Obsidian and these newer tools share markdown + local files, but they're aimed at different assumptions about who reads and edits the vault. Obsidian's default is "human reads and curates; plugins optionally enhance." The AI-first cohort (Tolaria, Sig in the sibling comment, and several others) assumes the AI reads and writes as a first-class agent, which makes design choices like how the app reacts to files changing underneath it (cf. the Zettlr comment downthread) a core concern rather than an edge case.

Worth watching how each of these tools positions the AI: as a UX copilot inside the editor, or as an autonomous agent with file-system access via local CLI/MCP.

>open-source

Exactly - cooperation is not incentivized properly

Yes, but the claim is presumably that this one is good.

At least it's Tauri!

Please cut this out. You really don't want to live in a world where individuals are discouraged from trying to build things that are good.

If you want something to stick around: you have to use and pay for it.

But if they ever choose to decommission it, they have the chance to do the funniest thing:

https://scryfall.com/card/plst/INV-156/obliterate

I hAvE a FeW qUaLmS wItH tHiS aPp

https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=9224

You're right. We should absolutely only rely on "Ask sales for price" closed-source software from megacorps, that get worse on every release, and get sunset anyway when the funding runs out.

Some people...

You do realize that would have once described GCC and Linux, right?

[dead]