[HN Gopher] Org tutorials
___________________________________________________________________
Org tutorials
Author : dargscisyhp
Score : 172 points
Date : 2025-07-23 03:09 UTC (19 hours ago)
(HTM) web link (orgmode.org)
(TXT) w3m dump (orgmode.org)
| hodanli wrote:
| i like logseq as somewhat modern iteration of org-mode
| account-5 wrote:
| What lead you to choose that over say obsidian, notion, Joplin,
| and the many others that pretty much do the same thing?
| innocentoldguy wrote:
| I switched from Obsidian to Logseq because Logseq has better
| block-level support, better embedded image previews, and more
| functionality out of the box without having to rely on
| plugins
|
| Why not Notion or Joplin? I like Logseq's outline format
| better than Joplin's long-form note taking format, and I just
| don't like Notion at all for purely subjective reasons.
| jcynix wrote:
| Orgmode is more than just a note keeping tool, it is a
| complete and complex toolbox. I can use tables like a
| spreadsheet, include source code snippets, etc.
|
| Joplin is fine, especially for shared note keeping. We store
| its notes on a private WebDAV server and everyone in the
| family can access these notes from their laptops or mobile
| devices.
|
| But the editing capabilities of Joplin are dismal. Try to
| swap lines (on a smartphone, no mouse), change the same term
| in a number of notes, or do some more complex editing
| operations. These are easily done in emacs/orgmode, even on a
| smartphone or tablet ... ,at least with emacs running in
| Termux under Android.
| solarkraft wrote:
| They do not do the same thing.
|
| Logseq is an outliner (though it does have a document mode),
| which means a deep interaction with the document's hierarchy:
| You can zoom into blocks, collapse them (not ephemerally,
| it's saved in the document) and link to them.
|
| I'd probably use Obsidian if it had those features (since
| Logseq is still as buggy as it was years ago), but the last
| time I checked it did not.
| uludag wrote:
| I'm on my seventh year of using org-mode for my task management.
| My system has slowly evolved over time but I'm pretty much still
| using the same single text file to manage everything. My main
| getting-things-done org-mode file is now at 6k lines long.
|
| Before org-mode, I was always downloading different software to
| manage tasks and notes. The tool churn was very degrading to my
| productivity but I feel that commercial interests would keep
| turning the churn machine: new UI changes, enshitification,
| monthly subscriptions, etc.
|
| It's such a refreshing feeling, sitting back, and feeling assured
| that for the next presumably 25 years of my career, and perhaps
| for the rest of my life, I can still be using org-mode, and it
| will always work as I learned it, but it's flexible enough to
| easily implement extensions.
| lycopodiopsida wrote:
| I try it regularly and I was running an org-mode based task
| management for a year and some months in between, but man, I do
| not have time and patience for sync conflicts in 2025. It can
| work but I have to be very cautious, and iCloud sync being a
| bit mysterious does not help. But I've also recognized that I
| don't have very complex projects, that GTD tools do not matter
| since their contents are transient by nature and that Apple
| Reminders is basically good enough. As a bonus it allows me to
| share Lists/Projects with my wife.
| uludag wrote:
| I totally understand this situation. I actually never had a
| good mobile set up when I was on iOS and only when switching
| to Android was able to finally setup something I liked using
| orgzly-revived, syncthing, and android Emacs.
|
| As for GTD, I never did proper GTD until about a year ago,
| after reading the GTD book. I don't consider my life complex
| by any means, but I've been surprised at the amount of
| projects in my life that have been reified in my system.
| lycopodiopsida wrote:
| I am practicing GTD since ~15 years already, but while I
| stick to some practices (review, inbox and so on), I have a
| simpler setup for projects and files, sufficient for my
| needs. One of the lessons is that GTD and productivity
| systems are not about tools - I am equally productive (or
| unproductive) in emacs, omnifocus, reminders. The advantage
| of OF and reminders is that I don't have to look after
| sync, workflow-wise I quickly learn to navigate around
| idiosyncrasies of each of them and settle on the same
| workflow, helping myself with scripts and glue code where I
| need it.
