search title of notes as primary criteria to return list

[TJ8756 3]

If I have a note titled Carrot and another called Carrot Soup and I search notes for the string "Carrot", put the notes titled Carrot and Carrot Soup on the top of the search results.    Then put the rest of the notes by whatever special algorithm you are using.   At least give me the option to request this in settings.    it's frustrating that EVERY search I do requires extra clicks to find the note that is *exactly titled* what I just typed in and that I have to click on 'found notes with "Carrot" to pull the notes with that string in the title up.   I'm sure I'm not the only one titling their notes based on the content of the notes and wanting it to come up first in the search results instead of buried in the quantity of notes that might also have mentioned "Carrot" somewhere in the note.   

I use the Windows version most but pretty sure it is the same in all the versions. 

[PinkElephant 8,078]

The search algorithm is using a concept called „relevance“. From what we know, the search term goes into it, as does the age of the note, and probably how frequently it was modified din the past. The idea behind it is to allow to find the right note with a high probability, even if you don’t remember much about it.

I often have the situation that I remember I tucked something away in the past, but don’t have the exact parameters to configure a very precise search. EN will most likely find it even then, and with little effort because „relevance“ will often move the note near the top.

You can work around it by applying the advanced search syntax, or if on a Professional or Teams plan by setting up a Boolean search:

https://help.evernote.com/hc/en-us/articles/208313828

https://help.evernote.com/hc/en-us/articles/4405520390291

It is not necessary that EN changes anything - you just need to use what already exists.

[Wilf Forrow 15]

The reason everybody uses Google search instead of Yahoo, AltaVista, Bing and all the hundreds of others is because it returns the most relevant results at the top of the list.  No trying to remember advanced search syntax.

Many search words appear dozens or hundreds of times in my notes - you would have thought having it in the title was a pretty good clue, and pretty easy to implement?

I know about "Intitle:" but I bet very few Evernote users do, and who wants to type that mouthful anyway?  I only ever use it when the results are so useless that I have to do the whole search again. 

[PinkElephant 8,078]

You put the important stuff into the title. Well, you is you, and you do what you do.

But 200+ million users all do their own thing, and they all expect good search results. I doubt that they all would be satisfied if EN would change search in a way to please you, and you primarily. All the words about what Google does and others should do only covers that you want it your way, without remorse, no hostages taken (as I read your posts, and I might be wrong, although I doubt it).

Fortunately it is only a remote possibility, a VERY remote possibility that search will be touched.

So better polish your advanced search syntax proficiency, if you want to build the searches you envision.

[RJLUK 307]

1 hour ago, Wilf Forrow said:

The reason everybody uses Google search instead of Yahoo, AltaVista, Bing and all the hundreds of others is because it returns the most relevant results at the top of the list. 

Actually not "everybody" does. Google, for no reason at all or without explanation often removes websites from their indexes. Depending on Google alone is flawed and yet anther reason to save bookmarks within EN relating to sites of use/interest.

[PinkElephant 8,078]

18 hours ago, RobertJLee said:

Actually not "everybody" does. Google, for no reason at all or without explanation often removes websites from their indexes. Depending on Google alone is flawed and yet anther reason to save bookmarks within EN relating to sites of use/interest.

Actually I rather save the whole site, not only a bookmark. The bookmark is saved along with it. 

Reason: If a web page is moved behind a paywall, a full copy in EN will still hold the full content. A plain bookmark will fail.

[Boot17 1,442]

18 hours ago, RobertJLee said:

Google, for no reason at all or without explanation often removes websites from their indexes

Also, we really have no way of knowing what Google isn't showing us, where with Evernote we have a better idea because they are our own notes and we can find them others ways besides a plain text search: tags, notebooks, sorting by last updated, etc.

20 hours ago, Wilf Forrow said:

I know about "Intitle:" but I bet very few Evernote users do, and who wants to type that mouthful anyway?

Strangely enough, "intitle:" is about the only advanced search term that I can remember off the top of my head.

Only every once in a while do I need to do a search beyond "intitle" and then I have to look up my notes on the advanced search.

It's the same with Google. I sometimes used advanced search terms, but I have to look at my notes to remember what they are.

