Even though I use Vim I never used Neorg. I suppose they use the same markup as in Org-mode.
Org-mode is far more superior than Markdown. Again, I don't know about Neorg, but Org-mode in Emacs supports tons of interesting things that don't exist in Markdown,
- things like "smart" datetime stamps where you can calculate the difference between dates, change the date and it would automatically adjust the day of week, or pick a date using the calendar UI;
- it supports time clocking - you can for example use pomodoro to automatically clock you in and out for each task, and then later build a time report, showing you how much time you spent on each task;
- priorities and tags; habit tracking and task management;
- tables that you can use like spreadsheets in Excel - can you do calculations in your Markdown tables?;
- embedded LaTeX snippets - indispensable if you need formulas and stuff;
- exporting to many different formats - e.g., you can easily turn your notes into a reveal.js presentation;
And of course code blocks. But not just static code blocks, you can run them and see the results. Moreover, you can for instance run some curl command, pipe the results into a javascript code block, then results of that calculation pipe into a python block and finally into some other backend that generates a graph.
In addition, there are tons of plugins you can use for example to automatically git commit your notes. Or have Zettelkasten system like in Roamresearch, Loqseq or Obsidian. You can keep your pdf annotations that automatically sync with the book, or keep notes to a codebase, where each note correlates to specific file, line or function in your code. Or you can manage your Anki cards to help you retain information - your notes and the anki cards would be the same, you wouldn't have to store and maintain the same info in two different places.
So, my suggestion is that before dismissing any tool that doesn't look very familiar to you or the majority of your peers, maybe first try to understand why some people choose to use that tool, even though it seems to contradict more popular choice.
Furthermore, each item you have listed as a benefit to Org-mode is in fact capable of being done in Markdown via plugins for neovim, and probably other markdown editors, like Loqseq, Roamresearch, or Obisidian, much in the same way you speak of plugins that interface with .org docs.
So, my suggestion is that before dismissing a comment regarding a plugin that is unfamiliar to you, is to read its spec, and then try to understand why people would be perhaps dismissive of that tool, especially when it chooses to conflict with existing, more popular choices.
> No, Neorg does not use the same markup as Org-mode.
Okay, I admit I assumed that prematurely. I do stand by my words though - Org-mode in Emacs is much more capable than Markdown in any other editor or a specialized tool I have seen. Emacs is not without flaws, and Org-mode also has weaknesses. Sometimes Markdown is a better tool for certain things, but when strictly comparing capabilities and potential, Org-mode would be ahead. Anyone who has used it sufficiently would attest to that.
All of this is possible in markdown. None of that is specific to the text format, it's all in the tooling, of which Markdown is unrivaled. Sorry, Org is not that popular in the grand scheme of things, just with Emacs people.
The problem is neorg is neither Markdown nor Org and I'm not bothering to use a one-off format for this one tool.
Yes, indeed, many of these individual features I listed, are available in other tools. For example:
- Literate programming can be done in Jupyter Notebooks, R Markdown, and other computational notebooks.
- Advanced to-do tracking, agenda views, and tagging are available in productivity tools like Asana, Trello, and Todoist.
- Customizable exports can be done in many document preparation systems like LaTeX or pandoc.
- Spreadsheets and calculations are, of course, native to Excel and Google Sheets.
However, the real power of org-mode - and what makes it stand out - lies in the integration and synergy of all these components in one place, inside a powerful text editor (Emacs). This tight integration is harder to achieve when you're using various separate tools to accomplish the same tasks.
It not only makes org-mode a versatile tool for many text-related tasks (note-taking, programming, writing papers, planning projects, managing to-dos), but also allows these tasks to naturally intertwine and interact. For example, you could extract to-dos directly from your code comments, or include executable code snippets in your project plan.
Moreover, as a component of Emacs, org-mode can tap into the vast ecosystem of Emacs plugins and extensions, meaning you can further extend its capabilities to suit your particular needs.
So, while it's true that many of these individual features can be found elsewhere, the unique combination and integration offered by org-mode give it a singular and valuable position in the tools landscape.
> Markdown is unrivaled.
Respectfully, I disagree. Yes, Markdown is more popular. Yet, in the hands of an experienced Emacs user, things that are possible to do with Org-mode can sometimes be on another level of awesome. You just probably haven't seen it.
> it's all in the tooling, of which Markdown is unrivaled.
The tooling for Emacs is unrivaled. Markdown is, honestly, pretty cool: it’s probably the best thing the John Gruber has ever done. I think that it’s arguable that Markdown will survive everyone now alive on Earth.
But I believe that Emacs will last longer still, because Emacs is not a text format but a powerful user-extensible environment. As long as general-purpose computers are legal, folks will use something recognisable as an Emacs.
