The online mind map smackdown

 clipped from tiffanybbrown.com

Review: The online mind map smackdown

Wouldn't you know it? About a week after this post, Comapping released an upgrade that changed the chart. I have updated the chart to reflect this new data. However, I have not re-reviewed Comapping. And I'm not 100% sure it's necessary given my reasons for preferring MindMeister.

Mind mapping may just be the next wave of online applications. Advanced JavaScript libraries and Flash are enabling web-based mind map applications that are almost as robust as their off-line counterparts (such as Freemind).
In this post, I'll revisit the previously-reviewed MindMeister and three newer mind map services: Mind42.com, Comapping.com and Mindomo.

What's the same?

All three of these services share a core set of features:

• Collaboration
• Exporting or downloading of mind maps
• Importing of mind maps
• Publishing and sharing of maps

But there are a few differences between these applications, and some of those differences may be a deal breaker for you.

MindMeister.com

When I originally reviewed MindMeister.com, it was in a private beta. A few weeks later, the site launched as a paid service (currently $4 per month), with a free plan that has a reduced feature set.
MindMeister's interface is all CSS, (X)HTML and JavaScript driven, with lots of Ajax communication with the server. It still offers all of the features from the original review, plus you can search del.icio.us and Wikipedia for related content from any node.
If you are a premium user, you can export mind maps to Mindmanager or Freemind XML formats. Otherwise you are limited to image (GIF, JPG or PNG formats) and rich text exports. Also, free users are limited to five mind maps at any given time.
Mindmeister offers basic text formatting — and something I thought was particularly cool — the ability to add notes to a node.
Cost? $4 per month; reduced-feature free service available

Mind42.com

Like MindMeister, Mind42.com also offers integration with del.icio.us and Wikipedia. When you create a URL within a node, you are offered the option to browse del.icio.us and Wikipedia for related entries.
Though all of these services offer collaboration and sharing, Mind42 takes it one step further by integrating the Google Talk gadget. If you have a Google account, you can chat while collaboration on your map. Mind42 also allows you to attach notes and to-do lists to nodes, extending it into a productivity-management tool. MindMeister, on the other hand, offers Twitter updates for shared maps.
Both MindMeister and Mind42 let you import Freemind and Mindmanager maps. But Mind42 only allows you to export your maps to Rich Text, Freemind, or Mindmanager formats (or download a Mind42 file). MindMeister also allows you to export your maps as GIF, JPG or PNG images. But to export to Freemind and Mindmanager formats, you do have to pay the $4 monthly subscription fee.
Where Mind42 falls short is in its file management screen. Deleting files is easy enough. But when you delete all of your mind maps, you are prompted to create a new one. As of right now, there is no way to leave that screen other than by creating a new mind map. Only then can you log out of the program.
Mind42 is also very error-prone at this stage. I experienced data-destroying errors (such as while saving) in about half of my sessions. It is the only application of the bunch that is still in beta. Mind42 will certainly have to iron out their wrinkles in order to gain traction.
Cost? Mind42 is currently free to use. I'm guessing that will change once the site exits beta.

Comapping.com

Unlike MindMeister and Mind42.com, Comapping.com's user interface was developed in Flash. Although that means you will have to install a plug in to use Comapping, it also means that the interface is a little more robust. Comapping.com, for example, offers "tool tip"-like keyboard shortcut hints.
Comapping also distinguishes itself in how it arranges the map. Where Mind42.com and MindMeister center the root node, Comapping anchors it to the left. While I prefer the flexibility of a centered map, Comapping says that its left-to-right organization is more efficient. From the company's web site:

… The conclusion was striking: people were more confused — and less efficient — when they were building or trying to review a part of a map that had the topics around a center especially going from right to left.
We have a hypothesis that the reason is tightly related to the fact that we read from left to right: Topic organized from left to right gives a much faster overview of the semantic structure — probably because you can physically see the topic in less eye spans.

Like Mind42, Comapping allows you to attach tasks to nodes. You can even assign deadlines. Minor quirk: Comapping only accepts one type of date format (yyyy-mm-dd). A smarter interface would be able to parse a variety of date formats.
One unique feature: the site allows you to develop presentations and slide shows.
There are some drawbacks to Comapping, however, mostly around importing and exporting files. You can only import Mind Manager files. What's more, you can only export files in Mindmanager, rich text or HTML. You can't export your mind map as an image, and Freemind is not supported. You can download a .comap file, however.
Cost? $11.99 for six months; 30 day free trial.

Mindomo.com

Mindomo is much like Comapping in that it was developed with Flash. Its interface is good, but not necessarily as thoughtful. For example, Mindomo supports keyboard shortcuts, but there are no hints as with Comapping.
Mindomo's layout and formatting options far are more flexible than its competitors. You can use a centered map as with Mind42 and MindMeister, or you can choose a right or left-aligned view. Mindomo also offers several pre-defined mind map themes.
One drawback to Mindomo is that you can᾿t export to Freemind. You also have to become a paid subscriber in order to export your maps in Mindmanager format. Mindomo distinguishes itself, however, with the ability to export plain text outlines and PDF files in addition to rich text files and images. But Mindomo can only import Mindmanager files.
Something else to note: only Mindomo also sells an enterprise software version that you can deploy in your business.
Cost? $65 per year / $36 for 6 months (about $6 per month). Also a free, ad-supported version

Who wins the smackdown?

I'd have to go with MindMeister. Mind42.com would be a contender if its service were more reliable. MindMeister's support for importing and exporting Freemind as well as MindManager has me sold. I also like that it uses XHTML, CSS and JavaScript instead of a proprietary plugin such as Flash. The interface is pretty to look at and easy to use. Importing, exporting and deleting maps is a smooth process. And while some of its offerings aren't as robust as Mindomo and Comapping, it does what it does quite well.

Feature comparison

Feature	Mindomo	Comapping	MindMeister	Mind42.com
In beta?	No	No	No	Yes
Flash?	Yes	Yes	No	No
Ajax?	No	No	Yes	Yes
Price	$65 per year / $36 for 6 months; Ad-supported free option	$11.99 / 6 months (about $2 per month)	$4 per month; Free option available	Free (for now)
Free option?	Yes. Ad supported	No	Yes. Reduced features	x
Publish maps online?	Yes	Yes	Yes	Yes
Publish maps on blogs / web sites?	No	Yes (as of 7/11)	Only with premium subscription.	Yes
Export to Freemind?	No	Yes (as of 7/11)	Only with premium subscription.	Yes
Export to Mindmanager?	Only with premium subscription.	Yes (Compatible XML)	Only with premium subscription.	Yes
Export to image?	Yes (GIF, JPG, PNG)	No	Yes (GIF, JPG, PNG)	No
Export as text?	Yes	No	No	No
Export as rich text?	Yes	Yes	Yes	Yes
Export to PDF?	Yes	No	No	No
Download maps for offline storage?	No	Yes	No	Yes
Import from Freemind?	Yes	Yes (as of 7/11)	Yes	Yes
Import from Mindmanager?	Yes	Yes (as of 7/11)	Yes	Yes
Collaboration and sharing?	Yes	Yes	Yes	Yes
Chat?	No	No	No	Yes. Through Google Talk widget
Attach notes to nodes?	Yes	Yes	Yes	Yes
Managing maps?	No apparent way to delete maps	Good	Great	Good
Map limits?	Unlimited maps and sharing with subscription. Unlimited public maps and only 7 private maps with free option.	No	5 at any time for free plan; unlimited for paid plan	None at this point
Available as an enterprise solution?	Yes	Yes	No	No
Auto save?	No	Yes (as of 7/11)	Yes	No
Manual save?	Yes	Yes	No	Yes

Agree? Disagree? Prefer another solution? Did I get something wrong? Say it in the comments.

Published 2 Jul 2007 • Permalink • Trackback URI • Post a comment

Categories: Information management, Internet life, Social media, Software

Share this entry:

• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 

Close

Forgot password?

Please put in your email: Send me my password!

Close message

• This blog post
• All blog posts

Subscribe to this blog post's comments through...

RSS Feed

Subscribe via email
Subscribe

Subscribe to this blog's comments through...

