(Archived) In Praise of Folders

[drtimhill 11]

I've used a number of note takers/organizers over the years, and I really like a couple of things about Evernote:

-- Pervasive sync across multiple platforms that works flawlessly ... +100 points.

-- Extensive 3rd party eco-system, so pretty much any app has "Send to Evernote" inside it ... +100 points.

 

Hooray! BUT, one thing I REALLY dislike is the lack of folder support .. -1000 points . I can simulate a folder hierarchy (badly) using a bizarre mix of notebooks, stacks, tags and note naming conventions, but it's like swimming upstream, and all the time it feels like EN is fighting me to make it as hard as possible.

 

Consider this simple problem: I want a project with sub-sections for bookmarks, notes, and documents. In EN the only decent way I can do this is with a Notebook for the project and tags for each sub-section. But that gets messy; I keep having to use tricks to see the different categories, I have to remember to tag items, the tags show up in a global space outside of any notebook and so get mixed up with other tag schemes for other notebooks. It just doesn't work for me.

 

So, I think EN still needs a better way to organize notes:

-- Folders is one way; allow notebooks to have folders that actually contain notes; stacks DONT cut it here.

-- A better tag system is another; Scope tags (optionally) to notebooks, so I can easily see which tags make sense.

-- Allow tags to truly group (I can put one tag in another, but it's still really a global tag).

 

Let's get real; I have a notebook with recipes in it. I have another with a dozen technical projects in it that are related. When I try to use tags its ridiculous to have "Breakfast" tags next to "Branch Analysis". It's cluttered and distracting.

 

The EN assumption seems to be "Most users dont organize stuff, so make search really good". Great, I love it. But "Most users dont organize stuff so no need to support any way to organize it" is bad. And with EN pushing into the Business space where the "shoebox" model breaks down, I REALLY think its time to enhance the organizational abilities of EN.

 

Just my 2c worth.

--Tim

 

P.S. Yes, I know there are lots of ways to work around this; but face it; they ARE mostly work-arounds, and cumbersome. And wouldn't EN be better if it HAD folders; you dont HAVE to use a feature if you dont want to, but you CANT use a feature if its not there!

[May 268]

There's also a workaround. You can simulate many levels of nested folders and organize everything into anything even with flat tags or notebooks. You'd just have to keep the hierarchy somewhere outside of evernote, e.g. in a separate Mind map or outline, etc..

Here's an example of organizing a tag in multiple ways, I have no limitations in my organizational structure. I can organize anything into any kind of structure, i.e hierarchical or even non hierarchical networked structure.

It's just a mind map in Evernote that organizes stuff, kind of a higher level overview. The mind map is a lot bigger, you just see a small portion of it. This workaround solves the problem and gives me pretty much unlimited organisational flexibility. It's nice to have this mind map, it surely doesn't hurt, sometimes it's useful to connect some topics, though most of the time I don't actually need it.

99% of the time I just search for a specific Tag and then find what I need by browsing or keep refining the search.

Still the mind map is nice to have for stuff like projects with lots of sub-projects and what not, or basically whenever I find it useful to connect related topics (Which I almost never do lol)

Flat metadata works for most things, but that doesn't mean that structured metadata is completely useless either.

Those are just different ways for organizing data:

For search

For browsing

Both are useful in different cases, and in fact everyone uses both.

[jefito 5,598]

I really don't want to comment on the "resources" arguments here. I merely stated that I found the lack of a simple hierarchy limiting to my workflow. At the end of the day, EN will base all feature decisions on customer demand, so I said my 2c worth; as others chime in here with yays and nays EN get a sample of opinions (albeit somewhat biased since we are, after all, all EN users .. those that REALLY needed folders probably arent even here since they will have rejected EN as their notetaking solution).

 

For those who are nays however; remember if you have more than one notebook then you are ALREADY using folders, arent you?

 

--Tim

Yeah, the resources thingy is a sidetrack, and I'm as guilty as anyone of stringing it along, so sorry about that. No fear, your comments are read by actual Evernote staff, and believe me, they're taken seriously. Frankly, I'd be surprised if there wasn't a faction of Evernote folks who want what you want, but the company hasn't chosen to do that at this time.