|
| This said, I still keep my long-term notes in denote,
| because it works and I don't trust Apple Notes for long-
| term stuff (missing built-in export).
| thecsw wrote:
| Orgmode got me through college, research, and at work, it really
| is the _perfected_ markup language that can do a lot more than
| just being a markup language. The extensibility and out of the
| box export to other formats makes it immediately useful for at
| least 80% of common tasks.
|
| It has ingrained itself so deeply into my muscle memory that I
| built out a whole website builder [1] and extended the language
| to support all kinds of nice QoL things for my website [2].
|
| Something that as the other commenter here noted--I can rely on
| orgmode for many decades to come.
|
| [1] https://github.com/thecsw/darkness [2] https://sandyuraz.com
| jhoechtl wrote:
| I have on gripe, that is the mixture between org structure and
| org document heradings. I know, they are the same, and such a
| distinction doesn't exist.
|
| You can start a "document" at any place in the org hierachy. I
| would rather prefer a distintion between these two concepts.
| medstrom wrote:
| How would the distinction work?
| eviks wrote:
| > As of 2025-02, there is no formal Org-mode syntax definition.
|
| is very far away from perfection
| nanna wrote:
| > As of 2025-02, there is no formal Org-mode syntax
| definition.
|
| Confusingly, you seem to have taken this from Karl Voit's
| website, without referencing having done so?
|
| https://karl-voit.at/2017/09/23/orgmode-as-markup-only/
|
| And then taken the sentence out of context. His point is that
| even though there isn't a formal Org-mode syntax definition,
| there is an informal one in that all of the Org mode syntax
| elements are part of the Emacs Org-mode implementation. The
| latest Org-mode implementation /is/ the spec. This is in
| comparison with Markdown where there are numerous syntax
| definitions and no implementation which includes all elements
| and everything is a mess.
| eviks wrote:
| > taken the sentence out of context
|
| > This is in comparison with Markdown
|
| This context is irrelevant, I'm not discussing how bad
| markdown is, but how great org mode is.
|
| > The latest Org-mode implementation /is/ the spec.
|
| You're just conflating the terms, that's not what a spec
| is, and having one has benefits that living impls don't
| have
| pbmonster wrote:
| > Orgmode got me through college, research, and at work, it
| really is the perfected markup language that can do a lot more
| than just being a markup language. The extensibility and out of
| the box export to other formats makes it immediately useful for
| at least 80% of common tasks.
|
| With regards to your 80% claim, do you happen to know an
| extension that works well with pasting images from clipboard?
|
| Over the years, my professional note taking has become
| extremely reliant on quickly pasting images (most often
| screenshots from papers or quick-and-dirty plots I made myself)
| from clipboard directly into the notes. The friction of doing
| this in vanilla org-mode is the only reason I'm not doing
| everything in org-mode.
| v9v wrote:
| I use org-download (https://github.com/abo-abo/org-download)
| for pasting images.
| chke wrote:
| yank-media is built-in https://orgmode.org/manual/Drag-and-
| Drop-_0026-yank_002dmedi...
| Nesco wrote:
| To people using org mode, how does it help you more than
| Markdown? Genuinely curious because I tried at some point and it
| felt too heavy.
|
| Maybe because I am a vim user instead of eMacs?
| stevekemp wrote:
| First of all "emacs" rather than "eMacs".
|
| But to answer your main question, markdown is used for writing
| text which can then be converted to HTML, PDF, etc, etc. It's
| used just to format things. org can be used in that way, and it
| might feel better/worse depending on what you feel about the
| choices used for various formatting styles.
|
| However the big gain of org is that you can use it to format
| dynamic tables, handle todo-lists, have deadlines, recurring
| tasks, etc, etc. It makes no sense to compare org-files with
| markdown-files. It's like saying "I use notepad how does Excel
| help you do more?" - they do different thigns.
|
| Now, much like excel, most people don't do everythign with org,
| but they can if they want to. It is extraordinarily flexible,
| and can be extended with custom lisp code if necessary.
