[Feature Request] curved, shaped, or freehand connectors between notes

As you’ll note by scrolling up, this has been something asked for in the past. Toward the top you’ll find two links to official responses. I think the first link probably does the most to explain why Scapple doesn’t have a lot of stuff like this.

Feedback - actually “Wishlist” - I really do love working with scapple. BUT: why ar connection lines/arrows always straight . And why do they only “stick” to textboxes on top or at the bottom, but not at the right/left end of a box?? As it is, the lines cross behind textboxes (simply not visible) wich in large mind maps makes the overview quite difficult.

In most other mind map apps it is possible to bend lines and connections, by simply drag them with your mouse and to connect it to all 4 sides of a note/textbox. Not in scapple.

Pleeeeeaaaase change that!

My long-standing wish as well. The lack of curved lines is my main reason for still using other mindmappers instead of Scapple.

such a pity…
To me the solution is: no longer scapple, so sorry for that, otherwise I liked the app.
But so many others can do it - your answers (…2013) are simply not satisfying.

For how I use Scapple, I don’t think I’ve ever once found myself in need a line that snaked around things, to such a degree that the lack of being able to do so caused me to fire up InkScape or something similar instead.

So if you need such a thing, and with such great regularity that you can’t even use it for some things, then absolutely, you’re in the wrong program. It’s not made for that kind of work. That’s fine! We certainly are not out to satisfy everyone, and I hope you find the right tool for what you need to do.

There is hardly anything else out there like Scapple, but probably the closest I have ever encountered (and one we looked to during initial design for ideas), is CMap. Most everything else is your stock mind-mapping tool that bases connectivity on hierarchical principles. Unlike Scapple, CMap does not hold back on having lots of little buttons and sliders and panels and dials and switches. So if that’s more your jam, you may like it.

2 Likes

I’d like to have Bézier curves, but not at the cost of adding CMap-level complexity. Not even close.

2 Likes

Clear words… (

What surprises me is that you always link “having curved lines” to many disadvantages like “many little buttons etc.”, "hierarchical principles etc. - I don’t know CMap, but I know there are in fact other solutions.

But ok.

I think you misunderstood. I wasn’t making judgement, or saying X shouldn’t do Y because of Z. I was just trying to give some pointers for finding software like Scapple that might work better.

I personally don’t have anything against hierarchical principles, nor consider it a “disadvantage” in most contexts—that is the foundation of Scrivener, after all, and what I consider to be one of the best ways to work with texts. It’s also quite useful for thinking tools, taking notes, and that sort of thing. I use a program called Logseq for journaling and task management, and it takes hierarchy to an extreme. Mind-maps can be useful for that, undeniably, but that model is also very different than how Scapple works. Thus if you’re looking for alternatives you might find most of those things too different and rigid. For myself anyway, the appeal of Scapple is that it doesn’t work that way, and forces a different mindset.

Most of the things I have found that present a model similar to Scapple are more orientated toward the feature filled end of the spectrum. That also is not a judgmental statement. You should see some of the software I use. It’s a tendency though, and there is probably some kind of correlation between tools where effort has been put into highly expressive connectors with Bezier controls and such, and a presentation vs quick-output emphasis in the design. With the former you tend to get a lot of controls. I would use InkScape if I need to present something, not Scapple.

These are descriptors of software. The world is full of useful options, and in some cases, lots of switches is just what one needs.

What I understood ist, that "Most everything else is your stock mind-mapping tool that bases connectivity on hierarchical principles. " and “CMap does not hold back on having lots of little buttons and sliders and panels and dials and switches”.

I don’t agree with the first and the second sounds like a little bit more biased than just “descriptors of software”…
And by the way: It is indeed possible to find something that offers a lot of the options I miss working with scapple and still is user-friendly and easy to handle.

But OK - from my side end of discussion at this point. I understood, that it’s not on literature&latte’s “to-do-list”, which is completely ok.

still? no plans…? :slight_smile: