Useful Lessons from the "Competition"

[Diego Mesa]

Many people are talking about "Notion" these days, as a replacement for their evernote. Just wanted to let the community know about it:

https://www.notion.so/

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=w_mh91IRLL8

And see if there are any ideas we can learn from them? For one - their website sure is easy to understand for someone looking at it for the first time (I dont TW is at all). 

Also I frequently read Hacker News, and today someone asked:

"Ask HN: How do you keep track of your creative thoughts?"

https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=18837345

As of this writing, TW is only mentioned once. 

What do you all think?

[Mark S.]

Hmm. Seems complicated. "Embedded media blocks" ? Huh? Relational databases? Filters that we don't know how they got activated? Talking about "blocks" kind of seems like a throw-back to 1980s computer tech.

From a higher perspective, why would you use Notion, a for-pay proprietary solution without a known track record, rather than Evernote, a for-pay proprietary solution with a good track record?

With TW, you can type now and organize later. Except for saving )-;

Any of the cloud-based solutions will have an immediate apparent advantage over TW because they don't have to worry about explaining save mechanisms. But that advantage comes at a cost of loss of personal control over your data.

That said, having a nice comic-book style front page with lots of examples of usage might do more to intrigue newcomers.

-- Mark

[TonyM]

Diego,

These are still only solutions to predefined problems, I could emulate them all in tiddlywiki, but in TiddlyWiki I can evolve them, bring in other algorithms and more.

I like solutions to all possible problems and methods from the past into the future - that is the TiddlyWiki platform.

Tony

[@TiddlyTweeter]

Ciao Diego

Small point on Hacker News.

Its interesting to read sometimes. TW does come up from time to time. The discussions I have seen give it a bit of airage. But I don't think there are enough commentators on there who really understand it well enough to depict the difference.

Part is the issue is that calling it a "wiki" tends, IMO, to diminish understanding. Yes, it IS a wiki system. But its modus operandi is, as far as I can see, is very different than most wiki. And explaining that "difference" matters to understanding it.

Just thoughts

Josiah

[@TiddlyTweeter]

Ciao Diego

It's an interesting example.

At base, I guess, part of the TW "oomph" is its central commit to independence from server ("single file forever"--*waves flag*).

But then we get the residual issue of stuff servers have well developed--basically "interaction"--gets more difficult.

I'm not good technically. But My general take is TW has a "PHONE-HOME" problem.

I think Jed's server Bob version is very interesting for suggestively bridging the gap.

Just rambling

Josiah

[TonyM]

Josiah,

As I have voiced previously on the subject of wiki the name and meaning issue, the easiest solution is to refer where ever possible to the "Tiddlywiki platform" And insert between these two words the following as appropriate;

Application
Note
Website
Database
Mobile

Because it is all of these and more.

Relegate tiddlywiki to the name and let platform suggest its capacity.

Regards
Tony

[@TiddlyTweeter]

Yeah

Where do I find those distinctions in the wild?

Such that a seeker could find their gold?

Looking for the one

Josiah

[Diego Mesa]

Hey all,

Thanks for you replies - I agree that TW is different/better/more powerful/flexible, etc than the "competition" I've posted. My point was not lets copy their features, but lets study:

• How they present their features
• Which ones appeal to larger groups of people
• How they get exposure to different groups
• etc

I want TW to be bigger, more well known, and EASIER TO BEGIN. Many "competitors" of TW have all three of these going for them

[TonyM]

I agree wholeheartedly

Tony

[Riz]

to be fair, if you want to consider competition on the FOSS platform, consider vnote (https://tamlok.github.io/vnote/en_us/) or trillium (https://github.com/zadam/trilium). Both of them are less than 3 years old but has managed to surpass Tiddlywiki in GitHub stars.

Tiddlywiki has several advantages over these two. Two major things that come to mind are.
1) Templating
2) Ability to have multiple copies of the same software running at the same time, essentially making it scalable without limits.

However, Tiddlywiki still gets beaten back when it comes to it. The reasons I think that causes this are, IMO.

1. Ease of entry
2. Appearance
3. Documentation

1. Tiddlywiki is a solution that requires intermediate activation energy from the user. People who decide to set up a personal knowledge base come in two groups*. Either "I want no headache, just install it and push an icon to get it up and running" group. Or the "I am doing it right this time, even if it takes some time" group. The first group opts for things like Evernote, or Joplin, or the apps I mentioned above and so on. The second groups goes for elaborate structures like org-mode or mediawiki and so on.

