Hi Alex,
Thanks for responding. I really appreciate it
Hereās a link to my actual bug report:
As you can see even assests donāt work (with the exception of PDFās and Jpegs).
The assets folder (situated inside the Logseq folder as usual) is on a separate data partition, not on the root partition. (But the home folder is on the root partition.)
I have tried sym-links as well as uploading files to the assets folders (which is not my preference).
As you can see, the best I can get, is the document file locked messageā¦
As you can also see - in Obsidian it just works, right out of the box - no need for any messing about. I donāt know why that could not also be the case for Logseq.
If that worked as a temporary work around until file linking was fixed, I would have been happy to use it; sadly it does not work.
However in the long run I donāt really want to have to add sym-links for every file I want to link to - it will become cumbersome over time.
My understanding is that it is intended to just work by design, and that the fact it doesnāt is just a bug. If I have misunderstood something there, then please correct me.
Meanwhile I am having to look into ways to make Obsidian behave more like Logseq, with a myriad of plugins etcetera. I am also experimenting with using both on the same files; but with mixed results.
Anyway - I do appreciate the response. And if thereās anything you else can think of that I can try I would be happy. I really would love it if Logseq comes through in the end.
Looks like the devs took some note of the feedback here.
I want to share my experience as a potential new user looking to move off Evernote to something opensource.
It took me less than an hour to clearly see logseq is too buggy to trust with my data.
In less than 10 minutes Iād encountered a bug which lost everything Iād entered into the document. Clicking on the help button generally didnāt work.
With the greatest of respect as a brand new user it appears to be alpha/beta software.
Evernote got a lot of feedback recently when they wanted to add Ai as a feature. They had a massive user revolt that forced them to focus on user feedback (instead of new feature lists) and got the overwhelming feedback that people just wanted the core functionality to work and be faster.
As an application you are asking people to trust their long term notes too it has to be trustworthy (stable, no data loss) first and foremost.
Suggestion: perhaps allow free tier users to donate. So people can clearly vote with their wallets that they want to pay for core feature development. Personally I just want a solid open source replacement for Evernote where I own my data.
Yeah I really donāt want AI baked into software I use either: If people want that, then Iād rather it be in the form of an optional plugin.
I also noted that right clicking in certain contexts brought up a google search option! Which I found at odds with the stated aim of privacy and security. I donāt know if this is still in the latest release; I do hope not.
Thankfully I havenāt had major data loss as yet - but the more I hear reports of it, the more I feel nervous to continue adding to my data and running the risk of loosing it.
Itās good to hear that the Evernote community were able to get their point across and that the development team listened.
I also however donāt want my data in the cloud.
And yes I hear you about the current buggy-ness, as of course Logseq is in beta at the moment: And I canāt help wondering if there isnāt a need for a more radical or ruthless approach in order to get what is an absolutely brilliant design conceptually, the implementation that it deserves.
Personally I would be happier using a stripped down alpha of a new branch rebuilt from the ground up, with a focus on reliability and stability before new features are added; even if that meant having to wait for features that I really want.
Sadly, this is me. I love Logseq, and was using it daily, but I experienced limited data loss and also display issues - blocks that would appear on mobile but not desktop. Iāve switched to UpNote which is a great piece of software with ultra-reliable sync, but thereās some friction compared to the ease of linking on Logseq. I tried Logseq again last week, but sadly encountered a bug within half an hour.
I donāt know about timescales, but I agree that a stable and a beta version would be welcome. The upcoming database version may be part of the issue: I know from personal experience the drain of refactoring an entire application and how it causes resource issues simply dealing with normal day-to-day running.
The new features are exciting, but I could happily use (and pay for) Logseq exactly as is, if it were not for bugs encountered.
Those who have experienced data loss; could you give a bit more detail?
Would be good to know if there are any repeatable causal scenarios across multiple users.
