Building a LEGO robot with the Mindstorms Education Set
How do minimalism and Apple products go together, when Apple is so expensive?
I have been using Apple products almost exclusively since the mid-90s. Now and then, I engage in debates about the pros and cons of Apple products compared to their competitors, especially regarding the price difference. And of course, the question arises whether minimalism and using Apple products even go together. It creates an ambivalence between design culture and the contradiction of consumption.
Continue reading “How do minimalism and Apple products go together, when Apple is so expensive?”The Zettelkasten as a Knowledge Management System and Beyond
There are a few topics that have been on my mind for decades, one of which is how to store and retrieve information and knowledge in a meaningful way—essentially, a Memex. In the 90s, I was a fan of Apple’s HyperCard, and since then, I’ve tried many things, but nothing has proven reliable. Data formats have disappeared (like Apple’s HyperCard), and even though the technical possibilities today are much broader than back then, I don’t have the impression that they have solved the fundamental problem. There is no quick fix that reads articles and books for you and also makes you understand them. I don’t trust summary services like Blinkist, not to mention that they don’t help me with scientific articles either.
In recent months, I’ve turned again to a system that I had used in the 90s but abandoned in favor of HyperCard: the Zettelkasten. Not just any box with index cards, but a Zettelkasten following the Luhmannian principle. Niklas Luhmann was one of the most significant sociologists of the 20th century, with an incredible number of academic publications to his name. His Zettelkasten, which actually consists of several boxes, contains about 90,000 slips and is being digitized at Bielefeld University. Luhmann attributed his productivity to this Zettelkasten system, and after several months using it, I can understand why. So how does the Zettelkasten work?
First of all, there are a few fundamental principles:
- The quality of a paper depends on what has already been written. In an ideal world, the thoughts in the Zettelkasten are already formulated well enough to be directly incorporated. The goal of the Zettelkasten, therefore, is to generate insights that are worth publishing.
- Everything you read is processed and placed into the Zettelkasten. Rather than following a strict plan (as is often recommended when writing academic papers), everything goes into the Zettelkasten and is, if possible, linked together right away. Luhmann himself always wrote his slips with the thought in mind of how they would fit into the existing notes. But new ideas can also emerge from the Zettelkasten at any time.
- Writing about everything instead of starting directly with a hypothesis also has the advantage of reducing exposure to confirmation bias, which causes one to ignore anything that might challenge the hypothesis.
- Highlighting in a text is useless, the learning effect is zero. According to Luhmann, thinking cannot happen without writing. Handwritten notes are preferable to those typed on a computer, as they tend to capture the essence better, thus facilitating understanding.
- The Zettelkasten is not an archive, nor is it an idea graveyard like Moleskine notebooks.
- There is no information hierarchy; thoughts can simply be inserted into Luhmann’s system wherever they fit. For example, if you have a note numbered “1,2,1” and another “1,2,2,” you can just insert a “1,2,1,a” if a thought is missing here. There’s no need to pre-think endlessly about what the best structure is.
- Self-discipline is more important than IQ. A smart working environment ensures that you don’t face resistance from the start.
- Daily work with the Zettelkasten leads to a new KPI for knowledge workers: How many notes are created each day!
How exactly does the Zettelkasten work?
- When reading a text, “Literature Notes” are created, which contain only your own thoughts about the text, written in your own words.
- These then lead to “Permanent Notes,” which are added to the Zettelkasten. The Literature Notes are discarded (this is also why I sent back my Scribe, since the Literature Notes could not be created with it).
- Additionally, there are “Fleeting Notes,” which contain all the ideas you have.
The Zettelkasten system is highly minimalist, with no fancy notebooks or software tools. The reduction, or even restriction, to what is essential also stimulates creativity and thinking (see Stokes 2001 and Rheinberger 1997). Of course, there are software solutions like The Archive, and they would have advantages for me: I don’t always have my Zettelkasten with me. On the other hand, I’ve learned that when I’m sitting in front of a computer or iPad, I tend to get distracted. Therefore, I now carry index cards with me.
