3 Pane view in DT3

Thanks for the discussion and the points you are raising, I suppose there’s no harm to go over some old ground.

Yes, this is a key differential between your work and that of others who have posted here. DT3 replicates the look of 3PV, but not the functionality/work flows that 3PV facilitated. For example, DT3 does not remember its place when switching between databases. For more, see the following posts in this thread:

http://www.organizingcreativity.com/2019/09/devonthink-3-where-the-heck-is-devonthink-going/

My point about Rachel Leow’s guide to DTPO was that, as indeed did many of workflows posted by academics over the years (such as here), it used 3PV!

Anyway, this is all largely irrelevant because, as @ThatGuy notes, this is the choice that DTech have made. Nothing more to be said really in the absence of their contributions.

1 Like

I could live without 3 Pane views. Not a big deal for me.

2 Likes

It’s jamming a lot into the sidebar and making it very clicky-scrolly. I loved having a sparse sidebar, a more detailed intermediary “sub-sidebar” and then the focus of that middle UI element in the main section.

I’ve tried all the suggestions in this thread, and none of them do what 3PV did. It’s much more fiddly than it was.

5 Likes

I found within a day or so I had aquired shortcuts and a couple of Keyboard Maestro macros, that I will admit, to change focus, and now can do it all from the keyboard. I find it less clicky-scrolly than before in fact. I did see a comment previously where people were going back to DEVONthink 2 in umbrage about 3PV after a DAY with 3. You need some time and expect some learning curve?

Option + the arrow keys seemed to work fine in the side bar? And key presses took me to the folders starting with the corresponding letters, Finder style. I have to say I find it less fiddly than I found the old 3PV. However that is, I suppose subjective and a matter of practice and muscle memory etc. and I wouldn’t want to insist on that. It seems to me, impressionistically, that there is much more you can do without ‘clicking and scrolling’ now? I also tried, just to see, using extra databases than my usual one. It worked well for me as it happens and I will keep them. I really don’t see any slow down at all on the contrary I find my usage a lot faster now and better.

Understand that it might seem like I am just piling on objections, but it isn’t just the clicky-scrolly bit, it’s also the visual and psychological aspect of 3PV that worked so well for me and is now gone. The macro > meso > micro dynamic that is lost when macro and meso are crammed into the one space.

I promise I’ve tried, but it’s just not even close to the same thing for me. And lots of others as well, if this thread is anything to go by.

3 Likes

I agree. At least one or two of my business partners ask me each month: “has Devonthink fixed the whole three-pane view thing…???” They ask because they want to spend money to upgrade…and want to upgrade…but they tested out DTP3 and are waiting until there is something similar to three-pane view functionality.

If DTP3 offered a “three-pane-view upgrade for $199.99,” myself and all of my business partners would purchase it immediately.

Instead, we are all sticking with DTP2 for now.

P.S. I love Devonthink as a company and as a product…best software ever and I recommend it to everyone (ver DTP2, for now)…I critique only because I love it so much.

5 Likes

Same. It changed the way I view information storage and classification. I just want my 3PV back and everything would be roses.

2 Likes

I take you and @patrickgdempsey seriously. I thought about it a lot, partly because the problem is interesting in general. I am interested in ‘this kind of thing’ and I am a kind of perfectionist and like optimal performance too: with a vengence some will say :blush:. I would say to Patrick though what I said before. There is a small learning curve on the upgrade. That is unavoidable and it was well over a week of heavy use before muscle memory returned on the ‘views’ for me.

I would be quite happy though if the team re instituted a 3PV simulcrum to satisfy part of their clientele. Like I said I would judge their refusal to do that on ‘under the hood’ properties and considerations that I don’t know about though. I trust their judgement and suspect their might be trade offs involved here?

I have to say I can’t even remember now what the difference between my set up and 3PV was. I respect the opinions some of you guys have put forward, you are not just fusspots or Luddites clearly. Which is what I felt initially. I just have to say though that for me, the current set up is as good and in fact better in many ways than the old 3PV. There are several option available in Workspaces too that can help?

1 Like

I don’t. I also program. I know that while tradeoff are importnat that if the feature was there it can be replicated.

I think all of your comments reflect that you are not a heavy user of DT. Right now I’ve got multiple databases and one has over 70K items in it. 3PV makes traversing that easy. I’ve tried the AI and smart folder tools and they are completely inadequate. Just like for me spam catchers never work, my data sets are such that I can’t ever depend on a see also type of system to find the relevant additional items. That depends on me placing them in a folder structure I can traverse easily as was mentioned earlier, from macro to meso to micro in a clean and orderly fashion without losing ones place in the structure.

3 Likes

@tudoreynon: Don’t get me wrong but I can imagine that you don’t have any problems.
Your screenshot looks like you don’t have a huge folder structure or multiple databases.
It doesn’t help anyone here who has organized in a different way in the last years.
So the point is that you are forced to be organized different now but DT was always proud of the endless possibilities and the freedom everyone can use it in their own way.
Now you need to have multiple workarounds like scripts and 3rd party tools to use DT effective ? That should not be a product strategy for a product of that league in my opinion.

1 Like

Well the DEVONthink 3 team program too, very well in my view. I too use DEVONthink 3 ‘heavily’. For all but one small part of my computer use: all my personal data is on DEVONthink 3 too and anything I do outside one part which I cannot put on DEVONthink 3 for non IT reasons. I have found my confidence in DEVONthink 3’s team to be well placed to date. I can’t speak for you of course.

‘Heavy’ use is a relative term I guess and I won’t and can’t comment on your usage or make suggestions as to strategies you might implement. I found that developing my own data strategies was useful though painful initially. I do find some cases that I have dealt with directly have been resolved by users themselves changing their own strategies.

I have found, after an initial learning curve no problem with the new DEVONthink 3 at all, in fact for me it is a huge improvement. I am sure the team will, if there are no tradeoffs, think seriously about reintroducing the beloved 3PV. I have no use for it myself now though I did work in it all the time in 2. I will end my commentary in this thread now I think. I have nothing to add after I reply to Andreas 76 with, what I know are some discursive and veering ‘off topic’ remarks. I consider, I will say, much of the problem here to be really at User level. Typically the response to such remarks from me is seen as “not having the issues I do or the needs.” as it was recently put to me. Begging the question really as to why I have the needs or issues or not, that I do.

In what way would I get you wrong Andreas? I made two extra databases since I posted the screenshot just to see. I could add a dozen without any problem.

Before I finish on this thread since I clearly have nothing to add or to assist some of you I will make a couple of remarks: don’t get me wrong though… Maybe the thread should be moved and retitled. “3PV for users with HUGE datasets” or something like that? Since my own view, which I am not pushing it on this forum, is that much, though not all of course and I don’t make it an initial assumption in any given case, regarding this ‘problem’ is really at the User strategy level. I think it is time for me to quit.

I don’t have any problems on DEVONthink 3, partly because I have chosen a good strategy for my use of DEVONthink 3: that is how I see it I am afraid. I don’t have a huge folder structure or multiple databases as a consequence, partly, of wise strategic decisions I have made regarding IT in general and DEVONthink 3 in particular. In fact decision I made years ago when I decided that though Filing Cabinet Skeumorphism was inevitable and necessary at UI to some extent, it was not de rigeur and not irreplacable, indeed I spent some time reconsidering my folder layout on DEVONthink 2 for those reasons. Of course the use of latin letters is Skeumorphic if you go hard enough at this distinction :woozy_face: but the issue does arise sometimes when talking about Markdown and so on and its counterintuitive initial impression to those trained on quill and parchment.

We sometimes make bad decisions regarding data storage, file name conventions and so on? I certainly have. I though do not expect my IT to follow and cope with those poor decisions indefinitely. That included putting some files on Word docs that I can no longer open by the way, however easy they are to find.

It would and will be interesting to me to have to deal with a different kind of data set than the ones I currently use? I hope I get the opportunity and if and when I do I will report back as to any problems I get onto this forum. I won’t be surprised if I get none, well none due to deficiencies in DEVONthink 3 anyway. It is partly of academic interest to me now since my own usage of DEVONthink 3 is fine and has no friction points.

I don’t think I have had any significant IT bottlenecks in my own work for a couple of years now. Including on, I admit, the old DEVONthink. I still think the new one is an improvement regarding shortcuts and so on and performance in some sense.

“Huge Database” is a movable feast on IT. I am going to say, though it is not germane to this topic though it is, in my mind, starting to intrude. That much of the problem here is down to “user error” and poor strategic thinking. That is debatable and contentious of course and something I have enough grief dealing with in places other than this forum.