|
| I track rental properties with an org-document for each
| property, and I get per-year profit/loss statements in a neat
| format with graphs too. You can't do that with markdown.
| impulsivepuppet wrote:
| Org mode offers so much more than just syntax. You can use org
| files as a calendar, a todo/issue tracker with time accounting,
| a diary/knowledge base (zettelkasten, org-roam), as a literate
| programming tool (think jupyter code notebooks but for
| practically any programming language with org-babel), or a
| publishing tool (static site generator, latex/pdf export) all
| at the same time.
|
| To be quite frank, Org mode is a _lifestyle_ which existed long
| before Notion or Obsidian did. Saying that it has a barrier to
| entry is a bit of an understatement.
|
| Having said all that, quite ironically, I've migrated over to
| Obsidian because I started using Intellij more for work,
| meaning that I don't need Emacs for its other capabilities all
| that much.
| jcynix wrote:
| Markdown is a markup tool, i.e. you decorate your text. Orgmode
| on the other hand is a complete toolbox where you can add tags
| to notes, filter on these tags, manage calendars, etc. You can
| enter tables both for formatting and spreadsheet like
| calculation.
|
| And you can insert snippets of code into your notes, like
| #+BEGIN_SRC shell ls | wc -l find . -type
| f -name "*foo*" #+END_SRC
|
| (or javascript, elisp, html, ... instead of shell) where the
| markup is changed appropriately in these regions.
|
| You can even augment orgmode with elisp code if you are so
| inclined.
| myaccountonhn wrote:
| I don't use it anymore but org-babel allows you to execute
| commands in code blocks. I would use that to build interactive
| explorations when learning how APIs work for example. I didn't
| find that nearly as seamless with Markdown.
|
| Combined with org-agenda you also unlock a calendar with
| recurring events, task priorities and more.
| MoreQARespect wrote:
| Orgmode has standardized primitives for the things which exist
| in some markdown note taking implementations but differ from
| implementation to implementation.
|
| Markdown doesn't have a built in concept of todo or tag or
| scheduled event, for instance. It wasn't built for that.
|
| I hate emacs but orgmode is still the file format which
| contains all of the primitives I need for my notes which looks
| like it will have the most staying power. I hope to be able to
| edit the same files in 2035 using whatever brain-connection
| device everybody is using in the future that I used in 2015
| running on a netbook with 1GB of RAM.
|
| Markdown files from the note taking flavor of today will have
| to be migrated somehow.
| polivier wrote:
| `org-mode` used with Emacs is the tinkerer's dream playgound.
| Apart from the basic markdown stuff, there are so many wild
| things you can do. For example, org code blocks are not just
| the basic markdown code blocks that show formatted code. Org
| code blocks can actually be executed and can show the output of
| the code, inline. So you can write code blocks (that may
| include data found in variables/tables/etc elsewhere in the org
| file), then "refresh" your org file and all the inline outputs
| of the code blocks will be updated.
| faustlast wrote:
| Besides being a markup for structured text with special syntax
| for links/tables/math, here are my highlights that I use:
|
| 1. Code blocks that can be executed have their result captured
|
| 2. Links to everything
|
| 3. Drawing vector images (SVG) with a tablet
|
| 4. Perform calculations on tabular data (like a simple Excel
| sheet)
|
| 5. Agenda (connected to Google Calendar)
|
| 6. Spaced repetition system for language learning
|
| 7. LaTeX export for reports/presentations with citations
|
| Expanding:
|
| 1.1. Execute code on different remote machines
|
| 1.2. Work with sessions and execute code asynchronously
|
| 1.3. Use noweb syntax for reusing code blocks
|
| 1.4. Tangle ("export") source blocks to files (locally or in a
| remote machine!)
|
| 1.5. Use a source block to generate a graph/plot and view the
| figure in the same place
|
| 1.6. Use narrow functionalities to automate script executions
| (example: execute all blocks in this section).
|
| 2.1. Links to PDF pages, commits/pr`s/branches, email, other
| files` particular lines, remote files, web pages, etc.
