Obsidian for web

Exactly.

And that is making harder for my workflow as i miss this link in workflow from job to home. Luckily i use a lot of hand writing on ipad so i can add them but for some meeting i would need some solution to connect.
Maybe quick win would be that obs can connect to online address and download file to local obs.
And there is a lot of corpo users that would need that.

1 Like

But any md editor, or word processor or notepad saving in txt, would do that if they can be linked on line. Or any online editor like Simplenote.

1 Like

Yes, but than i dont have sync between obs and need to move file, cant have folders, connection between files and things like that which make workflow and connections between files.

All this can be automated.
The key is you synchronising your Obsidian folders with whatever you have online.

Obsidian is all about local files. When the sync functionality is introduced there will presumably be online options.

The market for users who want to circumvent corporate IT restrictions will be limited and always subject to extinction when IT departments identify what employees are doing. I’d also point out that it’s an employment risk because employees doing this will be breaking corporate policies.

1 Like

Who said “circumvent corporate IT”? Dynalist, for example, works perfectly fine within my work environment precisely because it is transparent, scannable by the network guardians, and whitelisted. The same outcome would be an obvious requirement for whatever, if ever, Sliver and Licat decide to do.

So, anyway, why the strong pushback? We have folks here saying “really like what you’re doing, would like other options, please consider”. The owners will do whatever they do, but no harm suggesting alternatives. In my experience, the two developers at the core of the product have a wonderful openness to understanding their customers.

2 Likes

I doubt any security-sensitive company would allow anyone publish material on Dynalist/Roam/GDocs and so on, the data lives outside their control… I would not allow it if was as a CTO for such a company.

2 Likes

Good point.

Why the strong insistence on a web version when sync functionality will be available?

Please re-read the thread above.

6 Likes

I merely join the views of @Dor and @ksandvik. I believe that catering for a small group of interested people takes up dev time unnecessarily that can be spent better on features that have the support of many, and on improvements.

At the end of the day, though, it is the devs’ call.

2 Likes

Dont judge by your situation @Klaas. In my case “small” group of interested people is something like 100 people that could use obs if they would have sync through web.
Thats why Evernote is still kicking as they understood that you need all platforms available to be real productivity tool. As tools are not just for super cool startups and small businesses but also for larger firms that have rules as stupid they are. But as @anon27868835 said, maybe this sync functionality will sort things out.

4 Likes

@Klaas Would you please have a read of the thread from the beginning where I think the justification and answers to your questions were posted?

I don’t have stats for how common it is in the world, just know from my own career: I’ve worked in global roles for companies sizes 400 employees to 130k employees during the last 15 years. Of these, 60% did not allow me to install programs myself on my laptop. For those situations, being able to use Obsidian on the web would make Obsidian usable vs. not usable.

With my current employer, I can install software on my machine (though it is monitored) and the company I’m sure is glad that all my company notes are stored on their Onedrive. However, if I did not have this privilege then a web version would have to be used for the interface (preferably syncing to my choice of provider, such as Onedrive, Dropbox, etc.).

4 Likes

Philosophy, Architecture and alternatives.

The philosophy of the program is based on users having full control of their files which are kept locally on their own computers. Obsidian neither stores nor transmits any of this information.

As I understand it, the program is developed in electron as a local app rather an extension of a web app. It seems likely that considerable work would be required to create a web app, and where would the web app go to access files? If, as was originally suggested, it was in Dropbox or G Drive, who would control access to those files? Presumably the idea was that the app was given the access details and could sign in itself? There would be a major speed issue because the files would be on one web server, the program on another and the suggested users would be somewhere else working behind a corporate firewall. Probably the program would have to limit the number of files it loaded to make it usable. So it looks to me likely that it would be a lot of work for something that would have performance issues. There will be mobile versions of Obsidian, but Silver has emphasised that these would be lite versions of the app; partly I assume because of the limitations of phones and tablets, but presumably also because of these other issues.

Most other programs offering a similar feature set are web apps and run on a database (and despite this being a fundamentally faster design than the one just described, Roam has been accused being slow at times). But this availability does mean that people who need a web app have other options available.

The question arises why it could be used as a web app but not as a local program. If it’s a loophole in IT policy implementation then there will be trouble ahead. And, either way, it suggests possible failure in any security audit.

@ Gnopps and @IvanV if you cannot use Obs in your corporate environment it means it is not a company-approved app. Company notes are company property to compiled on company-approved apps.