RSS Feed

Subscribe via email
Subscribe

Follow the discussion

Login

Comments (11)

Sort by: Date Rating Last Activity

Loading comments...

Logging you in...

Close Login to an existing account

Username or Email:

Password:

Use OpenID!

Forgot login? Login

Close Login with your OpenID

OpenID URL:

Back

Login

Dashboard | Edit profile | Logout

• Logged in as

Admin options

Disable comments for this blog post
Save settings

The mind-mapping.org Blog » Blog Archive » Valuable comparison of four web-based service

[...] http://tiffanybbrown.com:80/2007/07/02/online-mind-map-services/ [...]

0 Vote up Vote down

Vic Gee · 93 weeks ago

This is a wonderfully comprehensive review for these four web apps.

I have been collecting details of information mapping and info management tools for many years, and have tracked the burst of on line applications that has mainly happened over the past few months. I thought you might like to have a comprehensive list of browser-based applications that do mind mapping, concept mapping, or diagramming:

Information mapping_________________

bubbl.us Collaborative mind mapping (radiant format not enforced)

bubble-mind.com Collaborative mind mapping

glinkr.net Hard-to-use concept mapping and mind mapping (shared but not collaborative)

kayuda.com Collaborative concept mapping and mind mapping

mapul.com Collaborative mind mapping with an organic flavour

touchgraph.com URL mind maps for network visualisation

wikimindmap.org Make mind maps from WikiMedia articles

webofweb.net Collaborative mind mapping - this has been around longer than all the others except the now-defunct mayomi.

writemaps.com Collaborative web-site hierarchical maps

Generic diagramming__________________

cumulatelabs.com/cumulatedraw/ Collaborative diagramming – can draw mind maps and concept maps

flowchart.com Collaborative diagramming – can draw mind maps and concept maps

gliffy.com Collaborative diagramming – can draw mind maps and concept maps

imaginationcubed.com Collaborative diagramming – can (just about) draw mind maps and concept maps

thinkature.com Collaborative on-line whiteboard service - can draw mind maps and concept maps

I have recommended your valuable post on my blog, http://www.mind-mapping.org/blog/?p=20

Regards

Vic

http://www.mind-mapping.org

The master list of mind mapping &

information management software

Get Clipmarks - The easiest way to email text, images and videos you find on the web.

Understanding a complex workflow and business process

 clipped from mail.google.com

Get Clipmarks - The easiest way to email text, images and videos you find on the web.

What is Leadership?

Understanding Balanced Scorecards

More than 50 percent of Fortune 1000 companies use balanced scorecards to measure business performance. Kaplan and Norton created a way to look at business strategy that digs deeper than just the financials.

Speaker: Jay Gulick, Director, BNET

Length: 02:30

What is SOA?

Service oriented architecture may be over-hyped, but it does offer lower-cost and easier integration.

Length: 02:10

www.bnet.com

Tuckman's Model: Fight Right

Conflict isn't necessarily a bad thing, in fact, it can create highly performing teams. Bruce Tuckman's theory of team development suggests that all groups progress through various stages of performance: from forming to storming, then norming, and finally performing. By learning to fight about the right things--goals, roles, and strategies—teams can reach the final stage more quickly.

Speaker: Edward Muzio, President & CEO, Group Harmonics

Length: 03:10

Workflow Modelling

um-srv01.wiwinf.uni-due.de

Foundations - Workflow Modelling WfMC and Workflow Specification Languages | XML Process Definition Language (XPDL) | Basic Workflow Concepts | Extended Workflow Concepts This section provides a short introduction into workflow management by giving an overview on common terminology and the description of the standards of the Workflow Management Coalition. WfMC and Workflow Specification Languages The Workflow Management Coalition (WfMC) was founded in 1993 as an alliance of companies and organisations dealing with workflow management. The mission of the WfMC is to establish a common terminology and standardised interfaces for workflow management. These interfaces comprise the definition, execution and management of workflows as well as references to external documents and applications [Jung01, pp. 126]. The conceptualisation of the interfaces is given by the WfMC's reference model depicted in the figure below. The workflow enactment services - using one or more workflow engines for the execution of workflows - represent the core of the reference model [Holl95]. A workflow engine is a software managing workflows with respect to given workflow definitions.