Here is an interesting video about Luhmann’s Zettelkasten, where he explains it himself starting at minute 37:26:
And here is the researcher who is now delving into the Zettelkasten:
Why I Will Return My Kindle Scribe
I was actually really excited about the Kindle Scribe I ordered, because it seemed to solve two problems I have with using my reMarkable:
- I don’t like writing my notes at the edge of a PDF, if there is even enough margin, because my work notes are the preliminary version of the final notes that go into my Zettelkasten. Simply highlighting something is not very useful, as some studies also suggest. I need to be able to write my own thoughts on a text, and that’s something the reMarkable 2 doesn’t allow me to do.
- Light 🙂
Light is available, but otherwise, the Kindle Scribe has been a very disappointing experience for me. Of course, I don’t really want to throw money into Amazon’s pockets or store my data in their cloud, but the topics of “working through paper” and “reading” are of great importance to me. Since I don’t jot down anything confidential… one must choose the lesser evil. Perhaps someday there will be a solution that works without the cloud. But how good is the Scribe really?
Continue reading “Why I Will Return My Kindle Scribe”Amazon Kindle Scribe versus reMarkable 2
Update: I have now tested the Kindle Scribe, and you can find the full report here!
I had one of the first Kindles in Germany and even wrote an app for it. I also had one of the first reMarkables and now own a reMarkable 2. Apparently, I’m susceptible to tech gadgets, especially when I hope they could potentially boost my productivity. Now, Amazon is entering this market with the Kindle Scribe, directly competing with companies like reMarkable. Here’s the introduction video from an Amazon event:
With the reMarkable, I became critical when they suddenly introduced a subscription model. While this didn’t affect me, since early buyers could keep the Connect subscription “for free” for life, reMarkable clearly realized that they weren’t getting good karma points for this move and changed their model. With the Kindle, I got one of the devices that had a built-in SIM card for which you didn’t have to pay any fees worldwide. That was really convenient, being able to read my newspaper every day no matter where I was in the world.
Will the new Kindle Scribe replace the reMarkable? I haven’t yet received a Kindle Scribe for testing, but already a few interesting aspects are noticeable. Both devices offer a tremendous advantage: focusing on the essentials. I’m not familiar with the current Kindle devices, but my old Kindle displayed books wonderfully, and it only had a web browser for Wikipedia—pure focus. Annotating texts was easier on my Kindle since it had a keyboard. But, of course, it wasn’t as simple as writing a note with a pen. However, I could easily export these notes using my tool.
Let’s take a closer look at the specs:
- Price: The Amazon Kindle Scribe is cheaper. While the reMarkable “only” costs 349 euros, that’s the price without the pen. The cheapest pen variant costs 79 euros, so under 400 euros you can’t get anything. The Kindle, on the other hand, currently costs 369 euros for the cheapest version with the pen.
- Storage: The Scribe is available with 16, 32, and 64 GB. The reMarkable only has 8 GB. The 32-GB version of the Kindle automatically includes the premium pen, which is the version I ordered.
- Pen: Both systems use pens that require nibs. Not much is known yet about the Amazon Scribe pen, but I suspect it works similarly to the reMarkable pen. It doesn’t need power, and there is a premium version that offers a virtual eraser. Unlike the colleague here, I don’t expect the pen to need charging.
- Dimensions: The reMarkable measures 187 × 246 × 4.7 mm, while the dimensions of the Scribe are not yet known. The Scribe appears to be larger despite the smaller screen, as its bezel is wider, especially on the left. We do know that the Scribe weighs 433 grams, which is 30 grams more than the reMarkable 2.
- Display: The reMarkable has a 10.3-inch screen with a resolution of 1872 x 1404 (226 DPI), while the Scribe has a 10.2-inch screen with a resolution of 300 dpi. The reMarkable uses an E Ink Carta display, although they say their Canvas technology is only partially based on it. The Scribe has a glare-free Paperwhite display. The Scribe also has a light that adjusts to the ambient brightness, whereas the reMarkable does not. I’m not sure if I would like the light, as I bought the reMarkable partly because I wouldn’t get more awake in the evening. But sometimes it’s annoying to have to find a light source.
- Charging: Both devices charge via USB-C.
- Battery Life: Initially, Amazon claimed the Scribe’s battery life was “months,” whereas the reMarkable lasts about a week for me. Amazon has since walked back that claim.
- Document Storage: Documents are stored in the cloud, and there is no software available yet for the Scribe.
- Document Editing: On the Scribe, it will be possible to edit Word documents. However, I don’t expect integration with Dropbox and Google Drive, as with the reMarkable. Overall, managing documents with the reMarkable is a bit cumbersome. You can send files via email, but otherwise, you always need the app.