|
| 7.1. Very easy to select which sections I want to export or not
|
| 7.2. Include hand-drawn SVG graphics in the PDF output
|
| 7.3. Generate Beamer presentations
| slightwinder wrote:
| Markdown is just a markup-language, while orgmode is a tool-
| collection with a community of its own, which happens to also
| come with its own markup-language. That's not the same, and
| comparing them on that level makes little sense.
|
| > Genuinely curious because I tried at some point and it felt
| too heavy.
|
| Which part felt heavy? The syntax? The tooling? The setup?
| orgmode's purpose is to deliver an environment for managing
| your notes, tasks, data, etc. Of course, will it be more heavy
| than just the markup-language alone, as most documentation
| focuses on the tooling and which jobs you can execute with it.
| This more akin to a whole Office-suit, than a simple plaintext-
| editor.
| NoboruWataya wrote:
| I hear so many people rave about orgmode on HN, all of them emacs
| users. This seems obvious since it is an emacs feature after all,
| but if orgmode is so good, has it not been implemented outside of
| emacs? Is there a standalone orgmode implementation that non-
| emacs users should look into?
| doctor_blood wrote:
| What would be the point? Without emacs all you're left with is
| another markup language.
| sligor wrote:
| What makes org mode tied to emacs ? I really need to try org
| mode to understand it. If only I had time...
| Torwald wrote:
| Elisp, but not really elisp, more the environment of elisp.
| It's a LISP machine. Hard to explain, it's a different way
| of computing. Another living instance of this model of
| computing is a Smalltalk image. Others have written about
| how LISPing makes you a better coder much better than I
| could. Try it out!
| codethief wrote:
| I disagree, Elisp doesn't tie org to Emacs at all. What
| does tie org to Emacs is the fact that Emacs' org-mode
| (i.e. the mode you use to edit org files) provides a
| great DevEx when editing org files, including lots of
| convenience shortcuts. (Again, the fact that those are
| written in Elisp is irrelevant.)
| skydhash wrote:
| It does. A lot of advanced options in Org have escape
| hatches for more code, and the fact that you configure
| org in Elisp and are free to hack on org provided
| functions due to the Elips environment add to its
| versality.
| skydhash wrote:
| It's really integrated into emacs.
|
| First, you have the calendar, but it's not just a date
| picker, it's also shows holidays and other markers.
|
| Then you have the capture (quick entry) where you have the
| full power of emacs environment plus lisp language to code
| anything you want. Emacs have other applications like a
| file manager, mail readers, document readers..., and you
| can capture the context as well as the note itself.
|
| Then, there's the agenda, which is fully customizable with
| a mix of options and code.
|
| And there's the exporters. Notice that emacs have support
| for most of the format, so it's more like an handover to
| some other parts of emacs. But you don't merely transform
| the document from org to html as an example. You extract
| the html from the org structure as you can filter sections
| out. Also a lot of options there (and code)
|
| And code blocks (named babel). That you can execute.
|
| So org can be a static document format or a dynamic
| environment. And all of that because of emacs as the buffer
| concept is very fluid. In emacs there are only buffers.
| Each buffer is assigned a major mode which is just a set of
| functions that does stuff on the buffer text. And you have
| the minor modes (more functions) that are more like
| plugins. And you're free to hack on them. It's just that
| the default set looks like a text editor.
| pbmonster wrote:
| As a very practical example: You take notes in org-mode,
| and as you do in many modern note-taking apps, you use
| copious links between notes.
|
| But org-mode is inside Emacs, and Emacs is (can be) also
| your email client. So your notes can link to emails. Emacs
| is also your calendar. So your notes can link to events.
|
| You can extend this to almost anything if you like Emacs
| enough. Your notes link to source code files (or your notes
| contain code, which can be executed from your notes). Emacs
| is also your git front end, so you could link to commits.
| eawgewag wrote:
| This is a great comment. My "Aha" moment with org-mode
| was when I started using it to track my TODOs on ongoing
| branch. I was able to link bookmarks to actual code from
| my org mode agenda, jump back and forth between my todo
| list and the actual code in my repo, add more, add
| context, etc.
