@iliketrash:
Let me get you out of the way. I agree with your post 100%, in which you're wary of storing data in an app's filesystem and/or, as I would put it, at the very least, mucked with by an application's management of the native file system. So what follows may interest you.
First, I've owned Together since it was KIT, mostly because I like the idea of keeping neatly in one place different, related, files and file types from different physical locations on my drives. Together also has a pleasant interface and the developer is very responsive and conscientious. I believe the Together people care for and believe in their product. That's why I feel a little queasy about what I have to say next.
Without belaboring the points, Together could get it get it together by improving start-up speed, overall performance speed, and the way in which it allows for combining many files into one, integrated document. The latter point is a lot to ask of an application that most certainly leans more to database category than to boffo media editor. Thats why if this was a straight-out review, Together deserves four stars. Considering Journler and other apps marketed as one thing but have functionality similar to Together, Together is special, but not uniquely so. It's a handy tool backed up by a solid team. Four stars. Except it's an endangered species.
Anyone who has seen a MacBook Air and has noted the reasonable prices for mobile broadband cards and monthly fees (at least if your priorities are as strange as mine) has seen the future. Call it "the Cloud," SaaS, or whatever. The point is that the application, and, thank God, the precious data that the application manages resides not on your laptop/desktop but on a great server somewhere in the sky. Or two servers. Or ten. Or ten buried under salt flats. This way, the data will survive the apocalypse (no need to worry about backups and backup media). This way, the only CPU you use is your browser's, mostly, and take a look at Chrome and see not only more evidence the trend is toward the Clouds, but that browsers will evolve to become efficient application front ends and not simply website viewers. So several benefits obtain: speedy apps, light, notebook-sized devices (or smaller, such as iPhone, Android-phone, etc.), syncing across platforms, and no-lose data, just to name a few. If you're asking yourself "what does this have to do with Together?" then my exposition is muddier than usual.
@iliketrash: This may not fit your bill, but have you seen the Cloud-based Evernote? It's not 100% cloud because it has a companion desktop app (that syncs with the Cloud) for each platform it runs on, although the desktop app is unnecessary. The cloud-based, web-based Evernote application is terrific on its own. Elegantly designed, quick, and so intuitive that you simply use it to get your work done without paying attention to how you're using it. It's probably not a lie to say that Evernote describes itself as a note application with web-clipping features (this is to water down substantially its power), and like Together, it offers folder categorization, tagging, intelligent searching, and it easily gobbles up all types of content, though, it cannot online display all file types. However, it's a young product and its developers enhance it regularly. Performance-wise, it's way faster than Together or anything like it, assuming one is at broadband speed. Its key limitation for now is that lacks a way to combine multiple media elements into one multimedia document. But then again, is this what we're looking for either in Together or in EverNote? It would seem that each, at least for now, is about data storage, organization, and access rather than about editing complex documents as one would do in, say, PowerPoint or InDesign or whatever different strata of users are using out there.
I've no doubt given EverNote short shrift and have probably undersold Together as well. I also have no doubt that if Together doesn't look skyward, it's rapid extinction is imminent. The future is in a Cloud-based application like EverNote—fast, platform-independent, secure, user-friendly, inexpensive (there's even a limited-storage free account available), and on one's hardware, taking up no space and little CPU. Desktop software is going bye-bye soon. So iliketrash, look skyward for your solution and the remedy for your filesystem discontents. The future is cloudy, but bright.
PS: I have no affiliation with or tie of any kind to EverNote. I simply love the product and it's essential to my productivity. Many other cloud-based apps that serve similar and different functions from EverNote exist, and everyone falls in love based on different variables. (EverNote would seem to attract many, however.) So look around. I've heard of OneNote, which may have similar functionality to EverNote. Other cloud-based apps I can't do without are Jott and I love Sandy; to a much lesser extent, I like and use some, yikes!, Google applications and remain loyal to MobileMe. Whatever the case, it seems a waste of time to look for answers in technology that's headed to obsolescence.
Evan Mitchell Stark, aka,
Dr. Evan Stark PhD,
Evanitude,
President, Message Science Inc.
Together
Keep your stuff together and find it again.
Version: 2.3
Together is "nice"--but yesterday's news. Look skyward for the answers.
Feedback Type: Commentary
Contributed by: Evanitude Saturday, October 04 2008 @ 07:21 PM PDT
Product Platform: MacOSX
Used Product For: Less than a month
Recommend Product: YES
Comments
Together is "nice"--but yesterday's news. Look skyward for the answers. - sjk
I couldn't agree more, jtice. I don't care if that categorizes me as having "old school" ideas/opinions about this but I'm not overeager to trust and/or recommend many newer ones that are still volatile and immature.Wednesday, December 03 2008 @ 11:57 AM PST
Together is "nice"--but yesterday's news. Look skyward for the answers. - Evanitude
@jtice, @sjkI take your points. Mostly, I agree. I, too, have multiple copies of my irreplaceable data on multiple drives behind a firewall. This is to mean that I have data in the cloud, which is to say, each storage company HAS multiple, safe-room sites, AND that I use multiple, sometimes free, storage sites AND I have multiple storage media on-site. I can't help but remember the recent California wildfires. People risked life and limb to return to burning homes to retrieve sometimes money, sometimes jewelry, but almost always, to retrieve photographs, hardcopy or digital. Diversification is always a good rule to follow. This said, I DO have a lot of faith in professional media storage companies to safeguard my data properly. Safe locations, safe rooms, controlled environments, redundancy, and multiple sites (and sometimes at no cost to the user) would seem a sensible way to go.
Evan Mitchell Stark PhD
Saturday, February 07 2009 @ 11:25 AM PST
Together is "nice"--but yesterday's news. Look skyward for the answers. - jtice
I can see how you could have quite a bit of confidence in 'the cloud' within certain self-contained environments, such as corporations and universities, where you know beyond any reasonable doubt that your data is safe and secure. But to me it just seems absurd to trust irreplaceable data, that may represent years or decades, to some unknown server somewhere owned by a small software company that could have the doors chained shut by creditors or have the data stolen by hackers or employees. It may well be the way of the future, but right now I like knowing my data behind a firewall that I control, backed up to multiple drives that I own, and essentially invisible to anyone else. Electronic data is by nature elusive and temporary––if you want a document to have high prospects of being readable in twenty years or a thousand years... make sure it's backed up on paper.Reply to This
Wednesday, November 26 2008 @ 08:22 PM PST