With Evernote, I generally use the "Switch To" (Cmd-J on Mac) command for my searching. It seems like that only uses the note title name, tag name, or notebook name to find the first 10 items and then has a catchall "search *** in Notes" at the bottom. If I don't find the note by title that I am looking for in the "Switch To", then I search all my notes.

[PinkElephant 8,078]

The search syntax uses daily EN words to control the interpretation of search terms. This makes the use easy, at least for some main operators:

Tag:XXX

Notebook:YYY

Stack:ZZZ

Any: AAA BBB

Nearly the only important thing to remember is „no space behind the : except in the case of ANY“ .

[Wilf Forrow 15]

1 hour ago, Boot17 said:

With Evernote, I generally use the "Switch To" (Cmd-J on Mac) command for my searching. It seems like that only uses the note title name, tag name, or notebook name to find the first 10 items and then has a catchall "search *** in Notes" at the bottom. If I don't find the note by title that I am looking for in the "Switch To", then I search all my notes.

Brilliant!!!! Just tried "Switch To" (Cmd-J on Mac) command for the first time - thank you.  Found every "Intitle:" keyword I tried instantly.

But I've been using Evernote for many years and I'm still learning - so I go back to my original theme:  Evernote search is a key differentiator.  If it doesn't find our target in the first few notes, without any complicated syntax or keyboard shortcuts, it gives us a reason to look at competitors.  

[PinkElephant 8,078]

54 minutes ago, Wilf Forrow said:

…  Evernote search is a key differentiator.  If it doesn't find our target in the first few notes, without any complicated syntax or keyboard shortcuts, it gives us a reason to look at competitors.  

Correct - I hope EN does not start to change the current search setup, which makes finding content far superior to competitors.

If you want to narrow a search down, with a few taps or clicks you can add filters to reduce the number of hits. I mean, if your aversion against a solid search syntax makes your hand tremble when typing in the few commands you need.

Maybe you better explore some more of the possibilities (now you mastered cmd-J), instead of posting nonsense about Google search being sooooo superior. You ever noticed the first hits are there because the site owners paid to be listed first ? „Working soooo good“ - what a joke, maybe for Google to make even more money.

Anybody who does not want to have his entire web life tracked and scrutinized should avoid Google services wherever possible. There is nothing „not evil“ about it any more these days ! „Superior search results“ are the outcome of vandalizing everybodies privacy.

[Wilf Forrow 15]

17 minutes ago, PinkElephant said:

If you want to narrow a search down, with a few taps or clicks you can add filters to reduce the number of hits. I mean, if your aversion against a solid search syntax makes your hand tremble when typing in the few commands you need.
Maybe you better explore some more of the possibilities (now you mastered cmd-J), instead of posting nonsense about Google search being sooooo superior. You ever noticed the first hits are there because the site owners paid to be listed first ? „Working soooo good“ - what a joke, maybe for Google to make even more money.

I'll try and keep my cool here.  My comments about Google are that it "just works" for most people, so they use it.  I would suggest 90% of Evernote users wouldn't know what "solid search syntax" means if it hit them in the face.  Evernote needs to attract that 90%, not the 10% who do, or the 1% that actually use it every day.

[PinkElephant 8,078]

DuckDuckGo works as well, in many aspects even better, and does not track users beyond the actual search.

I am opposing any hyping of Google without mentioning that they collect an endless ocean of user data, mostly without consent. Ever tried to find the switches to turn off data collection on a Google privacy page ? Yes 90% of users will not be able to turn this off, because it is set up to make it very hard to turn it off.

That they seem to read your mind even before you type in a search happens just because they in fact try to read your mind - without your consent, and based on algorithms that are kept secret, so nobody knows how they work. It is known that the search discriminates, by giving you the results Googles algorithms believe you want, not what you may have searched for.

Most of what you get initially is there because somebody pays for the placement. Your attention is auctioned to the biggest bidders, and it happens in the milliseconds between hitting „Enter“ and getting the search results presented. That is how Google makes its money, not by providing a neutral service to the public.

Suuuuper search, do you have anything else to tell about it ? If you didn’t know about what I posted above, go out and learn. You can confirm everything from open sources.

A last remark: Don’t use the phrase „It just works“ in connection with Google. Google does not deserve it. The claim is related to Apple, better to Steve Jobs RIP.