What interests me about the Scribe? Over the last few months, I’ve been exploring Luhmann’s Zettelkasten method and now have such a system at home. With the reMarkable, it bothers me that I couldn’t get the notes I wanted to make, not the permanent notes, but my working notes. So I always carry index cards with me, which is pretty unwieldy with the reMarkable. Writing on virtual index cards would be possible with the Scribe, as you can attach a note to a text snippet and export it later. For me, that’s the killer app. I also hope that importing and exporting documents will be easier. I’ll test it and report back here.
For reMarkable, Amazon’s entry into the market means this technology will reach the masses, but reMarkable won’t benefit from that. Quite the opposite. Because Amazon offers a convenient way to access content through its store, and its awareness campaign will convert potential reMarkable customers.
The question for power users will be how convenient it will be to manage notes and books on the Kindle Scribe. reMarkable offers folders that can also be created and managed on the desktop. The tags functionality, which reMarkable recently introduced, is really good, but unfortunately, it only works on the device itself. On the Kindle, the software on the Mac is, at least, a disaster; there’s no recognizable organization.
Working More Productively with the Apple Stage Manager
Apple’s new macOS version, Ventura, as well as the new iPadOS version 16, which will be released in the second half of 2022, bring many new features. One of the most hyped tools is the new multitasking feature, Stage Manager. Let’s take a closer look at it here.
What exactly does Stage Manager do?
Here’s what the press release says:
Stage Manager provides a completely new multitasking experience, where apps and windows are automatically organized, allowing users to quickly and easily switch between tasks. For the first time, users can create overlapping windows of different sizes in a single view on the iPad, drag and drop windows from the side, or open apps from the Dock to create groups of apps—enabling faster, more flexible multitasking. The window of the app the user is working in is displayed in the center, while other open apps and windows are arranged on the left side in order of their recency.
Apart from the marketing fluff, there are three key pieces of information here:
- On the left, apps and windows are arranged in order of their recency.
- You can group apps and windows.
- On the iPad, you can now use overlapping windows of different sizes (we’ll cover the limitations below).
Let’s first take a look at the macOS version. In the following screenshot, we can see 5 apps/windows on the left side. If you look closely, you’ll notice even more, as two apps/windows are already grouped (at the very bottom).
When you click on these windows, you’ll see them stacked on top of each other, here with a different example:
On my rather small 14″ screen, this doesn’t make much sense. While I can still switch between windows using Command-Tab, I can’t see the windows related to my task in the way I need to. With such a small screen, it’s probably better to place each window needed for a task separately in Stage Manager.
The organization of windows still doesn’t work all that well. For example, RStudio opens a new window when I commit code. This is not assigned to the main RStudio window but instead opens as a completely new window. This is also visible in the screenshot above with a Mail window. It doesn’t seem fully thought through to me.
However, what’s kind of nice: If you’re watching a YouTube video in a browser window, it will continue playing in the left sidebar. Not that you’d be able to see much, but in YouTube’s Theater mode, you can still follow the video a bit. How this benefits concentration is another matter.
What are the advantages?
At first, I was a bit disappointed with Stage Manager. What’s supposed to be better about switching between different apps for a task? For me, the advantage lies in something completely different, which Apple probably didn’t intend.
When you switch from one app to another today, you lose sight of the previous app. This can lead to forgetting what you actually wanted to do (“Quickly check what exactly was written in the email… oh, there’s a new email, I need to read that first”). However, because the previous apps are still visible, you’re quickly reminded of what you were actually supposed to do. This has worked quite well for me in the few days I’ve been using Stage Manager.
How does Stage Manager work on the iPad?
Stage Manager is also available on the iPad, but only for iPads with an M1 processor. My less-than-a-year-old iPad Air cannot use Stage Manager. Nevertheless, I was able to test Stage Manager on another iPad.
First of all, I wondered how much sense Stage Manager makes on a small iPad screen. Of course, iPads can also be connected to an external display, and it likely works well in that case. Otherwise, I see the same advantages and disadvantages as with the macOS version. Here’s the screen with grouped apps on the left:
The stacked windows on the iPad make even less sense to me here, though I only have an 11″ model.
Do you really need Stage Manager?
