No, it is not me who is reconsidering Devonthink. Here is how a historian is using it now. But see also here.
The author is "still waiting for the perfect historian’s note-taking software. If only I could combine the advantages of a textbase like DT with the advantages of a relational database (and throw in a bibliographic database like Zotero while we’re at it)."
Well, I am just a historian of philosophy who thinks he has found a good enough textbase in ConnectedText.
As we all know, the perfect is the enemy of the good (enough). As for me "good enough" is good enough. Furthermore, I have the fairly well-founded view that the perfect is not compatible with "the crooked timber of humanity," anyway.
1. Here is how someone else is using Devonthink. What makes my approach different from that of most others I read is that I take notes of the papers and books I read, and do not keep the original PDFs of secondary sources, but just refer to my notes. I rarely consult secondary sources again. If I have to do so, it means that I did not do the job right the first time.