So sure, we're all using multiple notebooks, and of course we have stacks, and we're all cognizant of what a fully nested hierarchy can provide (and its downsides, too). As it happens, I've been able to survive quite happily without fully nested notebooks pretty well, mainly through the use of tags, as -- per my comment before -- can millions of GMail users. If you want suggestions as to how to make Evernote work for you better with its organizational facilities as they are, feel free to ask: there are lots of knowledgeable folks who'd rather be directly helpful to an Evernote user than debate side issues that are out of our control.

[drtimhill 11]

I really don't want to comment on the "resources" arguments here. I merely stated that I found the lack of a simple hierarchy limiting to my workflow. At the end of the day, EN will base all feature decisions on customer demand, so I said my 2c worth; as others chime in here with yays and nays EN get a sample of opinions (albeit somewhat biased since we are, after all, all EN users .. those that REALLY needed folders probably arent even here since they will have rejected EN as their notetaking solution).

 

For those who are nays however; remember if you have more than one notebook then you are ALREADY using folders, arent you?

 

--Tim

[BurgersNFries 2,407]

 

Really?  Please tell us pray tell how many development man hours it would take?  Define a "fair amount of resources".  Also please tell us how many development man hours it took to develop the one level of nested folders we already enjoy, which was also based on user requests.

 

I eagerly await your answer, defined in true units of measure.

Honestly, I can't tell whether you're being willfully obtuse on this, or that you actually don't realize that a wholesale architectural change to Evernote's note storage and organization, across 10 or so different clients (of various generations, none of which should break due to the change), with corresponding UI support, testing, and documentation updates, would cause non-trivial amount of resources to be required to implement, and which, frankly, neither you nor I are able to estimate with any precision from outside the Evernote bubble. As far as I can tell, quantity of resources -- in any units -- has no value to the discussion, except for the fact that it is clearly greater than 0.

 

 

Additionally, the "one level of nested folders" is not really nested.  Rather, stacks are groups of notebooks & stacks cannot contain notes.  Unlike nested directories/nodes/folders where on my hard drive the parent directory can contain not only sub directories but also files.

[jefito 5,598]

Really?  Please tell us pray tell how many development man hours it would take?  Define a "fair amount of resources".  Also please tell us how many development man hours it took to develop the one level of nested folders we already enjoy, which was also based on user requests.

 

I eagerly await your answer, defined in true units of measure.

Honestly, I can't tell whether you're being willfully obtuse on this, or that you actually don't realize that a wholesale architectural change to Evernote's note storage and organization, across 10 or so different clients (of various generations, none of which should break due to the change), with corresponding UI support, testing, and documentation updates, would cause non-trivial amount of resources to be required to implement, and which, frankly, neither you nor I are able to estimate with any precision from outside the Evernote bubble. As far as I can tell, quantity of resources -- in any units -- has no value to the discussion, except for the fact that it is clearly greater than 0.

[megsaint 441]

It will take some resources (unless the magic elves are involved). And, in my opinion, any resources spent on implementing nested folders is a waste. But, unless I manage to get a job with Evernote, I will probably have only the same amount of input into any decision on this matter as everyone else on these forums. 

[ZZZ 135]

It ought to be obvious that we don't know the answer to that any more than you do. Only Evernote does. 

 

Yet interestingly, some people keep arguing how this would not be a good use of EN resources.  Yet you don't know how many resources it would actually take.  Makes perfect sense to me.

[megsaint 441]

Really?  Please tell us pray tell how many development man hours it would take?  Define a "fair amount of resources".  Also please tell us how many development man hours it took to develop the one level of nested folders we already enjoy, which was also based on user requests.

It ought to be obvious that we don't know the answer to that any more than you do. Only Evernote does. What is certain is that Evernote is aware of this thread and every other one that has requested folders. To date, they have chosen not to include this feature. I'm not really sure what else there is to say on the matter. Not, of course, that that will stop most of us.

 

And no, I wasn't snickering. I love a good argument (as long as it's about ideas and not about attacking people). 

 

Best of luck. 

[ZZZ 135]

 

 

  But now that I think about it, I don't agree with them spending time on Mac which I find utterly useless because I use Windows.

