Linking between UR databases

[xja]

Wasn't sure if this was suggested but, given that you can create external links to files and Outlook items, shouldn't you be able to create links between info items in different UR databases? Or is there a way to do this?

[kevina]

There currently isn't a way to create links between Info Items in different databases (.urd files).

[Daly de Gagne]

Linking between databases is an important feature, and one that is currently offered in such programs as ADM 4 beta and MDEInfoHandler.

Daly

[srdiamond]

Originally posted by Daly de Gagne
Linking between databases is an important feature, and one that is currently offered in such programs as ADM 4 beta and MDEInfoHandler.

Daly

You can't do everything. ADM 4--which isn't even a viable commercial product (its showcase product being in perpetual beta, with the bugs of an alpha version) is built around the idea of multiple databases, whereas UR is optimized for a single database. Unlike ADM 4 (so-called), the consequences for UR's design choices were at least subject to forethought.

[Daly de Gagne]

Originally posted by srdiamond
You can't do everything. ADM 4--which isn't even a viable commercial product (its showcase product being in perpetual beta, with the bugs of an alpha version) is built around the idea of multiple databases, whereas UR is optimized for a single database. Unlike ADM 4 (so-called), the consequences for UR's design choices were at least subject to forethought.

Stephen, when you write about ADM 4, perhaps you could in the interest of honest disclosure mention that your anger at ADM is at least in part predicated on the fact that your sometimes brash manner got the developer's back up, and that then the two of got into a pissing contest that is best summed up under the rubric of personality conflict.

Yes, you did identify some weak areas in ADM (lack of redo on the tree, issues with backup), but since you do nothing above except take a rather childish and generalized slam at the software, it is not clear whether your motive was to add to this discussion or simply use any excuse to shoot at your favourite target.

The multiple databases in ADM work extremely well, and the quickjump feature, for example, makes it very easy to switch from one database to a specific topic or subtopic in any of the other databases. Since you did not comment specifically on this feature, which was the point of my previous post, I can only assume that you either did not know about it or, knowing about it, wouldn't be caught dead saying something positive.

The point remains that ADM 4 (yes still in beta), MDE InfoHandler, and UltrarRecall are the main competitors in their field, probably to be joined by Zoot when Zoot comes out in 32-bit form.

The developers of each and every one of these programs are doing a splendid, exlempary even, job and do not deserve the sort of banal bad mouthing that you have engaged in.


Daly

[srdiamond]

Originally posted by Daly de Gagne
Stephen, when you write about ADM 4, perhaps you could in the interest of honest disclosure mention that your anger at ADM is at least in part predicated on the fact that your sometimes brash manner got the developer's back up, and that then the two of got into a pissing contest that is best summed up under the rubric of personality conflict.

Daly

I doubt anyone here is interested in this soap opera of your invention. Whenever ADM is criticized publicly, some member of their inner advisory council gets up and tries to personalize the discussion. That and the abominable practice of making plugs for a rival product without disclosing your official commitment to ADM is what makes me angry. It is typical of ADM sleaze.

ADM is not a real product. You can't buy it, because it doesn't exist except except as something that is really no more than a prototype. If you get hold of the prototype of ADM 4, be sure to back up your data. ADM "4" doesn't deserve to be mentioned in the same breath as UR.

[Daly de Gagne]

Originally posted by srdiamond
I doubt anyone here is interested in this soap opera of your invention. Whenever ADM is criticized publicly, some member of their inner advisory council gets up and tries to personalize the discussion. That and the abominable practice of making plugs for a rival product without disclosing your official commitment to ADM is what makes me angry. It is typical of ADM sleaze.

ADM is not a real product. You can't buy it, because it doesn't exist except except as something that is really no more than a prototype. If you get hold of the prototype of ADM 4, be sure to back up your data. ADM "4" doesn't deserve to be mentioned in the same breath as UR.

Stephen I have invented nothing.

I have nothing against criticizing ADM publicly. I have criticisms I can make, and have made.

If by official commitment to ADM you mean the fact that I am a member of the ADM Development Yahoo Group, which makes me a "trusted tester," a group to which you once also belonged, so be it. But that is not an official commitment to ADM -- I have no financial, personal or any other kind of vested interest in ADM.

What you call "no more than a prototype" is a well developed beta with features that work. If you want to make the criticism that the features should be broken up among several upgrades leading to a new version, ie. working up from 3.0 to 4.0, I would join you in making that criticism. In other words, the developer is guilty of trying to do too much between releases, and so opens himself to cheap shots of being in "perpetual beta."

As someone who uses UR and ADM 4 everyday, I can tell you that it is in the same league as UR. When it comes to columns, no one does it as well as ADM does it. When it comes to ease of saving from the web, no one does it as well as UltraRecall. Both are good programs.

Daly

[srdiamond]

I'm going to drop this discussion. I consider this poster incorrigible. Others can judge for themselves.

Added 3/18

Unless something new arises--

This poster recently posted in another thread--

"However, the level of our ability (at least for me!) does not match the level of ability of the software. The journal template pointed that out for me in clear terms, as have a couple of the GTD templates provided by forum members."

So how does this person who is unable to use substantial parts of UR, because his "level of ability" doesn't match, nevertheless--based on this very same sub-optimal use--assert: "As someone who uses UR and ADM 4 everyday, I can tell you that it is in the same league as UR."

Of course, it may be that the poster's abilities don't allow him to use not only some of UR's capabilities but also some of ADM "4" capabilities. Perhaps that's why he believed he could make the comparison. But the equality of two applications in one's substantial ignorance concerning each's merit would not imply their substantial equality of merit. You just cannot compare what you are ignorant of.