![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
...or, "I thought I was a geek!"
Via Recording Thoughts:
An interesting example of how a fact can cut both ways can be found at Loose Wire, where it is noted that, on the one hand, the ability to use a particular journal for a long time means you can use it as an archive longer, though on the other hand, a commenter notes that:
The "less pages = quicker archiving" argument doesn't sit well with me. The fact is, you could use the writing surfaces in a Miquelrius in a lavish manner (I've started to write almost exclusively on the right-hand side of the book; items showing up on the left-hand pages are important, which makes them comparatively easier to find), which would tend to use the book up faster, or you could simply retire the books more often. In the end, if you use books (not pages or square inches of writing surface) at the same rate, you'll still be better off using the Miquelrius pocket journals, since they cost about 60% of what a comparably sized Moleskine costs.
Losing paper is an issue for anyone who uses it, as it's still not terribly convenient to slip notebooks into scanners or copy machines, not to mention finding the time or money even if it were convenient. But I've come to the conclusion that - generally speaking - trying to keep myself organized by shoehorning the way I work into some electronic gadget doesn't work too well, despite the ability to restore yourself to your last sync point. This has mostly to do with the limitations of the device and the design of applications for it.
So while I'm not prepared to completely chuck my Zire (there are certain applications of use, and I wouldn't think of keeping addresses in a book), I am prepared to stick (or, more properly, commit) to a primarily paper-based system in which a Miquelrius journal is one of the fundamental "buckets."
Cheers...
Via Recording Thoughts:
"Anyway, it’s [Miquelrius] 4.09″ x5.90″ x .77″ thick, which is a total volume of 18.58 cubic inches. It has 200 leaves, each with 2 sides (i.e. pages) for a total of 400 sides to write on, or a pretty hefty 67 square feet of writing space.This kind of analysis goes way beyond anything I'd normally think of inflicting even on myself. Bottom line: Miquelrius books have more writing surface, and I'll add that they cost less, too.
The Moleskine, (pocket size, square ruled) on the other hand, is 3.6″ x 5.6″ x .52″ thick, which is a total volume of 10.48 cubic inches. It has 96 leaves, for a total of 192 sides to write on, which is a measly 27 square feet of space.
The Miquelrius has about 3.6 square feet per cubic inch, Moleskine has 2.6."
An interesting example of how a fact can cut both ways can be found at Loose Wire, where it is noted that, on the one hand, the ability to use a particular journal for a long time means you can use it as an archive longer, though on the other hand, a commenter notes that:
It's interesting to see Jim issue complaint on the Moleskine filling up too quickly. I have lost a notebook or two in my journeys -- often with several months of data and notes in it. As such I'm actually really attracted to Moleskines with limited pages and heavy paper. This is beneficial in a couple ways: 1) Less pages = faster fill up = quicker archiving = less notes/data lost if the notebook disappears. and 2) Heavy paper = no bleeding when using thick inks for notes or doing sketches / drawings.On a related note, in my experience I haven't had a Miquelrius crack its spine or tear its binding (which happened with my first pocket Moleskine, and I've banged the former harder than I ever did the latter). Apropos of paper thickness, I've found that Miquelrius paper takes ink from fountain and gel pens - at least the ones I use - better than does paper in Moleskines, so item 2 of the comment is not really an issue for me.
The "less pages = quicker archiving" argument doesn't sit well with me. The fact is, you could use the writing surfaces in a Miquelrius in a lavish manner (I've started to write almost exclusively on the right-hand side of the book; items showing up on the left-hand pages are important, which makes them comparatively easier to find), which would tend to use the book up faster, or you could simply retire the books more often. In the end, if you use books (not pages or square inches of writing surface) at the same rate, you'll still be better off using the Miquelrius pocket journals, since they cost about 60% of what a comparably sized Moleskine costs.
Losing paper is an issue for anyone who uses it, as it's still not terribly convenient to slip notebooks into scanners or copy machines, not to mention finding the time or money even if it were convenient. But I've come to the conclusion that - generally speaking - trying to keep myself organized by shoehorning the way I work into some electronic gadget doesn't work too well, despite the ability to restore yourself to your last sync point. This has mostly to do with the limitations of the device and the design of applications for it.
So while I'm not prepared to completely chuck my Zire (there are certain applications of use, and I wouldn't think of keeping addresses in a book), I am prepared to stick (or, more properly, commit) to a primarily paper-based system in which a Miquelrius journal is one of the fundamental "buckets."
Cheers...