WfMC Reference Model [Holl95, p. 20]

The five different interface definitions correspond to the integration of external aspects:

• Interface 1 specifies the exchange of workflow models between external modelling tools and a workflow management system. External tools might be graphical or textual editors for workflow definitions. Some general purpose process modelling tools supporting the WfMC standard can be used for the specification of workflows, too [Holl95, p. 20].
• Interface 2 describes the communication between a WfMS and workflow client applications. Workflow client applications are applications directly correlated with the workflow engine. They usually implement basic functionality of workflow applications like notification and data transfer [Holl95, pp. 31].
• Interface 3 addresses the need to integrate external applications. Usually, the needed functionality is not provided by the WfMS itself. Hence, there has to be an interface to other applications already running in the enterprise [Holl95, pp. 35]. Examples for such kind of applications are business related software and special software tools.
• Goal of interface 4 is to integrate other workflow management systems. The specification comprises the invocation of remote activities, data transfer as well as synchronisation aspects between different workflow enactment services [Jung01, p. 126] [Holl95, pp. 41].
• Interface 5 describes the communication between the workflow enactment services and external monitoring and administration tools [Jung01, p. 126].

Interface 1 is the most relevant specification for the purpose of mapping business process models to workflows. It concentrates on the specification of different types of workflows (processes) as well as associated organisational units and applications. The system-specific integration of applications is done using interface 2/3 [Holl95, p. 20].
The Workflow Process Definition Language (WPDL) is the first attempt of the WfMC to specify of a standard for the interchange of workflow definitions. Being a standard for exchanging models, it does not comprise a graphical notation. Meanwhile, WPDL has been replaced by the XML Process Definition Language (XPDL), an XML-based document definition for workflows (see [Nori02]). Top XML Process Definition Language (XPDL) Concepts supported by XPDL are represented by the meta-model shown in the figure below. This meta-model generally comprises static entities (e.g. data or applications) as well as dynamic concepts (processes). Static entities are represented by the meta-types

• Workflow Relevant Data,


• Workflow Participant Specification and


• Workflow Application Declaration.

Workflow-relevant data is initialised, created, read from external applications, and used during the execution of workflows [Nori02, p. 10]. It might be produced by an activity within a workflow or extracted from an external data source (e.g. an enterprise information system). For example, corporate databases are typical external data sources. These data sources are represented by the meta-type System and Environmental Data.
The workflow participant specification describes the resources which perform the given workflow processes [Nori02, p. 9]. This specification does not necessarily correspond to a human or a single person. It actually represents an abstract resource or a role which can be filled by one or more humans as well as an automated machine. Hence, the specification of a workflow participant corresponds to a resource available in an organisation or an entity in an organisational chart (Resource Repository or Organisational Model). The workflow application declaration provides the description of software applications needed for the execution of a workflow process [Nori02, p. 9]. Those applications are usually invoked by the workflow engine and workflow-relevant data has to be passed as a parameter (e.g. internal or external applications like corporate information systems or common office applications). Internal applications are usually provided as part of a workflow management system or can be developed using a proprietary development environment or language.

XPDL Meta-Model [Nori02, p. 12]

A workflow process definition is an aggregation of static entities (data, applications, participants) as well as the description of the system's dynamic behaviour. Dynamic aspects of the meta-model are represented by the entity-types Transition Information as well as Workflow Process Activity and its concrete subtypes

• Block Activity,
• Atomic Activity and
• Sub-Process Definition.

