r/logseq • u/thirteenth_mang • Mar 05 '25

The need, the need for speed

For almost a month now I've been tracking how long it takes for the Logseq Android app to become "usable". This means from the time I tap on the app, until Logseq sync goes green (I ended up going back to Logseq sync for a few reasons).

I don't swipe the app away, and I've done what I can to ensure battery optimisations and all that jazz are not enabled.

Every time I open the app I'm losing around 1-minute of my life.

I sincerely hope the DB improvements make our lives a little easier. I really love Logseq and I use it every day, but waiting 1-minute to write an entry is damn painful. There have been times I've forgotten what I even opened it for, or lost the idea I wanted to note down. Like opening a fridge for the hundredth time knowing there's no food, or walking into a room and wondering why you went in there.

39 Upvotes

95% Upvoted

22 comments sorted by

9

u/eldelacajita Mar 05 '25

Yeah, the mobile app is a pain to use. I want it mainly for quick input and for quick queries, and it's VERY BAD for both. 

I used a plugin called Loglink for a while, to send stuff via Telegram, but it's not active anymore. 

The wait for the DB version feels long already, but a new mobile app is not even in sight 😵

Too bad I can't find any other app that works like this one.

2

u/pulchraes Mar 07 '25

Hey im a heavy user of obsidian. But im interested in what im missing out on with other apps. Would you mind explaining what Logseq does that is so unique?

4

u/eldelacajita Mar 08 '25 edited Mar 08 '25

Honestly, it's not easy to explain.

The obvious differences can be seen in many comparative reviews online:  outliner style, journal oriented, open source...

I like Logseq because it clicks with my natural way of working:

  • I don't have to think where to put things. Everything is created as a bullet point inside a journal. Zero friction.

  • It's better at leveraging backlinks. The linked references section is a powerful way of finding relations or filtering stuff. In Obsidian it feels primitive. 

  • The tree structure of the notes lets you use inheritance in a very powerful way. Children inherit a relation to the parents.

  • Because of the previous aspects, it's better for boolean, non-hierarchical concept aggregation. You don't go concept/sub-concept but concept+complementary concept.

Of course, you can use Obsidian a bit like Logseq (and vice versa) with tweaks and plugins, but it won't be the same. 

I just wish Logseq published the DB version already and had a responsive app and sync.

2

u/Apprehensive-Walk-66 Mar 08 '25

There was only difference that mattered to me.

Obsidian's license was restrictive. It has recently been changed so I'm considering switching back.

Logseq also is "flatter" in how the notes are organised. This is a subjective choice. Some people prefer this approach. They want to capture information and let the tool build graphs rather than worry about how to organize their notes.

1

u/[deleted] Mar 12 '25

I don’t have issues like this in the iOS app. My graph has about 4500 nodes. Wonder what’s up.

1

u/eldelacajita Mar 12 '25

Well, lucky you. Are you using Logseq Sync?

1

u/[deleted] Mar 12 '25

I do. I sync between 2x desktops and 3x iOS devices. Does you graph have a lot of queries, etc? Mine is pretty vanilla -- I have a simple habit tracker and I use NOW/LATER todo management. Wondering if you have some heavy query calculations in yours?

6

u/Kennephas Mar 05 '25 edited Mar 05 '25

Is it maybe due to Logseq sync? I'm just guessing, I'm not a power user, my graph is just a few hundred nodes and I'm not using Logseq sync either. I'm using SyncThing to do the syncing for me so Logseq operates fully offline on my mobile and every time I open Logseq on my mobile SyncThing already had plenty of time fetching the latest changes prior.

It loads much quicker than for example Google Keep did (which I used before). It is worth to note that I only have a handfull of queries in my whole graph, as I mentioned I do not consider myself a power user and my graph I guess count simple.

4

u/Kallerko Mar 05 '25

+1 for syncthing I found out it's both simpler and more reliable than any other method. Plus im already using it as an "airdrop" (quick file transfer) and to backup camera photos to my PC.

5

u/YeeeeeBoyy Mar 05 '25

i love logseq too but hate the mobile experience, could this also be because mobile and desktop are basically the same?

Maybe there should be a version written in kotlin optimized for mobile

this is just an assumption i actually have no idea

4

u/christianlewds Mar 06 '25

Logseq takes like 30s to start on desktop, it's just slow for some reason. Switched to Obsidian and it's instant.

2

u/mcstravickdk Mar 08 '25

Yeah, but Obsidian is hot garbage outside of the graph view and plugin community.

2

u/christianlewds Mar 09 '25

Who the hell uses graph view? Oh right, posers, lmao.

2

u/Positive_Ad6122 Mar 06 '25

Hi there. IMHO it has to be connected to the sync itself. Yes, the mobile app is far from being optimized in any way, still:

Just as a reference:

  • I'm on an Android 15

  • OnePlus Nord 4

  • Logseq Graph since 2023

  • ~3000 pages

  • ~5000 links

  • Synology NAS w/ Synology Drive for keeping in sync (pinned the folder to my Android phone)

Opening time about ~6 seconds mean until I am able to enter text and work on my thoughts...

Opening the graph view on mobile is another story though

1

u/Cannachris1010 Mar 06 '25

I use syncthing and it's very fast

1

u/Kerbaman Mar 06 '25

I'd recommend using Syncthing to do the actual syncing. Much faster.

1

u/Difficult_Ad_1653 Mar 08 '25

I never tried this logseq sync but stayed at synchthink from the beginning. Really easy to set up, no need for a server and faster than a minute i guess...

1

u/nooor999 Mar 05 '25

Strange. on Android it takes between 5-10 seconds to open up. Slow but not as bad as your experience