| ubermonkey wrote:
| I think you're missing what he's asking.
|
| Orgmode includes agendas and whatnot in addition to the
| markup; any Org implementation somewhere else would need to
| include those.
| stevekemp wrote:
| There is an implementation for neovim, and some "viewer"
| applicatrions for android, etc:
|
| https://orgmode.org/tools.html
|
| Basics are easy to replicate, but one of the reasons why org is
| so useful is because it is tied into the emacs ecosystem, so
| you can write extensions/configuration tweaks in lisp. You can
| hookup agenda (calendars), etc, etc, and those things don't
| really translate so well to external tools.
|
| If you had to write a lisp interpreter, and fake "bare minimum"
| compatability? At that point you'd be better off just running
| emacs for real.
| amelius wrote:
| > You can hookup agenda (calendars), etc, etc, and those
| things don't really translate so well to external tools.
|
| Sounds like a replication of Unix inside an editor if you ask
| me.
| vslavkin wrote:
| Well, yes. I'd say that's what emacs is. A framework for,
| mostly, text based applications in lisp. The advantage is
| its "unified interface".
|
| Everything is configured in the same language, uses mostly
| the same keybinds, and can easily be integrated with other
| apps of the framework.
| anthk wrote:
| If _every_ Unix tool outputed TSV, yes. In Emacs everything
| it 's Elisp.
| input_sh wrote:
| Wait until you learn many of the default bash keyboard
| shortcuts (like Ctrl + A / E to move to the beginning/end
| of the line) actually come from emacs.
| BeetleB wrote:
| I know you meant it as a criticism, but Emacs years view it
| as a feature.
| pydry wrote:
| orgzly revived for android is pretty great.
|
| more tooling would be good though, especially command line
| tools to get data in and out.
| bananapub wrote:
| 1. it has, there's various mobile apps and a reimplementation
| for vim and vscode at least
|
| 2. it's very very good and having access to it is enough reason
| for some people to _become_ emacs users, much like magit
| nurumaik wrote:
| Standalone orgmode implementation is called emacs with org
| mode. I'm that person that uses emacs solely for orgmode and
| write code in other editors (vscode/zed/cursor), we also exist
| thyristan wrote:
| Same. I do use emacs with spacemacs, because that is the only
| thing that makes emacs viable to me, only to use it solely
| for orgmode.
|
| Everything else happens in vim/nvim or zed.
| DemiGuru wrote:
| Have you considered incorporating orgmode plugin with
| Neovim? [https://github.com/nvim-orgmode]
| eadmund wrote:
| > if orgmode is so good, has it not been implemented outside of
| emacs
|
| Org Mode _is_ that good, but part of its goodness is due to
| being in Emacs.
|
| Emacs is not really an editor: it's an easily user-extensible
| operating environment with a remarkably shallow learning curve
| (seriously: one can go years just setting variables before
| moving up to simple functions and then starting to explore).
| Having all that power so easily accessible is a part of what
| makes Org Mode great. It's what means that each Org Mode user
| can mold his experience to his needs.
| xenodium wrote:
| I've written a handful iOS apps powered by org. Journelly is my
| latest https://xenodium.com/journelly-like-tweeting-but-for-
| your-ey...
|
| I got quite a few users who either come from Markdown or simply
| don't care about the internal implementation. Here's a
| wonderful writeup by a user
| https://ellanew.com/ptpl/157-2025-05-19-journelly-is-org-for...
|
| ps. Markdown is also coming to Journelly
| https://xenodium.com/markdown-is-coming-to-journelly
|
| edit: My other org-based iOS apps
|
| - Flat Habits (habits tracker): https://flathabits.com
|
| - Plain Org (general purpose org viewer/editor):
| https://plainorg.com
|
| - Scratch (a scratch buffer):
| https://apps.apple.com/us/app/scratch/id1671420139
| ants_everywhere wrote:
| I think it's kind of the other way around.
|
| Emacs is a universal lisp environment, and org-mode is a
| lightweight markup language that works well with it.
|
| You can port the markup language, but it's a heavy lift to port
| the lisp way of thinking to another language.