And I completely respect your right to hold and express that opinion. I have no desire to belittle it or your desire to participate in this thread. Especially as I always find your posts entertaining. 

 

Best of luck.

 

 

Now why did you have to totally disarm me like that .  How the heck can I respond negatively to that?  Hopefully you weren't snickering when you wrote "find your posts entertaining"  .

[ZZZ 135]

 

I think that you forgot the "in my opinion" part of this. In fact, this change would affect every single one of those clients in a non-trivial way, and would take, yes, a fair amount of resources to implement going forward (which haven't been spent yet, by the way, whereas resources to implement all of the aforementioned clients are sunk costs at this point). This is not a nonsensical argument.

 

 

Really?  Please tell us pray tell how many development man hours it would take?  Define a "fair amount of resources".  Also please tell us how many development man hours it took to develop the one level of nested folders we already enjoy, which was also based on user requests.

 

I eagerly await your answer, defined in true units of measure.

[jefito 5,598]

I don't care about 90% of the requests I see on these forums, and I suspect that applies to most posters here.  Do you think it would be helpful or unhelpful if I jumped into those threads and told the person starting the thread how I don't think what they want is necessary, and that I hope EN doesn't devote resources to it?

Since features take some amount of time to complete, and to implement all requested features would likely take more time than is available to Evernote, then any feature request is implicitly a vote to devote more time on feature X than feature Y. Some people don't understand that underlying truth, while some people prefer to make it explicit. It's all part of the conversation.

 

And the "resources" argument is a nonsensical argument which you use to justify such posts.  We're talking about a feature, not a major redesign of the software that would seriously impact resources. They've already made decisions such as to support a web client and Mac and Windows and Android and iOS that make this feature like a speck of sand on the beach*.

I think that you forgot the "in my opinion" part of this. In fact, this change would affect every single one of those clients in a non-trivial way, and would take, yes, a fair amount of resources to implement going forward (which haven't been spent yet, by the way, whereas resources to implement all of the aforementioned clients are sunk costs at this point). This is not a nonsensical argument.

 

*Insert argument below that I have no idea how much time/work it would take to implement this feature.

Not required in this instance.

[megsaint 441]

 

  But now that I think about it, I don't agree with them spending time on Mac which I find utterly useless because I use Windows.

And I completely respect your right to hold and express that opinion. I have no desire to belittle it or your desire to participate in this thread. Especially as I always find your posts entertaining. 

 

Best of luck.

[ZZZ 135]

 

I don't care if there are folders or not. What I do care about is Evernote spending limited development time/dollars implementing something I find utterly useless. But I'm not Evernote. Perhaps their priorities will shift to folders. I won't agree with that decision but it's not mine to make.

 

I don't care about 90% of the requests I see on these forums, and I suspect that applies to most posters here.  Do you think it would be helpful or unhelpful if I jumped into those threads and told the person starting the thread how I don't think what they want is necessary, and that I hope EN doesn't devote resources to it?  And the "resources" argument is a nonsensical argument which you use to justify such posts.  We're talking about a feature, not a major redesign of the software that would seriously impact resources.  They've already made decisions such as to support a web client and Mac and Windows and Android and iOS that make this feature like a speck of sand on the beach*.  But now that I think about it, I don't agree with them spending time on Mac which I find utterly useless because I use Windows.

 

*Insert argument below that I have no idea how much time/work it would take to implement this feature.

[megsaint 441]

After having spent years frustrated by the attempts to graft the real world metaphor of a filing cabinet onto digital information, EN was almost a revelation.

 

Perhaps one day you will also experience the revelation that there is 0 reason both can't exist in perfect harmony, like ebony and ivory,

I don't care if there are folders or not. What I do care about is Evernote spending limited development time/dollars implementing something I find utterly useless. But I'm not Evernote. Perhaps their priorities will shift to folders. I won't agree with that decision but it's not mine to make.

[BurgersNFries 2,407]

In the end it doesn't matter which we think is the 'best', if we want to use Evernote (and we don't have to) then we have to do so understanding that they have made a decision to build an application that is more tag than folder friendly.

 

In the past, they've been very very clear that this is a design choice that they made and not a mistake.

 

Given that there have been and are in progress major releases to a number of clients that show no indication of adding any further levels of folder navigation I think it's safe to assume that this isn't going to change in the short to medium term.

 

Again, this post isn't intended to say whether one method is better than an another, I'm just trying to describe what the current situation is and given that I have been around a long time whether an imminent change is likely.

 

Yes, you/we've been very clear in the past & I don't know how we could be any more clear.

 

 

I'd suggest that most of the responders here understand the difference between tags and notebook hierarchies pretty well.

Yup. 

 

I have posted & do believe that when you have a large number of notes that the sub-notebook system normally just muddles things up.  The larger number of notes, the more muddled things become.  Jeff's oft' cited example of the red, round, rubber ball exemplifies this.  Did I put it in the red folder?  The round folder?  The rubber folder?  Or the ball folder?  Well before I started using Evernote, I used (and continue to use) a freeware app called Locate32 that indexes all the files in all the folders on all my hard drives.  This allows me to simply search on a keyword & instantaneously find that file, rather than having to drill down various & sundry sub folders.  However, what I think & do has no bearing on what Evernote does or does not do.  I find it fascinating that some people seem to love to convert what's in Metrodon's most recent post into personal vendettas.  It is what it is.  If you don't like it, I don't know why you consider the collective "us" as your enemies or imply (or flat out state) we are stupid or unpaid corporate shills.  But guess what?  We are not the ones responsible for this.  We simply offer alternatives.  You can use them or not.  Honestly, we really don't care.  But trying to place blame on us is like getting mad at your tires because you ran out of gas.

[jefito 5,598]

I want to clarify what I consider a fundamental difference between folders and tags. Tags, in the current implementation, are GLOBAL to an account; a given tag is visible in all stacks and notebooks and can be used anywhere. This is in keeping with the basic concept of a tag being metadata attached to a note. In contrast, a folder is LOCAL to the notebook in which it is created. Again, this matches the paradigm of a folder being a container inside an outer container.

 

Tags make sense when they have a global usage. A "bookmark" or "TODO" tag is generic and has a global "feel" to it; it makes sense. But what about "Breakfast"??? Is that global? This isnt an abstract example; I have a "Food+Wine" notebook with recipes and stuff in it for home, and other notebooks for work use. EN seems clumsy to me when I have to wade through ALL the tags to find ones relevant to a project i'm focused on. To my mind, therefore, the issue is one of focus; I dont like polluting a global tag namespace with lots of tags that are only applicable in one notebook. What I'm looking for is a way around this, and currently EN doesnt seem to offer anything other than discrete logon accounts (shudder). Hence my discussion regarding folders, though there are of course options, such as more flexible scoping of tags.

 

--Tim

I'd suggest that most of the responders here understand the difference between tags and notebook hierarchies pretty well. Extending tags to have semantically hierarchical behavior has been discussed at some length, by some of these same forum users -- I think that it would be an interesting (and possibly useful to me) addition. Fully nestable notebooks are clearly desirable by any number of folks, though in my case I doubt that I would use them, as I tend to limit my notebook count in general and so don't need any further organization than stacks already provide. Obviously, if they were available, I could choose to just not use that facility, but like Metrodon, I just think that they won't be available any time soon, if at all. Just for a point of reference, I'd offer one notable and widely used application that uses tag-like system (labels) and flat folder structure for organization: GMail. Understanding that GMail is not the same thing as Evernote, there are marked similarities.

[Metrodon 2,188]

In the end it doesn't matter which we think is the 'best', if we want to use Evernote (and we don't have to) then we have to do so understanding that they have made a decision to build an application that is more tag than folder friendly.

 

In the past, they've been very very clear that this is a design choice that they made and not a mistake.

 

Given that there have been and are in progress major releases to a number of clients that show no indication of adding any further levels of folder navigation I think it's safe to assume that this isn't going to change in the short to medium term.

 

Again, this post isn't intended to say whether one method is better than an another, I'm just trying to describe what the current situation is and given that I have been around a long time whether an imminent change is likely.

[ZZZ 135]

This is a very OLD debate, probably going back to almost the first version of Evernote.

 

Those that don't understand the value of folders and subfolders continue ad nauseam to try to discount their value.