I’m a bit concerned that Stage Manager will meet the same fate as Mission Control: hardly anyone knows about the feature, and most users probably only stumble upon it by accident. Additionally, Stage Manager needs to be activated first. My guess is that most users install the new OS versions simply because they are installed automatically, not because they really want them (unlike in the past, when people eagerly awaited a new macOS version, like macOS 8 in 1997, for which you also had to pay nearly 200 euros). On the other hand, sometimes you only realize how good a feature is once you have it.
The other new features in the latest OS versions are cosmetic. The system preferences on macOS now look exactly like those on iOS and iPadOS. I’m really curious about Freeform, but unfortunately, it’s not included in the beta version yet.
When “Free” eventually turns into subscriptions: tado and reMarkable
On October 13, 2021, reMarkable announced that the previously free cloud service would now be limited, and the truly exciting features would become paid for new users. I had suspected this earlier, just as I had with tado. tado had announced a subscription in August 2018, but they backtracked for the first customers. While I had to purchase the new app for about 20 euros to use the new features, at least I don’t have to pay any subscription fees.
With both companies, I wasn’t sure why they didn’t include a subscription model from the start. Because in both cases, it was clear that costs would increase as more users accessed the servers. For reMarkable, the costs would be even higher since they offer 8 GB of cloud storage. It should have been obvious from the beginning that at some point, a subscription would have to be introduced to offset the growing costs associated with the increasing number of users. Did both companies avoid the subscription model because they thought it might deter buyers? Aren’t the first customers usually early adopters who are less price-sensitive?
I sold my reMarkable a few months ago, not because of the impending subscription model, but because I simply want fewer gadgets, and it didn’t fit into my workflow. At the end of the day, reMarkable is a niche product, because the desire for focus in a time when distraction is either sought or found by distraction is only present in a small number of users. Even though I think it’s a great product, I don’t believe it will ever be widely adopted by the masses.
GarageBand has been stopped – The case is to blame
Normally, I don’t use GarageBand, but since the youngest loves making music, I gave him the iPad to try it out. Unfortunately, the app kept crashing with the error message:
GarageBand has been stopped. GarageBand was interrupted by another app and cannot be used. Once the interruption is over, playback or recording can be resumed.
The solution was simple: the iPad case. I had bought a cheap case, simply because every device you buy usually comes with additional costs, and I thought I could avoid that. Apparently not. In the forums, the solution is blamed on a software issue that occurs when using a non-Apple case. I suspect there won’t be a fix for this anytime soon. But it’s pretty crazy that an iPad case costs at least 200 euros for a good one. The top model, the Apple Magic Keyboard, costs around 300 euros.
First experiences with the Apple Silicon Macs with the M1.
I have already experienced a processor change at Apple. My Apple career began in 1996 with a PowerBook 5300, which I absolutely loved—despite its 640×480 pixel grayscale display. On the one hand, a Mac laptop at that time was still something very special and rare (admittedly, at an exorbitant price, but it had been provided to me by my then employer), and it had a keyboard that felt incredibly good and, above all, sounded wonderfully. On the other hand, compared to the Windows PCs I had used before, it was also extremely reliable. With 8 MB of RAM and a 500 MB hard drive, it was also quite well-equipped. This PowerBook was the first to feature a Motorola PowerPC processor, so there had already been a kind of transition shortly before.
In 2006, Apple switched to Intel processors, a move that was extraordinary at the time, especially since in the 90s, Apple had aired commercials where a Motorola processor roasted an Intel processor. For the transition, Apple offered a program called Rosetta, which allowed PowerPC applications to run on Intel-based Macs. Typically, these programs ran slower. The commercial was actually referenced again when the first Intel Macs were introduced, around minute 1:05 of the presentation.
Now another transition. In 2019, I bought the 16″ MacBook Pro after many years with a MacBook Air. I hadn’t kept any other Apple computer longer than the Air, but over time, it had become too slow for what I was doing with it (R, a lot of work in the terminal with sed, awk, Lightroom, etc.). I hadn’t upgraded earlier because I absolutely didn’t want the awful butterfly keyboard. The return to scissor-switch keyboards began with the 16″ MacBook, but I still couldn’t get used to the huge device. Not to mention, it became incredibly hot and loud, and the battery life was far from Apple’s claims. For example, when I trained a machine learning model, the MacBook got so hot that I didn’t need to heat my office anymore. And during any Zoom or Webex call, the battery drained faster than an ice cube melting in the summer heat.