There has been long pending issues to reduce the activation energy to get started. A good example of the effort in this direction is Jed's Bob. However, it will take a long time before a newbie will find Bob, long before which he would have given up the idea to continue using TW. Having to install run time separately is so 2000s. It will not run well with the post millennial generation.

My point is this. Tiddlywiki should concentrate more on the Windows OS users, which forms 80% of the desktop and laptop users, rather than the "ready-to-hack-around" Unix cult. This is coming from an active Linux user.

Consider this: create an installer for windows that will check for existence of node run time in the system, and if not, will download and install it for the user with user permission.

2. Appearance. Tiddlywiki does look like it was conceived in the 90s and was designed in the 2000s. Consider it constructive criticism, but who uses a depressing grey tone as the major colour? Was the primary goal to appear appealing to emo kids?

Notice how every one of the new age note taking app which surges past Tiddlywiki in stars and downloads does look "nice"?. Heck, if any of them appeared in the search results around the time I started looking for a new note taking application, I wouldn't have given Tiddlywiki a second thought.

3. It is nice to see that documentation efforts are occurring at higher pace than before. There is still lot to go. For eg: the getting started tiddler. It could do with an recommended way of installation for different platforms. May be it will look opinionated, but it will help a new person to get it up and running in the smallest possible time.

I am not claiming that these three will magically turn around TWs fortunes. However, these three are the looming issues, IMO.

I feel like atleast some hold the attitude that "if they don't find TW good enough, their lose." After all, there are no monetary gains in having a larger following for a FOSS project. Consider that more people also means more contributions, more ideas and a better product for all.

In the end, this is another wall of text. It will disappear from our feeds in 24 hours and from our minds faster than that. Makes you think about the pointlessness of everything.

TLDR: May be community need to have a sit down on why TW5 lags behind much less featured competition.

* Remember that the binary classification is made for understanding sake and people exist in a spectrum.

[@TiddlyTweeter]

Riz,

I think that is a *brilliant* post.

I completely agree that immediate full installs, "click & get on with it", would likely increase TW usage enormously. 

IMO Windows and Android are key. 

FWIW, BTC's latest for Android looks in the right direction in understanding that its not just about getting it to work--its about it working on easy download with appropriate modern looks and a wiki up and running immediately.

----

I'm still trying to get to the take-away message your post partly points to. It is not so easy as we don't have much of a "promotion orientation" here. Though some of us are quite keen to see more of it.

----

An issue is one should not disparage all the wonderful ways of TW. I thought your post very sensitive to that. 

At the same time having a landing area for "Getting Started" on TiddlyWiki.com with so many options I really can't see a plus. My suspicion is it has a negative effect on uptake.

----

Enough. I'm interested to see who else sees this issue similar to you.

Very best wishes

Josiah

[Mark S.]

On Wednesday, January 9, 2019 at 5:28:05 AM UTC-8, Riz wrote:

My point is this. Tiddlywiki should concentrate more on the Windows OS users, which forms 80% of the desktop and laptop users, rather than the "ready-to-hack-around" Unix cult. This is coming from an active Linux user.

Consider this: create an installer for windows that will check for existence of node run time in the system, and if not, will download and install it for the user with user permission.

Hi Riz,

That was a great write-up!

Perhaps it would be better to say, "concentrate on the desktop". Why would you exclude Mac, when the developer is a Mac guy?

I'm thinking the install-node-in-background is a very difficult install sequence, especially since you're having to install the software from some other project. My experience attempting to upgrade node by hand on Linux is that node is finicky and has lots of environmental conditions. The experience wasn't much better on Windows, where installation information is stashed away in the users roaming data directory.

Of course, maybe someone has already written an easy-node-installer package.

What about TiddlyDesktop? Maybe it should be focus point #1 ? It now does everything you would expect a full-blown app to do. At 200 megs, it's not exactly the lightweight solution that the original TW was, but a lot of people have spare space on their drives these days.

Thanks!

-- Mark

[@TiddlyTweeter]

Mark S. wrote:

What about TiddlyDesktop? Maybe it should be focus point #1 ? It now does everything you would expect a full-blown app to do. At 200 megs, it's not exactly the lightweight solution that the original TW was, but a lot of people have spare space on their drives these days.

