This looks really nice, but I suppose I might ask the hard questions - how does this compare to Obsidian, which is my go-to "notes app which is just a bunch of markdown files stored to your computer"? I very much like Obsidian, and as I understand it they are your direct competitor, so some indication of how you want to distinguish your app from theirs would be great if you want to compel me to switch. :)

> Every feature we didn't build is time you spend writing.

Also, I feel that this kind of marketing language rubs me the wrong way (perhaps also that it feels LLM-ish). How is you not adding features saving me time? Maybe it saves you time...

Im touched that “Ghostty but for X” is a marketing point but what does it mean in this case? I thought this might be based on the architecture I did for Ghostty. But it’s not. Or it might be full native UI, but it’s not (it’s GPUI). Not trying to be rude or unappreciative but as the creator of Ghostty here… what do you mean?

This is a mysterious use of "X but for Y".

Yeah not to dogpile on this, but looking through the commit history, it seems like this was mainly vibe coded? When I think of "Ghostty but for X", I think of.. something the opposite. Love seeing GPUI projects but the marketing makes it seem disingenuous

I don’t get it. Why not just use a terminal and a shell, like Ghostty?

Bear is my fav answer to this. It's mostly "just markdown", but great design. Nice Apple cloud sync integration. Just the right touch of formatting ("# Header" renders bigger and hash is grey, but still markdown, tables are visually tables, images render inline, etc.

???

Why not a TUI app ? I don't really want a second terminal that only does one thing...

> Markdown is already beautiful. We don't render it. We don't preview it. You read it raw, the way it was meant to be.

I don't want to be inflammatory or shallowly dismissive of other people's opinions. But I find this puritanical view surprising when we're talking about presenting markdown for reading by humans.

Take markdown links for example. In a terminal those should surely be rendered as OSC8 hyperlinks where supported: that gives actual link functionality, as well as being much more readable.

Or take markdown code blocks; to me it seems clear that they should be rendered with syntax highlighting, probably in a box or against a slightly different background color to set them off from the rest of the document. Triple backticks are for machines, not humans, surely? I don't think they're beautiful.

I don't know the history / lore of what is common mark vs non-standard addons etc. But github supports things like <details> tags; clearly it's no good just rendering that in plain text. A browser renders it well; not sure how to in a terminal.

Similarly tables should surely at least have padding added so that each column has constant width as you look down the rows, but promising to output it raw wouldn't do that since markdown itself has no such requirement. Which gets at my overall point: markdown is a format for capturing richer document data while writing; this should be rendered for humans to read.

MacOS only it would appear. Would have loved to try this with my obsidian vault for where I can't use electron.

This seems overly complicated. Let the editors be editors.

I recently created a Go application for myself after not finding a note-taking application I liked. Instead of implementing an editor, the application just creates the `%Y-%m-%d.md` file and then opens it in my preferred editor. I have other features, but in the end, all it does is create files or pipe data into the editor I want to use.

  journal                     # opens 2026-03-07.md in vim
  journal yesterday           # opens 2026-03-06.md in vim
  journal weekly              # pipes 2026-03-01 – 07.md into vim
  journal monthly             # pipes 2026-03-01 – 31.md into vim
  journal monthly last month  # pipes 2026-02-01 – 28.md into vim

Since ive been giving Claude access to my notes a cli tool to open my vault makes sense, but I'm curious how it has ai features if it's free.

As others, I find the comparison to ghostty somewhat confusing. Also, this seems like a separate app for what could be a TUI application? Unless I'm missing something.

The idea of showing raw Markdown with just a few colors and maybe some bold/italic variations is compelling, but what about tables? Tables in Markdown can be very useful, but also a pain to type out/format manually.

Auto-save on every keystroke sounds good, but wouldn't that hammer the underlying storage too much for no reason?

And the installation instructions continuing the unfortunate trend of `curl | bash` doesn't help..

-----

On the topic of Markdown editors, what are the current recommendations (primarily for Linux)? Obsidian is a crowd favorite, but it seems too heavy if I want to only open a single file, especially outside of any vault. Something to preview/edit `README.md` files would be nice.

> Diary entries get a path: diary/2026/march/03/

Date paths should use at least a double digit numerical index so they are naturally ordered when sorted lexicographically. Numbers also give you i18n for free (assuming Gregorian calendar of course, but it seems that's what this non configurable tool does here).

What's the point of markdown when it's not rendered? Markdown is for formatting things to look different, like headlines and code blocks look actually different, what's the point of typing the characters to format your text if you don't even see the formatting and it looks like plaintext

I've tried a lot of note management but always come back to [potwiki](https://github.com/vim-scripts/potwiki.vim) + "Vim". Only one necessary functional bit in the whole thing, write CamelCase and your word is linked, hit enter on it and you're there.

>No preview pane

How can you even call a program a markdown editor if it does not even render markdown?