Just to add a further point that came to me overnight, of course only DT understands its replicants, whereas many programs understand tags. Working as I do with various programs like Tinderbox, Scrivener, iThoughts, HoudahSpot, the Finder and others, tags give me a lot more flexibility. One of the people on the Tinderbox forums even wrote a little routine that extracted tags as meta data and wrote them into the text of a note, which is handy for passing the information from one program to another. And of course a lot of programs have the capability to save smart searches for meta data. Trying to pass a folder hierarchy from one program to another, on the other hand, is not likely to be the easiest trick in the world. And what if you change the folder hierarchy in one program? Are you then going to change it in others as well?
Just to add to what I wrote in reply, I am now going to be experimenting with TheBrain 10 (https://www.thebrain.com/products/thebrain). I’ve played with this before, and as I am still very dissatisfied with DT3, I shall look at it again. One thing that put me off is that it is very expensive, but at this point it may be worth it.
I’m really sorry about the situation with DT3, but the program really isn’t helping me at the moment. On the contrary, it gave me some extra work yesterday straightening out some indexed folders. Probably my fault for not setting things up properly, but it doesn’t fill me with confidence. In my case, and I emphasise it is only my case, it is beginning to feel like time to move on.
I only keep separate databases for large client matters (especially litigation) but otherwise, have one database for current matters and then groups within it for each matter. I have a separate database for each year’s archives and generally do not have these open.
I maintain folder templates for each type of matter and then just copy and paste the folder into DT, which creates a group for the matter and sub groups for aspects of it.
I dipped into this thread for the first time in a while and I am glad I did as it gave me a new perception on how I used DT2 and how it interfaced with my work.
At the heart of the matter is that I have been using hierarchical filing systems, paper or electronic, even since I was first exposed to the library card file system as a child. Over the many decades since my own filing systems have grown into a complex mind map as it were of the information I have either needed or desired to retain and how to find it again. Something of a zettelkasten as it were. DTP2, after a steep learning curve, plugged into and strongly leveraged my hierarchical filing system.
Mind you I am not gainsaying tags or any other more ‘modern’ way of organizing information and they do work for a lot of people. As far as that goes if I was a young guy or an IT pro or what ever that grew up in a milieu that was non-hierarchical I might well be taking to a different way of doing things. BUT… I would also note that there are literally centuries if not eons of human experience pointing to the value of hierarchical means of information storage and organization. It just works.
So my suggestion to the DT team is that the size of this thread is a clue that whether the three pane view fits in your vision of where to take this app or not, that sometimes back tracking a bit is just fine too. Retaining old functionality that is heavily used is not a bad thing!
I’ve become so dependent on 3-pane view, this topic has held me back from upgrading to DT3. It is incredibly useful for RSS feeds and quickly viewing topics as well as stored notes, files, etc. Would love to take advantage of the weekend sale to upgrade, but I’m concerned that I’ll regret it.
As an existing DT2 user, I assume one can do a trial, and then switch back to DT2 without purchasing?
I had DT3 upgrade into the shopping cart, ready to purchase it for the Black Friday promo. I did a final search looking for other users feedback after the upgrade. Most people I respect in the community, most people I have learned from share two voices: “I miss the 3 panel view, so I’m staying DT2”, “I don’t use this any longer, or just not for work”.
I just opened my DT2 to verify and… yes, I’m using the 3PV. it was invisible, but useful, always there. Now I’ll have to setup another account and test DT3 to see if it fits my workflow (or not and start looking for other options).
Besides the 3PV or not, It’s disheartening to discover this kind of thread in the forum, with so many old time real users, and the lack of empathy in the responses. Most of the official responses look like: “It must not be that important”, “You’re using it wrong”, “We will not waste time dealing with such small details, deal with it!”. I’ve been using DT for 8 years and was willing to upgrade, but if that is the tone/responsiveness I can expect for the future, 3PV is a minor issue IMHO.
For what is worth, I find DT3 really really good and worthy of at least trying it out and seeing if it works for you. I can’t think of anything I could do in DT2 that I cannot do in DT3. Matter of fact, it was only after DT3 came out that I started to enjoy using DT and really plunged into it.
You could put a very different lens on and see how the staff is actually working really hard to fix all the glitches in a completely new software and all the while juggling different demands from users from all over the world with very different needs. (The fact that the staff and the developers reply to every email and always make a point of noting every request, and sometimes giving feedback as to how feasible it is, actually leaves me very comfortable to ask everything that I need or think could be better. With this I know that I won’t be disrupting their jobs and that they will feed it to their system and eventually make a choice about it.)
Forgive me if I am not following what the question here really is. I see many requests that were made in this topic that are already implemented, so I don’t really know what some here think is missing from DT3. Perhaps someone can explain it to me. Anyway, just my two cents
I can do the same kind of stuff, but without 3PV it’s done in a very different, and, for me and others, an inferior, more cluttered way. The 2nd pane was the place that the mid-level detail lived. Now that it’s shoehorned into the sidebar, that pane seems way too busy (again, in my opinion) and requires a lot of scrolling if you need or want a few databases open at the same time.
DT was the software that really made me fall in love with 3PV. That’s the irony of it all.
Not to be an arse mate but there’s been considerable effort made by numerous individuals in this thread that have already done that. Considering that I, myself, put in more than a few good hours, I’d suggest the least you could attempt - if reading a thread isn’t your forthcoming - is to, the very least, make an effort to understand what’s being argued.
I doubt it was your intention, but this does look like one of those “I’m not having a problem, so really no-one’s having a problem” posts.
I don’t find the lack of 3PV a serious issue, but it’s clear that other people do. Once the discussion’s got to the point where it’s established that 3PV is gone, they’re not obliged to justify that to me (or anyone really).
I’m finding the lack of exposed networked knowledge features in DT to be quite limiting as I step back into using it. I’ve been trying out Roam and I’m in love with the way that every paragraph (they call them “blocks” is addressable, and that backlinks are automatically created between documents as they’re linked.
This kind of functionality in DT would go a long way towards bridging the benefits of a hierarchical system (where moving from one group/folder to another destroys information—useful at times) and keeping the links between ideas as items are filed. Tags are also useful but they don’t facilitate specific sections of an item/document to be linked to another, making tags more useful for broad concepts or categories and less for specific ideas.
A reply on another thread described DT as a “document and information management” application. I think the fundamental shift that’s being described here is towards DT being a “knowledge management” application, of which documents and information are the root.
I’d also note that, save for a query regarding v 2.0 from 2008, this topic has far and away the most number of replies of any post in the forum, as well as over 8k views.
I agree. I think there would be many, many more posts on this thread begging/asking/demanding for the functionality of three-pane-view from DTP 2 to be restored in DTP 3…but all of the power users who need the same functionality of three-pane-view in DTP 2 have gone dormant, while delaying purchasing DTP 3, while we wait for three-pane-view, or similar, functionality to be restored.
I tested DTP 3 for my company…and we are ready to pay for upgrades for all partners and employees…but we are waiting for the functionality of three-pane-view, or something very similar, to be added to DTP 3.1. The inability to select multiple folders/tags and “see” all records contained within the multiple selection of folders/tags is a complete non-starter. My partners and employees would very much prefer an OPTION, even if not the default option, to fully restore the three-pane-view in DTP 3…at a minimum, the same functionality must be restored to the view settings in DTP 3 even if three-pane-view is not fully restored.
To be completely honest, my partners would gladly pay double (or quadruple) the price for DTP 3 licenses if it included the same three-pane-view from DTP 2 or, at a minimum, something functionally equivalent.
We swear by DTP…but only DTP 2 at this point…notwithstanding the amazing new interface and new features in DTP 3. I have convinced multiple colleagues to convert their entire office/firm from PC to MAC entirely on the basis of being able to use DTP…but when asked by these same people if they should upgrade, I have recommended that they wait until they get the sidebar functionality updated to match or exceed the utility of three-pane-view from DTP 2.
Again…major thanks to the DTP team for the massive improvements in so many varied aspects in DTP 3 compared to DTP 2…EXCELLENT WORK!!! But please give us the power-user features that were available in three-pane-view in DTP 2!!!
THIS!!! SO much accurate info in this thread but DEVON seems to be ignoring us. FWIW I go back and forth stil from DT2 to DT3 specifically for 3 pane view.
I miss 3 pane every day. I have tried a number of work arounds base on the discussion in this thread but they are not doing the job. I have, as I mentioned earlier in the thread done some experiments using the built in search functions in the computer’s file system, but they still don’t beat DT, but DTP3 really should not have deprecated 3 pane view given how much so many of us depended on it.
I’m about to embark on a major new project, and the thought of trying to do so while using DT3 without 3PV makes me tired. I’ll be keeping an eye on this thread and future DT development in the hope of a return for 3PV. For the moment though I am evaluating alternatives and will be moving on. I’d stick with DT2, but have to assume it will soon no longer be supported, and would like to get ahead of that eventuality before I absolutely have to migrate everything.
I can’t think of anything I could do in DT2 that I cannot do in DT3. Matter of fact, it was only after DT3 came out that I started to enjoy using DT and really plunged into it.