Yes. Once it has (1) portable addressing of its wiki;  (2) built in download of a wiki on first run.

TD is a marvellous thing that needs a bit of love.

Just me rambling

Josiah

[Diego Mesa]

Riz - you've wonderfully captured my exact thoughts on this topic as well! Very well said! I typed up a much longer response, but after rereading, Im basically just agreeing with you point by point several times, so I removed it lol.

I don't want what you said to disappear - Can we come up with some new action items (milestones in github) from this? How can we use this as a springboard for change?

[@TiddlyTweeter]

Diego Mesa wrote:

Riz - you've wonderfully captured my exact thoughts on this topic ... 

 

Can we come up with some new action items (milestones in github) from this?

 

How can we use this as a springboard for change?

 I think the issue is only WHO wants to engage promotion? I think there are a few of us with fairly congruent ideas.

I dunno. I dunno if its about articulating more here on GG the obvious frustration some of us have TW is not better known. OR going Gits. Either way I think we are ripening to ACT.

TW is very mature. If its not nowish its likely never.

Josiah

[Diego Mesa]

JournalBook: https://journalbook.co.uk/

HN comments: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=18872599

[@TiddlyTweeter]

Diego Mesa wrote:

JournalBook: https://journalbook.co.uk/

HN comments: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=18872599

Thanks. Very pertinent.

The simplicity of Journalbook "facing us" page is striking. How its doing what it does is not said. And that itself in interesting. That it feels it doesn't need to.

The HN comments bit where TW is mentioned is also interesting in that it doesn't have a lot of impact. It should but it doesn't.

I'd be very happy to promote TW more in forums. My problem is I'm not that smart. I need "scripts" that make sure I don't present it wrong.

In another thread it was suggested we improve the Wikipedia entry for TW as a step in that direction ... https://groups.google.com/forum/#!msg/tiddlywiki/fMRfHip0l08/xcWJNzorAQAJ

Thoughts

Josiah

[Dave]

Maybe the "Tiddlywiki foundation" could pick several instances of TW specialized uses and turn them into node-included snap packages? (Yes, Linux only, but it's a start...)

TW for notes
TW for writing
TW for photo gallery
etc...

[@TiddlyTweeter]

Ciao Dave

I agree that having Example TW to show would be great. Where are they when we need them? :-)

Josiah

[Jed Carty]

For example wikis I have a few that may be interesting:

A interactive fiction game: http://zorklike.tiddlyspot.com

Documentation for a server (it is incomplete, but the idea is there): https://www.ooktech.xyz:8443/SecureNodeServer

A photo gallery demo: https://ooktech.com/TiddlyWiki/PhotoGallery/

I have some more on my computer. I will see about uploading them.

[AdamS]

I think Dave's point goes beyond example TWs. I don't think the TW community is lacking there. There are some amazing and exotic examples floating around. If I'm understanding Dave's point correctly, we should have "empty" TWs available that are roughly optimized for certain tasks. They come pre-loaded with some basic plugins particular to that task and maybe there's an easily available list that has suggestions and links to other plugins that are associated with that task.

So if someone is new to TW wants to use TW for note-taking for school, they just hit the link and get an edition with a couple plugins for notes. If they want a TW for writing, there's another one to download, etc.

I think Dave's idea would go a fair ways to reducing some of the activation energy.

Another thing that would help would be a WYSIWYG editor. As a newbie who originally came to TW for writing, I found the plaintext editor very offputting. I almost went to WordPress just on account of that. I know we have the ckeditor plugin available, but something native to TW might help.

Best wishes,

Adam

[@TiddlyTweeter]

AdamS wrote:

.... I don't think the TW community is lacking there. There are some amazing and exotic examples floating around. 

Excellent. 

What are the examples that you recommend?

Best wishes

Josiah

[@TiddlyTweeter]

Ciao Jed

I think those 3 are great for scope. One author, 3 dimensions. Its very invigorating.

I hope this thread leads  towards concrete shows of good TW.

Josiah

[TonyM]

Adam,

I do think "Editions" is the appropriate way to "package" such "Canned" solutions. We need to add some editions and promote them more directly.

Regards

Tony

[Diego Mesa]

I mentioned something similar in another related thread:

https://groups.google.com/d/msg/tiddlywikidev/GN--K_hYI-c/PVQdChI-AwAJ

"We can even imagine simplifying while expanding the supported editions of TW:

1. Bare-Bones
   
2. Feature Rich
• Comes loaded with many plugins making it easier for new users to "get started". 
  
3. Niche:
• Writer
• Student/Researcher
• Dungeon Master/Gamer
• etc. - These will probably just differ in style/pre-loaded content, not really functionality. 

This has turned into a great thread! Thank you all for your useful and thoughtful comments. Let's keep the discussion going! 

Diego

[TonyM]

Diego,

Even a code mirror and visual editor setups would make usefull editions however a toc and a few other features for managing, Notating and commenting on tiddlers would help, and this could be common to editor editions.

Always with a reminder of the ability to configure and enhance.

Tony

[S. S.]

Apologies for the long post that follows. I actually wrote most of this earlier, to focus myself on the proper way forward for TiddlyWiki's Documentation.

---

The thoughts below have come into focus while spending spare time reviewing documentation for TiddlyWiki over the past couple of months.

I find I now need to step back and ask myself these questions about the Beginner's level documentation instructions being written:

• Who is the target of these instructions?
• What technical level should be assumed of them?
• How can the present site be used to get the "right-target" new visitor to start quickly and try out a few things?
• Not get stuck and frustrated and leave thinking this is not a fully developed and documented program?
• How can I write instructions that allow readers to:
• become comfortable with the naming conventions
• get familiar with the underlying infrastructure and quirks of the program
• quickly find and use the right tools the right way for their task
• gain insights for use in their own creations

To answer them, I realize I first have to try and understand exactly what TiddlyWiki is and isn't. There are lots of serious, candid, and even comic posts in Google Groups to give me clues, and I have tried to absorb them.

What I see as a "core" strength of TiddlyWiki is that it gives the infrastructure and the tools to make "solutions".

As many programmers of integrated systems might quickly learn, there is no - "one size fits all" - out of the box - "solution". There are just too many scenarios and user's personal needs and desires to be taken into account.

So, if my understanding is in the right direction, what goes into the "core" of TiddlyWiki - should be either - "infrastructure" or "tools" - for creating solutions.

I came to this understanding while looking at the Table of Content macros when creating Documentation for Beginners. It has caused me to believe that these macros are actually "plugin" material. In essence they are not "platform" or "tools." I imagine similarly that, though I have never used it, the whole Journal system is the same. They are both "user-solutions."

To change tack now, the first post in this thread starts with looking at how other programs are "doing it" ; that inevitably leads towards the notion of "Marketing" TiddlyWiki. As I have noticed, this usually leads to creating "user-solutions."

Since most any part of TiddlyWiki can be "programmed" and customised, one will have a limitless number of "solutions." It takes a lot of time, effort, and testing, to make comprehensive - end user friendly "solutions." Something as "seemingly" simple as the Table of Contents macros, that have been in use for years, still have noticeable issues.

Thus, out of the necessity of keeping TiddlyWiki maintainable, it should make sense that "ready-made end user-solutions" released in empty.html are kept to the absolute minimum, else continuous tweaking (followed by testing) to satisfy users' needs, may soon become unmanageable for the development volunteers.

Now, back to the Documentation issue.

The user-base for TiddlyWiki's Documentation should perhaps not include the vast majority - namely those who are unable (such as through lack of skills, motivation, time) to set up and personalize it for their own ends.

Instead it should focus only on those who already have some basic programming skills, and also the inclination, ability, and time, to use TiddlyWiki to create solutions for themselves and others.

Helping those who are able to create personal or "end-user-solutions" on their own - and who need insight from the knowledge base of regular users, could be considered as a key target. Trying to create documentation that entices those looking for "ready-made" solutions, but unable or unwilling to "play the TiddlyWiki" game - seems pointless.

It may be wise to accept that actual creation of ready made solutions is a branch separate from the venture of core TiddlyWiki.

It may then also be wise that Documentation should be written with the purpose of luring this "right user-base", and structured so as to entrap them into this fascinating TiddlyWorld we share.