| durazabu wrote:
| The reason is that elisp org-mode is huge and re-implementing
| it without elisp is a great undertaking.
|
| I started an implementation in javascript that I integrated in
| an obsidian plugin [0]. But the plugin has a long way to go
| before reaching feature parity with emacs orgmode.
|
| [0] https://github.com/BBazard/obsidian-orgmode-cm6
| arethuza wrote:
| There is an orgmode for VS Code that I used for a while:
|
| https://github.com/vscode-org-mode/vscode-org-mode
| rootnod3 wrote:
| If it doesn't support Babel or Agenda, it loses 90% of the
| reason to use it.
| rootnod3 wrote:
| The biggest strength is not the file format or basically the
| org mode markdown flavor. The strength comes from integrating
| it with all the other Emacs stuff. Org-babel for example, think
| of it as a suped up Jupyter notebook. And it integrates with
| the emacs calendar/agenda. The closest you can get is maybe
| Obsidian's Dataview plugin, but it absolutely pales in
| comparison to Emacs Org.
|
| It is one of THE main reasons for me to use Emacs.
| kashyapc wrote:
| Like someone else mentioned in this thread, I'm not a
| "traditional" Emacs user. I use Emacs only for Org Mode; for
| the rest I use Vim, or occasionally something else. (For the
| rest of your question, there are some good responses from
| others.)
| eawgewag wrote:
| Orgmode isn't really just a MD equivalent. It's the integration
| into Emacs and the entire platform that makes it so incredible
| and powerful. I would love an alternative because as TS
| developer I don't use Emacs anymore (non VSCode LSP is a
| nightmare to run) but it just doesn't exist :(
| anthk wrote:
| Org-Mode with Hyperbole it's like doing computing in 2070, but
| without bullshit AI LLM's. Try it and you'll understand.
|
| https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cFdgpb0TeQo
|
| If you are a Lisp programmer, you can OFC use ob-lisp with it
| (and maybe there's ob-elisp to learn Elisp in a literate way).
|
| This is like a Jupyter netbook, with steroids. Org Babel:
|
| https://orgmode.org/worg/org-contrib/babel/
|
| Supported languages:
|
| https://orgmode.org/worg/org-contrib/babel/languages/index.h...
| aquariusDue wrote:
| Hyperbole is the weirdest thing ever (in a good way), I can't
| exactly describe it to people either because it's a monolithic
| package that is made up of a number of packages (like the one
| for window control) but once you start using it and adopting it
| gradually you reach an epiphany. At that point the usefulness
| of Hyperbole is evident but until then nada, it seems more
| hassle than it's worth (though there are moments when it has
| bugs relating to other packages, like org, but those are
| quickly fixed by the maintainers in my experience).
|
| Though a downside is that you end up curating a workflow that
| is so tailored to you that it seems weird from the outside, if
| it ever leaks, i.e. weird notation in git commit messages.
| That's due to sprinkling implicit and explicit "buttons"
| (pieces of text roughtly) throughout text (source code or
| otherwise).
| tra3 wrote:
| Can you share some of your use cases? Been on my radar for a
| while..
| aquariusDue wrote:
| The most straightforward would be opening URLs in various
| places. Sure, org-mode has something like this built-in and
| there's the Embark package that even has the embark-dwim
| command which saves you a keystroke basically, but I still
| prefer Hyperbole for this bit and it doesn't interfere with
| Embark either. Same goes for file and folder paths.
|
| There's also more fine grained stuff like opening specific
| commits on GitHub for example. E.g. throw a
| gh#rswgnu/hyperbole/5ae3550 and when you M-RET on that
| "button" it automagically opens it in your browser.
|
| You can insert "buttons" with labels on the fly in a buffer
| interactively by going through a menu like {C-h h i c} and
| specifying a label, its type and so on from a list of
| previously defined button types with their own properties.
| Those buttons in turn can call any command with preset
| arguments.
|
| I can go to a file or hunk from the Magit status buffer by
| pressing the aforementioned Action button (binded to M-RET
| or a side mouse button too in my case).