Since I also hold a contrarian view on much ‘date retention’ it is again best that I retreat before we fall into another contentious rabbit hole. I will make some remarks first though. I think we are running, as a society, into a situation where we have so much data ‘stored’ that we can’t sort through it in any useful way and its retention has negative but unintended effects in other ways.

This has a direct bearing on much of what I do by the way. I include in all this, endless and pointless and intrusive ‘video’ footage from Ring and other paranoia based companies, saved text messages and emails and photographic records of every trivial event. It is true though, that some of us, lawyers and so on in particular, don’t have a free hand in this. I know professionals now who save every text message. I now use Confide myself. Just as a kind of reminder to myself not to save stuff, not out of ‘security’ concerns.

In my own case, though to some of you my data base is ‘small’. It is probably ten times bigger than it really needs to be. I moved my personal photos out of DEVONthink 3 recently and reduced them to about 2% of what they were. I had what some consider a ‘small’ collection in the first place.

1 Like

Thank you for your comments and congratulations that you have found your strategy. It is indeed interesting to see these thoughts and also to rethink my own strategy.

Before we go into more detail, I would like to look at it from a higher perspective. It is quite simple
It’s just incredibly annoying when a relatively banal function is switched off without comment, even though it has such a great impact on the usage, that you are suddenly faced with a pile of problems. For me this is out of all proportion.
A new strategy is considered when you know how DT wants to position itself in the future. Everything else is only the reaction due to a deficiency. In this case you are suddenly interrupted in your work and you are pressed for time with tasks that were not foreseeable yesterday.

In the past I wanted to build everything on the basis of tags, but found the implementation still too shabby. So I built my folder structure analogous to the DT strategy with AI and automatic sorting. That was always the biggest feature of DT and it is based on folders. Why are folders now treated so neglected ?

So what is the strategy that DT pursues? It would be important to know this before simply reorganizing everything, just because an update came.
And this is exactly the biggest problem for me. I don’t know where the journey is going and I’m not willing to waste my lifetime for updates of my programs. DT is not the only program and system that wants to be maintained. It should have a hand and foot to make my new organization sustainable and in line with the DT strategy. And DT is for me a professional software which I never expected to suddenly end up in such a blind flight (regarding this)

Okay, maybe I didn’t pay enough attention to all this, didn’t follow the blogs or didn’t test the betas. Maybe my strategy was wrong.
The fact is that such an intervention needs to be better communicated in advance with a reference to how DT envisages the best practice approach in the future.

1 Like

For most of my navigation I use search – that’s the beauty of DT, the grouping is nice but not necessary. For example Go-To Group… with search is really nice.

2 Likes

I do also and it’s a nice feature. And that’s what it should be …“an additional feature” for specific situations and not a replacement. There are several situations when you better want to work on the folders f.e. when moving documents around or when you are not aware of the substructure.

Yes, for me 3-pane would not work as I use DT3 mostly on my laptop, even if I have a 42" monitor on the desk back home for laptop connections. Even so I doubt I would use 3-pane-views, searching is much faster.

1 Like

I have to say that that is what my long winded replies really boil down to. I really am at a loss here. I have done my best. I use search mostly if I can’t find something and have really moved away from ‘over foldering’ you might say. I do use naming strategies now which work well too, so stuff ends up self sorting if you activate some of the columns. In fact it is amazing how much one can achieve by doing that. “recents” in my case gets me what I need as it happens. I know other folks won’t have workflows where that is relevant.

The book back in the nineties that opened my eyes concerning the futility of defining categories (i.e. folders) was George Lakoff’s Women, Fire and Dangerous Things: What Categories Reveal About the Mind. For me, having labels, smart groups based on search results and a good flexible search is of utmost importance. Groups/folders is mostly as a navigational tool for use now and then. I know computer users today where most of their files are inside the Documents folder with no whatsoever folder organization.

But each one of us has different workflows.

2 Likes

One aspect which in my view is neglected in the recent debate is that some users (me, at least) work in a multi-language environment (my main database contains thousands of pdfs in German, English, French). For grouping those, the AI and smart groups are only of limited use. Cross-links between pdfs dealing with the same topic but have been published in different languages are rarely found, of course.

2 Likes

So basically setting a hierarchical system then?