[PJO]

I have some similar things but it occurs to me, as someone who doesn't have time to keep up with tiddlywiki developments, that what I'd like to see would be something like tiddlywiki explained using tiddlywiki -- perhaps with some YouTube videos embedded or linked. Or even just a HOW TO with respect to the new features with each release. Since tiddlywikis are single files a newsletter on changes and HOW TOs with a tiddlywiki attachment is something I'd subscribe to.

The interactive game reminds me:

Once (long before the web!)... I learned how to use a slide rule using a book -- that I'm sure there's a term for but it escapes me -- which set problems and offered answers and page numbers. If you got it wrong it explained what you likely did and sent you back. It was very useful (without it I'd have flunked physics in university; it was the last year that calculators were banned). I'm sure nobody has the time to do that for TW, and that it's to some extent structurally impossible given that it's not a frozen thing like a slide rule, but ... I wonder

At times TW feels like a train going past on which people are inventing new lego. If you go away for a while and come back you can recognise some names but the language has changed, web sites that you were familiar with are gone or changed or contain code that no longer works. It can be a bit bewildering even for a long time TW user who only drops in here occasionally.  There isn't a definitive, structured, way to apprehend TW. It's somewhat ironic as a wiki would be a great way to organise the information.

I assumed there were two reasons for this. First, everyone was too busy inventing new lego and, second, possibly wrongly, I had the feeling that a "tiddlywikihwotopedia" could only be countenanced using TW, and that just would be too hard given its single user orientation. 

I have no doubt at all that I've missed a lot of good information that has been shared here and which I could have used or learned from but I can't spend the time, and if and when I have searched I get so much that is out of context, out of date, irrelevant, or requiring background knowledge I don't have, I find myself thinking "if only there was a wiki" (of all the things!).

And it means I have even missed things UNDER MY NOSE. The canonical example: my wife has used a "Tiddlyfolio" tiddlywiki for many years to store some confidential information in encrypted form. When she began having hassles with Firefox and saving I looked at updating it to TW5 but a) just couldn't find the code to do the encryption and b) completely overlooked the fact that the capability was now built in! 

And this was despite my using TW5 for quite a long time. I didn't even find it immediately. First, after some research, I tried out Joplin, which is pretty nice, and which I have since switched to instead of Evernote. However, if you get access to the device e.g., if it's left open and unattended for a few minutes, there's no requirement for a secondary password (as there is in the case of authy e.g.). That's just not good enough for the kind of data she she deals with and is legally required to protect (counselling practice, not Swiss bank account details).

I greatly appreciate the efforts of Dave Gifford and others who provide some structure that "passengers" (non engineers) can use for orientation. Not because I rely on them, but because I know I might do someday, and of course in the meantime I can make some useful chance discoveries.

There's some irony in the word passengers, because what I suspect many TW users have in common is an active desire to control their own information and a preference for open source software.

An ability to make some structured discoveries, preferably one that people could collaborate on developing, would be terrific. A YouTube channel (or equivalent) would be good. Something else that would declutter things for many: splitting this group in two, one for developers and one for users. That works well for another open source tool I use.

By chance I stumbled on the /selfhosted subreddit recently, having known nothing of it previously. This seems to be the broader context in which TW fits. Software that you manage yourself instead of surrendering your data, privacy and freedom of choice. I found myself wondering briefly why I have yet to get any documentation for that kind of software in the form of a TW, even a template say, for filling in key things one will need to refer to later. Being able to record, synchronise and, where needed, encrypt key procedural, configuration and other information is really very valuable. I maintain a TW for my network and one for each computer on it. I've never got around to one for the house but have long thought that every home could use one. 

[S. S.]

The below exchange helps me get a bit of perspective.

Do read the full gripe for Documentation just some hours ago here - caused because the method of creating an external link that changed path for different users wasn't quickly "findable" in the documentation. This is what the complaint ended with:

And I'm not a Luddite. I'm fairly technical, but my expectation is that an end-user tool should make it obvious and easy to do common things. If I have to put on my 'programmer hat' to figure out how it works, it probably is too hard.

Then a little below that, Mark S. puts this all into perspective perfectly by saying:

If you use it as described, it works out of the box. But if you immediately start wanting to do something unconventional like inserting a macro into a link, well, that's what the forum is for. There's lots of documentation. Way more than many other projects I've seen. The problem is, it's not possible to foresee how people are going to want to use TW than it is to foresee how someone is going to want to use a string. One person wants to do macrame, another wants to make a tin-can phone, and someone else wants to make a candle-wick. Very hard to document the 1000 different ways people might go.