|
| I barely scratched the surface really.
| silcoon wrote:
| I wish there's something like Obsidian with the same support for
| org-mode that Emacs has. A few pros:
|
| - Organize notes in org-mode is much quicker - The best support
| for lists (and I do list most of the times) - Tags and properties
| - Perfect integration with agenda - Great TODOs support - Code
| blocks with highlights, execution and results
| medstrom wrote:
| Logseq has buggy syncing and imposes some odd constraints on
| your files if you want to keep it easy to edit the same file
| from both Logseq and Emacs, but in principle, it's all there!
|
| Not sure if it can execute code blocks tho.
| ubermonkey wrote:
| After a few attempts over the years to move to emacs -- all
| them failures -- what finally got me to use it consistently was
| Org. The funny thing is I still don't use it for coding or
| other writing; emacs is on my computer as the org platform.
|
| I am VERY interested in Obsidian, which seems like it could
| definitely support an org-like system. It's _almost_ there as
| far as my own use cases are concerned, and the seamless sync to
| mobile is really enticing.
|
| But goddammit, my fingers now know how to move through org
| buffers pretty well, and Obsidian lags on that front, so I may
| be stuck. ;)
| kleinishere wrote:
| What specific features / functions are most compelling for
| lists? Of course moving a tree around with different header
| levels. But anything specifically great with lists?
| dbmikus wrote:
| Check out Org-Roam: https://www.orgroam.com/
|
| It has some Obsidian-like features inside Org Mode.
|
| So, if you're looking for an easier-to-use UI, it's not it, but
| if you're looking for Obsidian-like linking and backlinking, it
| has that.
| moi2388 wrote:
| I tried several times, but I just can't get EMacs or org mode
| working.
|
| It's like every single functionality only works 90%, and breaks
| on the last 10% required to actually be a valid alternative :(
| nanna wrote:
| I think a hurdle one has to make to adopt Emacs is to stop
| expecting things to work as you might have come to expect them
| from other programmes. Sometimes this is for historical
| reasons, but the main reason is that Emacs just has it's own
| logic, which may seem counterintuitive at first but often has
| very good reasons behind it. Try to persist past through that
| final 10% and you may find there are reasons why they're as
| they are. And when you need help use the channels out there...
| everybodyknows wrote:
| Try asking your favorite LLM.
|
| ChatGPT4o has been a godsend for adding helpful snippets of
| Elisp to my own ~/.emacs file.
| jrm4 wrote:
| Funny, I just posted a standalone question but I'll repeat it
| here:
|
| Anyone out there using Generative AI to modify their environment
| et al? Basically to attack the whole "lisp" thing?
|
| I see the potential in the power and would love to get back into
| it (I used Org-Mode for about a year then gave up on it) and
| wondering if anyone else has tried.
| Kiboneu wrote:
| Yes! I experimented with it on my EXWM setup. After some back
| and forth via Aider, it made me a module to help me control and
| monitor tasks on my timewarrior setup, giving me a pomodoro-
| like indicator on my taskbar (changing colors as it approaches
| one hour).
|
| It was a cool experience! I had it evaluate the code via
| commands to the emacs daemon, without reloading EXWM (ballsy,
| but I was prepared for failure).
|
| EXWM is extremely flexible, but there is a high barrier of
| entry to using and customizing it. Having an LLM embedded to a
| live-evaluate desktop environment makes the interface more
| approachable without reducing its flexibility as much.
|
| It also allows you to create explicit controls that map to the
| user's muscle memory and sub-symbolic sensing of the
| environment, while staying out of the way during normal usage
| -- a different paradigm than embedding an agent as an interface
| in its own right to control the environment (via speech or
| text).
|
| Since open source software is readily modifiable, maybe soon it
| will unironically be the year of the linux desktop.
| Scarblac wrote:
| Is there are good way to share org files between a laptop and a
| phone? I want to mark to-dos as done, add new ones and notes etc
| from both.
| dargscisyhp wrote:
| Syncthing, maybe?
___________________________________________________________________
(page generated 2025-07-23 23:01 UTC)