An activity is a given unit of work which will be executed by a participant using computer applications and relevant data (see [Nori02, p. 8]). Additionally, every activity is characterised by a start- and end-time as well as the fact whether it can be executed automatically by the WfMS or by a workflow participant. The transition information specifies the control flow between activities [Nori02, p. 9]. It consists of a starting activity, an end-activity and a condition under which the transition is made. An atomic activity is an indivisible unit of work which has to be done at one go. A sub-process definition allows the embedding of another workflow process definition. A block activity consists of a set of other activities (type Activity Set). The semantics of an activity set is similar to the one of a macro. If an activity set is called during the execution of a workflow process, the activities contained in the set are copied into the calling process definition [Mato03, p. 13]. Basic Workflow Concepts Main concepts for the description of the dynamic aspects of a workflow system are activities and transitions. Activities correspond to defined units of work which can be atomic or consist of a set of activities. The control flow between activities is specified by transitions. Hence, a transition relation between two activities defines the ordering of these activities. An activity can be started if its preceding activities (connected by transitions) have terminated. Transitions, activities, and static entities (i.e. IT-related resources) are grouped by a so called workflow process definition. Workflow Process Definition A workflow process definition groups all elements necessary for the execution of a workflow. As shown in the meta-model depicted in the figure above, these elements comprise dynamic (activities and transitions) and static aspects (data, applications and participants). Additional attributes are a unique identifier, a name and two headers:

• The process header comprises the creation date, a textual description and different time-related properties (e.g. estimated duration of a process' execution) of a workflow process.
• The redefinable header consists of information about the author of the process definition, a country key, its publication status, responsible participants and a version number.

An activity set is a set of activities and transitions. All transitions contained in this set can only start from activities within this set and end in activities within this set. In other words, there are no transitions leaving an activity set or coming from outside. Properties of an activity set are a list of activities, a list of transitions and a unique identifier. Workflow Process Activities As shown in the figure below there are different types of activities within a workflow process definition. An atomic activity is an indivisible unit of work executed under the control of a WfMS. Such an activity can be executed automatically or by a human participant and usually works on workflow-relevant data. In contrast to this, block and route activities do not refer to workflow-relevant data. A block activity executes an activity set and has no own behaviour. Invoking an activity set means the start of the first activity in the set. The execution terminates with the last activity in the activity set (see the figure below [Nori02, p.30]). A route activity is an activity with no behaviour. It only serves as a dummy activity for cascading transition conditions (see subsequent section on transitions).

Different kinds of activities in XPDL [Nori02, p. 30]

According to XPDL there is only one general XML-element for activities called Activity. Specific elements for route, block or sub-flow activities are missing. The differentiation between different types of activities is done by the annotation of alternative attributes. Those attributes are named Route, Implementation and BlockActivity. Activities can additionally be specified in terms of their level of automation (automatic or manual) as well as their implementation alternatives (no implementation, tool or subflow):

• An automatic activity can be fully controlled by the workflow engine using internal and external applications.
• Manual activities require the involvement of a human being.
• Activities corresponding to the no-implementation alternative cannot be supported by an WfMS (e.g. manual tasks).
• A tool supported implementation implies the usage of a software application.
• If the implementation type is set to subflow, the execution has to be delegated to another workflow process definition. Parameters can be passed to such a sub-flow activity and the synchronisation can be specified with respect to a synchronous or asynchronous execution. Synchronous execution requires the calling process to wait for the termination of the called process. After its termination the called process might pass output values to the calling process. During an asynchronous execution the calling process does not have to wait for the termination of the called process and no output values can be returned.

Additional information for activities are deadlines and simulation information:

• A deadline is the expiration of a given period of time. A deadline might for example be a milestone (given a project management context) or a specific appointment. The occurrence of a deadline can be handled synchronously (the current activity is interrupted by the deadline) or asynchronously (the handling of the deadline has to be done parallel to the currently running activity).
• Simulation information extends the model by giving specific data for the simulation of models. Examples for specific data are average costs, expected duration and average waiting time.

As shown in the figure above, every activity is a join-point for several incoming transitions (join element) and specifies the type of splitting for outgoing transitions (split element). Both - join and split - can refer to parallel or alternative executions of workflows. An alternative split (XOR) represents a fork specifying that exactly one of the given alternatives can be executed. An alternative join corresponds to the synchronisation of an alternative split . The parallel execution of activities is started by an AND-split and ended by an AND-join. Rules for the construction of workflow descriptions regarding parallel and alternative connectors (splits and joins) are classified by so called conformance classes:

• A NON-BLOCKED conformance class implies no formal properties of a diagram regarding the relationships between splits and joins.
• If the conformance class is set to LOOP-BLOCKED, the graph build by the activities and transitions is a directed acyclic graph (DAG).
• A FULL-BLOCKED graph implies that every AND-split has exactly one AND-join, every XOR-split exactly one XOR-join and vice versa. Additionally every path starting from the split will reach the corresponding join.

