Just adding my informal vote for a 3PV. I’d really like it back in DT3. It was my overwhelming preference in v2.
3 Likes
I initially thought that too, but having worked with DT3 for some time now I have adapted & would not go back now. It takes a bit of getting used to, but works well once you do.
What is your setup, if you don’t mind sharing?
3-pane view was the most popular view in our company too but nobody misses it now. And there are of course still plans to make the sidebar more powerful (e.g. support for multiple selections and keyboard navigation).
1 Like
Things like custom metadata, smart rules, reminders, improved filesystem integration, imprinting, typed sheet columns or form views are definitely for power users.
1 Like
I’m wary of knee jerk reactions to new iterations of software, as development often requires adjustment from long term users who aren’t comfortable with the transition. I raised some concerns about the lack of 3 Pane View upthread some months ago, when I first dipped into the betas.
However, Patrick’s points above, especially (i), are very well made. I also worked exclusively in 3 Pane View in DTPO, and am finding the transition difficult. I have DT3 set up with the sidebar hidden, with the Preview setting as Widescreen, View setting as List sorted by name. Superficially it approximates the look of 3 Pane View, but I very quickly run into roadblocks in terms of accessing the material I want to view. From my experimentation, the Standard Preview setting very quickly produces endless scrolling, among other limitations.
Alternative arrangements are hard to adapt to. I find the use of the sidebar to navigate quite frustrating. It has a range of options above and below the list of open databases, which I find visually distracting. As others have pointed out, you cannot navigate with keys. Also, every database has the same icon and grey scheme – hard to differentiate. Granted, DTPO’s database sidebar also had the same icon for all, but the beauty of that was that you selected your database, and then navigated using your preferred View; i.e. DTPO’s database sidebar allowed you to ignore the sidebar and focus in on your content.
I would be very grateful to know if there are other workarounds for replicating 3 Pane View in DT3, or if there are things that I am missing.
3 Likes
Could one of your staff please share their set-up for replacing 3 pane view?
The sidebar is always visible, the main view is either list, icon or columns view depending on the database & group and what’s desired/needed.
E.g. I use list view if I want to overview additional information in multiple columns easily, e.g. tags, rating or custom metadata.
Icon view is great for images & video but also for PDF documents and used in the global inbox as the global inbox doesn’t contain much data and as this simplifies mouse actions.
And columns view is very useful in databases/groups that require navigation more often, e.g. in case of feeds and navigating via Go > Next Unread Item.
And finally, search results use almost always list view.
1 Like
A member has contributed a set of very nice-looking colored icons for the databases here Can we color the project icon?. Hope it’ll brighten up the mood.
3 Likes
Thank you both, replies much appreciated. @cgrunenberg, your approach seems to involve a lot of switching between views; certainly a change in work practice for me, but will try it out.
If others have alternative workflows to replace 3 Pane View and have the time to outline them, I’m always happy to learn new tricks!
I already used multiple views in version 2. As long as the option to retain views (see Preferences > General) is disabled, it’s only necessary to change the view once for certain databases/groups.
But the most similar replacement only for 3-pane view is of course a visible sidebar plus list view (either standard or widescreen) and optionally the option to show only documents (see View menu).
2 Likes
Hmmm, I wonder though whether you have your (likely) heterogeneous user base in mind. You apparently have your workflow, and fine if that works for you. But how did you decide that the Three Panes View was no longer useful?
Looking at it based on the info here — asking a bunch of users (infrequent to power users, different disciplines) to share their workflow via Screensharing would provide information on which workflows are used. Or just asking users to send screenshots of a typical scene when interacting with DEVONthink. Just looking at how many people use Three Panes View would be interesting. (And sure, if the software would record which view is used when and transmit that data — via opt in — you had additional information.)
BTW, are there videos available of DEVONthink employees/developers sharing their workflows? Not dummy data, but how they actually interact with the software?
And yeah, as other have mentioned, even without additional functionality, DT did beat Mac’s Finder, in part due to its additional views. And sure, part might be “it’s different and I don’t want to change” — and you are likely invested in the Sidebar. But it’s a … sidebar, nothing more. It doesn’t have the space or flexibility, nor does it fit overall. I think it’s now a question of “do you want to promote your workflow”, or do you allow part of your user base to keep theirs.