You insist on using Obs for company notes, which means that, in effect, by demanding a web version you are asking the devs to help you circumvent company policy.

That means, you are being selfish in the extreme towards the other users who use Obs legitimately. You are demanding dev time spent on an illegitimate use when there are so many other REAL, legitimate issues and features that need attention.

If, as you claim Gnopps, you have really worked in those big corporations, like I have too, you know that audits do happen, as @Dor has pointed out, and you would be rapped on the fingers in the best scenario for circumventing company policy.

Last but not least, if you guys are so keen on using a markdown web app that circumvents company policy, there are plenty of other web apps out there. There is no need for Obsidian to join that crowd, esp. since it is going to have a sync functionality.

Alternatively, use Obs on your personal device to compile company notes, and copy them to a USB, or sync, when you need them in a corporate environment.

Who’s to say what information would be stored on the web? I agree with you that a company may have a policy about where data may be stored - however Obsidian can be used very well in a work context with no sensitive data being stored there (such as for meeting notes about activities not relating to customers for example).

1 Like

Wow, where do I begin?

Couldn’t we have a fruitful discussion rather than a confrontational one? Are you trying to troll the forum here? I’ve really enjoyed the helpful and explorative nature on this forum, couldn’t we keep it that way? :slight_smile:

Seems like I have to address your points.

@ Gnopps and @IvanV if you cannot use Obs in your corporate environment it means it is not a company-approved app. Company notes are company property to compiled on company-approved apps.

That is up to the company policy. I’ve seen several companies where the employer simply is too lazy to trust their employees, even if they are highly qualified, and just do a block all for simplicity’s sake. As for company notes being company property having to be used on company-approved apps, this again depends on the company’s policy about what kind of data they allow to be stored where.

You insist on using Obs for company notes, which means that, in effect, by demanding a web version you are asking the devs to help you circumvent company policy.

Please see above regarding different companies and different policies. It seems here you are deliberately trying to misread what I wrote, could we try to find an agreement instead? :slight_smile:

That means, you are being selfish in the extreme towards the other users who use Obs legitimately. You are demanding dev time spent on an illegitimate use when there are so many other REAL, legitimate issues and features that need attention.

Again, feature prioritisation is neither yours nor mine. Could you please refrain from attribute-calling (“selfish”) or saying that it would be “illegitimate use” when you know nothing of the policies where this might be needed.

Again, for Pete’s sake, this is a simple request for a web version that I provided justification for and now I’m being called selfish trying to use Obsidian for illegitimate purposes.

If, as you claim Gnopps, you have really worked in those big corporations, like I have too, you know that audits do happen, as @Dor has pointed out, and you would be rapped on the fingers in the best scenario for circumventing company policy.

That is correct, if the policy was being circumvented.

Last but not least, if you guys are so keen on using a markdown web app that circumvents company policy, there are plenty of other web apps out there. There is no need for Obsidian to join that crowd, esp. since it is going to have a sync functionality.

Here I would give the same advice back :slight_smile: If you are afraid that development resources are being spent wrongly then how about another app?

I’m very happy with the current Obsidian app (thank you devs!) but still think a web version would be very beneficial for plenty users.

Could we please then leave this discussion and just agree that (evidently) there is a need for a web version, be it for restrictions or simply user preference. We now know you are against a web version being developed. How about this thread remains on topic about how such a version could look/work? Then it is up to people other than you and me to decide what to do.

8 Likes

Why did you flag my comment as inappropriate? Afraid to let the devs see my opinion? I have not insulted anybody, merely stated my opinion, which, I agree, is not what you’d like to see.

You have conveniently refrained from addressing the issue of circumventing company policy (i.e. you have not provided an argument how a web version would be an acceptable alternative), nor have you addressed the audit issue @Dor mentioned.

As for me going to another app: no, thanks. I paid to support this app because I like it and believe in it, and have no reason to change. You, on the other hand, are trying to get a web version developed that is NOT on the road map because you want to circumvent restrictive company policy. A questionable reason, and certainly not a scheme one that deserves involving others in.

The devs are doing a tremendous job, they are the ones who decide what they spend their time on, but why should they spend time to even consider this request?

Luckily for you they will consider it and will be the ones to make the decision. Like you, I have given my input, whether you like it or not.

Replied in PM to avoid this thread going further off-topic.

4 Likes

You may be right, but Obsidian is the only competent alternative I have found to Roam Research. Having a web version also opens up the possibilities of Obsidian being usable on a phone or tablet, which again, does create convenience.

2 Likes