Transitions A transition is partly specifies the control flow between activities. As shown above the information whether incoming transitions of an activity are disjoint (alternative) or conjoint (parallel) is assigned to the activity. Additional information about a transition is assigned to the so called transition information [Nori02, p. 40]. Basic elements of such a transition are

• its name (i.e. a character string),
• a textual description and
• a condition.

A condition should be a (semi-)formal specification - represented by a Boolean expression - of the circumstances enabling or disabling a transition. Additionally, a starting and an ending node are assigned to transition information. Consequently, every transition is characterised by exactly one source activity (from), exactly one destination activity (to), and a Boolean expression representing a firing condition. There are four different kinds of conditions in XPDL:

• CONDITION: A transition can fire if its condition is evaluated to true.
• OTHERWISE: Indicates a default transition which will fire if no other transition's condition evaluates to true.
• EXCEPTION: An exception is a special transition indicating an abnormal behaviour. An exception-condition can trigger the rising of a special condition.
• DEFAULTEXCEPTION: A default exception is triggered if all other exception conditions are evaluated to false.

Top Extended Workflow Concepts

Workflows are managed by a workflow management system by assigning tasks (as parts of workflow instances) to given resources. Such a resource might be either a human participant or a workflow application. A human resource usually corresponds to a role filled by a specific person in an organisation. A workflow application might be categorised into internal and external applications. An internal application is usually implemented by the WfMC itself and is closely coupled to the workflow system. An external application is an application independent from the WfMS.

Regarding the specification of resources for the execution of workflows there is one major problem. On the one hand, XPDL aims to be a language for a system-independent workflow definition interchange. Hence, a workflow model described using XPDL should be independent from any specific workflow engine. On the other hand, the description given by an XPDL-document should be sufficiently precise for the execution of workflows. This aspect might require the annotation of specific users or applications which are subject to a proprietary definition by a WfMS. Consequently, the XPDL-definition only provides an abstract mechanism for the specification of human resources and software-applications. Workflow Participants The XPDL-specification describes workflow participants as "an abstraction level between the real performer and the activity, which has to be performed" [Nori02, p. 43]. The engine has to map every abstract participant to a user given in the workflow management system's environment. The characterisation of every abstract participant includes its unique name and type. Possible types of workflow participants are:

• RESOURCE: A specific resource given in a workflow management system's environment.
• RESOURCE_SET: A set of resources.
• ROLE: A role description that directly corresponds to a role given in an organisational chart. Such a role might be a function or some kind of qualification filled by a human.
• ORGANIZATIONAL_UNIT: An arbitrary element of an organisational chart.
• HUMAN: A human being interacting with the WfMS by worklists and/or applications (i.e. a concrete human being, like 'John Miller')
• SYSTEM: A software application representing the participant of a fully automated workflow.

Those participants are assigned to activities of a workflow model using the Performer-attribute of an activity [Nori02, p. 31]. Hence, an activity keeps a reference to an abstract participant using the performer-attribute (which is rather a character string than a reference to a workflow participant). Workflow Application Declaration According to Junginger, workflow applications can be divided into internal and external applications [Jung01].

• An internal workflow application is implemented as part of the WfMS. They are usually implemented using a programming language given by the WfMS. In the context of XPDL, those applications are called procedures.
• An external application is an individual software package which can be used by a WfMS.

Using XPDL, a workflow application is specified by a unique identifier, its type and a list of parameters. The name of an application represents a unique id and does not necessarily correspond to its physical location or a specific implementation. Like the description of workflow participants, the identification of a workflow application is only a symbolic link. The interpretation of such a symbolic link representing a workflow application depends on the WfMS at hand. There are workflow engines supporting internal applications, external applications, or both [Jung01]