I spend quite a bit of time waiting for the results of a calculation, even if it’s only 20 or 30 seconds sometimes, but it adds up over the day, and sometimes it’s several minutes or even hours. I usually know in advance how long it will take, but I don’t start another task for just half a minute because it disrupts my train of thought. Data analysis is also a meditative act for me. So, the speed of a computer is extremely important. Not just for data analysis, but for all other tasks on the computer as well. It just has to feel smooth.
The speed of a calculation in R depends on many factors:
- Memory (yes, R loads everything into memory)
- Processor speed
- Parallelization
For memory, the first Apple Silicon models aren’t particularly well-equipped—16 GB is the maximum. It doesn’t help that the path from the processor to memory is especially short. The operating system uses part of the memory, the running programs also use some, so there’s not much left. Especially when working with large files, as I often do, which can sometimes reach 50GB or more, swapping is almost “predetermined.” Parallelization is not possible yet, as the necessary packages are not available—Homebrew, for example, is still not available.
Additionally, R is currently not available for the new Macs. It lacks (still) a Fortran compiler, and this is not only a problem for R but also for many machine learning software extensions for Python. Who would have thought that this old programming language could still have such a big influence today? Of course, R also runs via Rosetta, but then I could have just not bought a new Mac and let myself be used as a beta tester for Apple 🙂 But, small spoiler: Even with Rosetta, the Intel version of R runs faster on the M1, and it seems that’s not just the case for me.
I initially purchased a Mac mini with 8GB of RAM and a 512GB SSD to test how good the performance actually is and whether I could make the transition. I was able to pick up the Mac mini the same day from the Apple Store, and from the start, I was amazed at how smooth everything felt on this computer. R worked flawlessly, though RStudio showed error messages frequently. No big deal. But it soon became clear that the memory limitation was an issue. When trying to process a 200GB file (using sort, awk, sed in the shell), at some point, the hard drive filled up with swapping, and the process failed. Okay, maybe the mini is just a bit too weak for that task. What surprised me, though, was that not once did the fan kick in—this would not have been the case with the 16″ MacBook Pro. So, all in all, everything seemed great…
…except for the Bluetooth. My Mac mini also had the well-known Bluetooth problems. Specifically, the mouse loses its connection multiple times a day, which is extremely inconvenient when you’re showing a demo during a video conference. Not good, very frustrating. I tried all sorts of tips, including using a wired connection to the network instead of Wi-Fi. No improvement. It’s unclear whether this is a hardware or software issue. A chat with Apple Support dropped multiple times, and eventually, I got tired of it because, you know, I have a job too. An update to the Big Sur beta helped a little, and as of yesterday, the computer is running on 11.1, so I’m hoping it will be better now, and that it’s not a hardware issue.
Another not-so-pleasant experience was the sound. I have never experienced an Apple computer with such poor sound quality—my old PowerBook 5300 probably sounded better. They could have definitely done much more with the sound.
Despite the Bluetooth issues, after 2 days, I decided to also buy a portable Apple Silicon Mac. In full configuration (16GB RAM, 2TB SSD), it costs about the same as I could sell my 16″ MacBook Pro for on the used market, and at the same time, I get double the storage space. There used to be a rule that you should calculate how much storage you might need and then multiply that size by 4. Unfortunately, there are no 8TB SSDs for these computers yet.
The computer arrived after almost 3 weeks, one week earlier than expected. Here, I noticed a small speed boost, likely due to the doubled RAM. The 200GB file also went through smoothly now, thanks to enough space on the SSD. And, just like with the Mac mini, the computer hardly seemed to break a sweat. Only once did the computer get a little warm, but not hot, and certainly not as hot as the 16″ MacBook Pro. This is also reflected in the battery life. I have yet to drain the battery in a single day. No kidding. I plug the computer in at night, and I usually still have a few hours of battery life left. It’s a completely new feeling.
The Bluetooth issue also exists with the MacBook Air. This is unpleasant, and I wonder how it could have gone unnoticed in the tests Apple conducts. That a transition doesn’t go completely smoothly is understandable, and you’re always somewhat of a guinea pig when buying the first model after a major shift. For me, it’s a trade-off: How much time do I gain by having a fast computer versus how much time do I lose when something occasionally doesn’t work. The mouse connection is of course a hygiene factor; it should just work. But with the MacBook Air, I’m not as reliant on it. So far, I’m happy with my decision, though I would have preferred 32GB or even 64GB of RAM. But those options aren’t available yet.
