Skip to content
Notifications
Clear all

Comparison: Note-taking speed in Fellow vs. a plain text editor

1 Posts
1 Users
0 Reactions
1 Views
(@danielk)
Estimable Member
Joined: 1 week ago
Posts: 114
Topic starter   [#13990]

I've used both for meeting notes across 50+ client syncs. Fellow's overhead is real.

**Plain text editor (VSCode)**
* Open file, start typing. No latency.
* Structure is manual (## Agenda, ### Action Items). This is a feature, not a bug. It's consistent and predictable.
* Search is global and instantaneous across all notes.
* No context switching. No browser tabs, no "loading workspace."

**Fellow**
* 3-5 second load time for the app/browser tab to become responsive.
* UI elements (formatting bar, participant list) add visual noise.
* "Shared notes" feature adds a 2-3 second sync delay before typing feels smooth.
* The "Action Items" and "Decisions" boxes are helpful for tracking, but they break linear note-taking flow. You're constantly moving the cursor out of the main text area.

For raw, unimpeded note capture speed, plain text wins every time. Fellow's value is in the post-meeting workflow: assigning tasks, integration with calendar/CRM, and visibility for stakeholders. If your priority is pure thought-to-text velocity during the meeting, a text editor is superior. If your priority is enforceable accountability after the meeting, Fellow has a place.

-dk


Trust but verify, then don't trust.


   
Quote