It's much easier to document a single-purpose tool like "gpg" or "notepad" then a sprawling octopus of a tool like TW.

Once we want something, we assume it is an obviously common requirement! That's today's way of thinking in this technologically complex world. We want things to happen our way almost effortlessly. When those "oh so obviously important" solutions aren't already ready and waiting for us, and we know we might be capable of doing it ourselves, we want to do it quickly, very quickly, without having to put on our "learning" hat.

Remember even just a decade ago, one had to employ a full time programmer and spend quite a lot of time explaining in detail what was wanted, and then the programmer, who had spent years learning the language would take days to make it happen.

Now, we expect complex customization to be "out of the box" or "doable easily by myself" - without putting in too much effort learning! And we expect the documentation to be laid out perfectly for us to accomplish that learning almost instantly. A Difficult challenge for the documentation creators!

[Dave]

We just need an AI cranking out custom TWs until it gives us what we want ;)

[TonyM]

I am building a code mirror editor tiddlywiki, eddition. I will make it public for review however any comments on essential components would be appreciated.

Its intended for text and code but not for tiddlywiky design.

Regards
Tony

[Diego Mesa]

Just an update - notion hit HN today, and here are some comments:

https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=18904648

[Greg Molyneux]

I'd written on this subject some time ago in a different thread, and think this is vital for wider acceptance of TW.  One thing I'd ask of the pondered "TiddlyWiki Foundation" is to make the various editions proposed here by AdamS interoperable.  That is, to use a common set of tags and fields, so that tiddlers can be taken from one edition, and linked to or imported into another edition.  Thus, notes from the note taking edition can be linked or imported into another for scheduling, tasks from the scheduler can be brought into an outliner, all could be linked from a mind map in a TiddlyMap enabled (or kanban-ish enabled, or whatever enabled) project management edition.

You want a real user base growth?  I'd argue that such capability and interoperability - out of the box, so to speak - would go a long way towards that end.  Just a thought.

[Rizwan Ishak]

Notably, the first comment mentions reverse engineering the API to access the data. Might not be entirely impossible to build a synchronisation tool between notion and Tiddlywiki.

Sincerely,
Dr. Rizwan Ishak

[Diego Mesa]

Some more observations: The notion post has over 887 votes and 438 comments, making it a very highly voted and discussed post on HN. Tiddlywiki isn't mentioned once in the comments.

[Dave]

+1 for interoperable tags and fields - great idea!! (like fusion reactors - but hopefully more achievable)

I suspect barring a G10 Summit of Tiddlywiki this would have to be achieved by a suite of TW.Apps made by one person (given our decentralized nature)

[Greg Molyneux]

Dave,

I think the G10 TW.Apps summit is a great idea.  Think about it this way: Linux (which powers half the internet) is developed by a fairly decentralized group of coders and contributors.  What we need is a good project manager, and coders willing to cooperate around pre-defined and agreed upon standards - beyond the very open and capable framework TW itself provides as a basis - towards pre-determined usage goals.  Such a group takes nothing away from TW, which it uses as a foundation, but it has the potential to extend this framework in a way the TW project itself isn't likely to go: "TW.Apps: built on Tiddlywiki".  That's ok, it's just a different set of desired outcomes, using the same underlying framework.

Allow me to copy this from another current thread: We see other programs able to do this or that, and frequently say "TiddlyWiki can do that".  In most cases, that is absolutely true - TW can do that.  But it doesn't.  At least not "out of the box".  So many of these features require someone to code the capability, or develop a given feature, or download and test a plugin (and hope it doesn't break something else), and this is a HUGE barrier to entry and use for most people.  This is why StackEdit or DynaList or similar are used so easily - they just do the things that people require for a given workflow.  It's not that they're better from a tech standpoint, but they are better suited to the needs of their users, right out of the box.

In my view, this is one of the biggest lessons we can learn from the "competition".

[@TiddlyTweeter]

Greg, Dave et al ...

Isn't the issue just getting TW used?

I'd modestly suggest ...

-- focus us on Windows & Android

-- think into complete solutions ... i.e. routes where install is both a wiki and its system of running together in one go.

Best wishes

Josiah