Logseq, as it gives too many options and needs a lot of configuration. I like a tool that guides you ‘out-of-the-box’ with a best practice. Nice, it’s flexible, but basic features like linking to an agenda should not be via plug-ins.

Now I am using Logseq more and more, it also pushes me to use CSS, specific settings, /-codes etc. I’d rather have buttons, visible at the right moment and not all this “techie stuff”. I guess the mass market will have few users who understand CSS? Noteplan is a good example of keeping it simple and beautiful, with an intuitive User Interface.

Already I have broken something, confirming I am not too technical. A header could be colored, I no longer have this option :-(.

What do you think about how technical the Logseq interface should become? I look forward to hearing what your opinion is.

I think ideally Logseq would have as many of the features that currently require technical knowledge developed into a more user-friendly experience that doesn’t require any technical knowledge.
And I believe this is the direction it is going since for example, we keep hearing they’re working on an interface for building complex queries without having to write Datascript.

I think other things that will probably also happen are (keep in mind this is just my speculation):

  • more config fields will become available to be configured via the user interface instead of via changing the config file directly as text
  • there will be a nice interface for changing basic UI elements such as colors, text font, etc without the need to write CSS. Also keep in mind you already can customize the appearance without writing CSS by using themes.
  • There are new plugins coming every day, which decreases the likelihood of needing to write custom javascript or even advanced queries for many use cases.

Keep in mind this is a beta product, so there are a lot of rough edges still.

However, at the same time, it is great that the ability to tweak it with custom CSS, javascript and advanced queries remains available for the technical folks to continue to be able to customize things to their liking. That makes Logseq a very powerful product for those that have this kind of skills.


I agree with you on the high technical aspect of logseq.
Lots of things somewhat need a technical affinity to be able to work good with them. To be totally honest that is the reason why my graph is currently in Obsidian. I keep an old version active in Logseq to keep an eye on Logseq as the outliner style of working feels better for me.

There is also a lot of somewhat technical discussions about the way logseq should go forward and I regret to see that those discussions get more and more technical every time I look at those. I think simplicity in the use of the application should be the focus but IMO that is not always the case.

1 Like

Yes, Logseq is a bit too tech for now, but our vision is to make it easy for everybody - we are working on the UI, on-boarding improvement and surfacing features.


I agree. I know it’s still in beta so I try not to be too critical, but if Logseq wants to eventually conpete with something like Bear, it needs to be user-proof and all visible code removed for basic users.

Great to hear that it is the intention to make the interface less technical and more user friendly. I really love Logseq and after tweaking the CSS so it shows open tasks on the journal page, it is almost perfect for daily use.

More Intelligence and AI would be perfect too. I hope the speed of further improvements remains high.

I am happy with Logseq out of the box.
I love that you start with your diary and that every bullet has its ID, and that you can set properties.
The concept of not having to decide what or where a note will be before I start writing is what makes it perfect for me. And that you can just add TODOs on the fly. And the possibility to organize knowledge hierarchically. All this without plugin or config.

Simplicity is not in beauty buttons or unrelated functions.
Improvements could be adding filter categories to the all page view or more intelligent search and maybe a non-tech query builder.

1 Like

I truly love Logseq and all the technical stuff I can do with it!
But I also understand that is not for everyone :slight_smile:
I do hope there will be caution that Logseq doesn’t become heavily bloated from too many features. I love the light and simple UI.
I feel plug-ins might be a nice way many people can have the Logseq they prefer.