The sound of the MacBook Air is much better than my old Air’s, but it doesn’t compare to the 16″ MacBook Pro. No surprise, the speakers are much smaller. Still, it’s better than the mini’s sound.
The instant wake feature actually works, and sometimes I wonder if the computer was even “asleep.” The keyboard sounds almost as nice as that of the PowerBook 5300, and if anyone wonders why a keyboard should sound good, well, aesthetics don’t stop at just the visual 🙂
Remarkable 2: Experiences After the First 2 Weeks
I had purchased a used Remarkable tablet of the first generation back in May because I wanted to test whether the device was right for me before spending a lot of money on the second generation. I have already written enough about the pros and cons of the Remarkable approach, so here I will focus on the new device with comparisons to the first generation.
First of all, the Remarkable 2 looks incredibly sleek. This starts with the packaging that arrived. Everything was thoughtfully designed, with small and large packages that together formed a block that fit perfectly into the shipping box. Everything was carefully packed, especially with paper. The plastic wrap could have been avoided, though.
As an early adopter, I paid a lower price for the whole package, meaning I got some extras for a much smaller additional cost. I treated myself to a Book Folio and a Marker Plus. This marker has an “eraser” built in, meaning I don’t need to go into the menu to erase something. You get used to it very quickly. However, the “eraser” is so wide that it’s easy to erase too much. But I wouldn’t want to miss this feature anymore. It definitely makes the work easier.
The marker attaches to the Remarkable 2 just like the Apple Pencil 2 attaches to the iPad — magnetically. This is already a significant improvement over the previous solution. The Folio also sticks magnetically. However, what’s missing from the marker is the ability to store extra nibs inside it. That’s unfortunate because I found that feature extremely practical. A nib lasts me about a month, and in the last few days with a nib, you start to wonder if the writing is becoming messy. With or without the Folio, the Remarkable feels really good in the hand, and have I mentioned how sleek it looks? Even with the Folio? 🙂
Apparently, the new generation is also faster than the previous one, but I haven’t really noticed much of a difference so far. Overall, the Remarkable is still not the fastest software, and I hope they make some improvements in that area.
The Remarkable first generation looks almost cheap next to the second generation. The display size is the same, but the case is slightly larger. The plastic of the first generation always seemed a bit dirty. However, I do miss the buttons from the first generation; the swipe motion from top to bottom to return to the home screen is still a bit unfamiliar. Sometimes, I also find the response a bit sluggish. As mentioned earlier, it’s not super fast, neither the old nor the new model.
Despite daily use (sometimes more, sometimes less per day), the battery lasts surprisingly long for me, definitely over a week. The USB port, which is now built into the side panel, is a USB-C port, making it much easier to plug in.
I mainly use the Remarkable for:
- Taking notes during meetings
- Brainstorming and story writing (see below for an example of how I add a story to a PowerPoint)
- Making annotations in PDFs, such as correcting papers or adding notes to articles I need to read
- Reading books
- Journaling and planning
For all these activities, the device is extremely well-suited. I use it more than my iPad, which I could now sell. However, with the iPad, I can draw on a virtual whiteboard in Zoom calls, which is a bit more complex with the Remarkable, though still possible. Overall, I am very satisfied with the purchase. It’s a lot of money for a device that does so much less compared to an iPad, but it has exactly what I need: something analog that doesn’t strain my eyes as quickly and offers a better writing feel. Is the higher price compared to the used first-generation device justified? I don’t know. For me, it’s about how practical it is, and the new generation is definitely more practical with its longer battery life and well-thought-out accessories. The rest is an extra cost for a significantly better design and aesthetics that are in a completely different league. And yes, that’s also worth something to me. After all, who doesn’t know that the writing tool also affects writing inspiration? 🙂
Update August 23, 2021: With a heavy heart, I sold my Remarkable 2. I still think it’s an excellent device, but it just didn’t fit into my workflow. And since I’m constantly trying to reduce the number of my gadgets… 🙁
Update August 2022: I have a Remarkable again. It’s simply unbeatable when it comes to taking notes, and it’s better for reflective work where you shouldn’t be distracted…