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.