I’m not sure I understand what that means. “Space”, “flexibility”, “fit overall”. Could you explain?
The closest I came so far to an approximation of the Three Panes View was by using the sidebar and expanding the folders, then selecting folders (see image in a previous posting). Essentially splitting the interaction between the main area (right of the sidebar) and the sidebar itself.
So far (in DT 2.x) the sidebar was for selecting databases. Which gave you context: “Now I’m in my work database.”, “Now I’m in the work reading material database.” I can focus on the main interaction area and even hide the sidebar. Now I need the sidebar with the other databases present (= “fit overall”). It mixes context with content.
As for space, I need to expand the folders, with subfolders, and subfolders … which costs horizontal space (= “space”). Interaction was much more flexible when selection of databases (context) and content wasn’t mixed.
(It’s hard to verbalize — I think this issue is something you see, and likely have to see, when people are interacting with the software. It’s hard to ask people about it, as it’s such a basic part that it’s essentially invisible — until it’s not there anymore.)
2 Likes
Thank you very much for this. Show Only Documents might be a game changer, especially in standard view. It gets rid of what appeared (to me anyway) to be the somewhat redundant duplicated view of folders. I will continue to experiment with the view options (and don’t worry @BLUEFROG, I will keep reading the new manual 
) to find the best fit for me. In the meantime, having such excellent support and input from the developers is fantastic, and much appreciated.
1 Like
My setup is pretty standard.
I am a fan of tagging so each of my databases is structured into folders containing smart folders which use tags to keep subjects together. The beauty of using smart folders this way is that I can slice up my data in several different ways.
I have added a screenshot, but i don’t know if it helps any!
Bill
I have to say that DEVONthink has rapidly gone from being my most-used application to being my least-used application. I have bought an upgrade to DT3, but I’m really not sure if I need DEVONthink any more. Three-pane view was the ONLY view I ever used and I feel completely disorientated by its disappearance. This may be partly to do with age. When you get older, adaptation is undoubtedly more difficult. At the moment I’m thinking that I may need to use the Finder for organising my material because it will be easier that way. We’ll see, but I’m neither happy nor confident at the moment.
4 Likes
@DanielWessel: I totally agree.
This lots of scrolling and searching for my last locations runs me crazy. Even in finder with its tabs I am more flexible to work on different folders at the same time without getting lost in scrolling through the navigation pane.
Don’t get me wrong - DT3 is really great and I´m also aware that most of the work is behind the scenes. But thats why I think that a missing ui feature should no ruin this hard work and good product !!!
A user interface that does´t fit your needs can be really frustrating because it´s that what you always are in direct contact with. Now the ui is more straight forward and standardized but it lost some of the advantages that persuaded me for using DT when seeing it the first time. Of course you can workaround everything but thats not an argument why we don´t need and want it.
It is like @DanielWessel mentioned. “Its hard to verbalize.”
Software can have perfect features but you don´t like to use it because it feels confusing / complicated - or software can give you a good feeling when working on it even if there are some missing features.
So I would like to know, why DT want to kill the 3pane view. Is it because of strategic motivations or because of cost / relevance matters ? Maybe you should start a poll to see which feature future versions should focus on.
As you can see on this thread lot of people care about this feature.
You always point out to be proud of the flexibilty of DT and that everyone can manage DT fit his own workflow… of course the missing 3pane view cannot be argued away that we have the same flexibilty as before. It was one of several unique selling points that is missing now.
1 Like
The DT2 sidebar was mainly a “database switcher” — which for me was a waste of horizontal screen space. The DT3 sidebar may be mixing "contexts, but I appreciate how it not only lets me navigate among databases, but among content within those databases with ease (e.g. I can have a folder in database 1 and a related folder in database 2 showing at the same time — very powerful).
I also created Workspaces for each database. This way, when I don’t want the sidebar visible (to keep focused on one database), I can hide it and switch databases by key command.
1 Like