The truth is Notebooks and Tags serve two very different purposes, and while you can try to simulate NB with Tags, you never really can.

 

The anti-notebook people continue to spout that Evernote has already made this decision and will never change.  Well, I for one, can tell you I have seen Evernote change their mind on major features.   So, I don't pretend to know what they will do in the future.

 

The most simple example of the need for subfolders, is a book:

• The Chapters, and sections within a chapter, are analogous to subfolders
• The Index is analogous to Tags

Having both is the ideal solution.

 

Tags are great for searching, but not so much for presentation.  Sometimes we would just like to open a Notebook, and view/browse it in the logical, arbitrary order we have designed.

 

If you don't understand the need for subfolders, you need not waste your time trying to rebut this statement of need, for your post will just be ignored by those of us who do understand the need.

 

One might ask the question, what is the value of continuing to ask for a feature that has been ignored or denied for so long?  Well, people and organizations do change, and sometimes reverse their previous decisions.  Perhaps someday a brilliant software developer will come to work for Evernote, and will create a concept/design that supports subfolders with a minimum of change to the current Evernote architecture and code base.

 

And then the Powers-that-be at Evernote will have an "Ah hah" moment.  :-)

 

Holy *****, you have a world view which realizes that different people may have different preferences and that there's no reason to argue why your preference is better, and that others preferences shouldn't be considered.  I almost had a heart attack. 

 

Seriously though, great post.

 

p.s. I just gotta love the words they have set to filter here, it makes it look like I tried to swear when I didn't.

[ZZZ 135]

After having spent years frustrated by the attempts to graft the real world metaphor of a filing cabinet onto digital information, EN was almost a revelation.

 

 

Perhaps one day you will also experience the revelation that there is 0 reason both can't exist in perfect harmony, like ebony and ivory, and that way people can work using the paradigm that is most comfortable to them .  As opposed to the standard "tags are so much better for me" blah blah blah response from the usual suspects on this forum.

[JMichaelTX 4,118]

This is a very OLD debate, probably going back to almost the first version of Evernote.

 

Those that don't understand the value of folders and subfolders continue ad nauseam to try to discount their value.

The truth is Notebooks and Tags serve two very different purposes, and while you can try to simulate NB with Tags, you never really can.

 

The anti-notebook people continue to spout that Evernote has already made this decision and will never change.  Well, I for one, can tell you I have seen Evernote change their mind on major features.   So, I don't pretend to know what they will do in the future.

 

The most simple example of the need for subfolders, is a book:

• The Chapters, and sections within a chapter, are analogous to subfolders
• The Index is analogous to Tags

Having both is the ideal solution.

 

Tags are great for searching, but not so much for presentation.  Sometimes we would just like to open a Notebook, and view/browse it in the logical, arbitrary order we have designed.

 

If you don't understand the need for subfolders, you need not waste your time trying to rebut this statement of need, for your post will just be ignored by those of us who do understand the need.

 

One might ask the question, what is the value of continuing to ask for a feature that has been ignored or denied for so long?  Well, people and organizations do change, and sometimes reverse their previous decisions.  Perhaps someday a brilliant software developer will come to work for Evernote, and will create a concept/design that supports subfolders with a minimum of change to the current Evernote architecture and code base.

 

And then the Powers-that-be at Evernote will have an "Ah hah" moment.  :-)

[drtimhill 11]

I want to clarify what I consider a fundamental difference between folders and tags. Tags, in the current implementation, are GLOBAL to an account; a given tag is visible in all stacks and notebooks and can be used anywhere. This is in keeping with the basic concept of a tag being metadata attached to a note. In contrast, a folder is LOCAL to the notebook in which it is created. Again, this matches the paradigm of a folder being a container inside an outer container.

 

Tags make sense when they have a global usage. A "bookmark" or "TODO" tag is generic and has a global "feel" to it; it makes sense. But what about "Breakfast"??? Is that global? This isnt an abstract example; I have a "Food+Wine" notebook with recipes and stuff in it for home, and other notebooks for work use. EN seems clumsy to me when I have to wade through ALL the tags to find ones relevant to a project i'm focused on. To my mind, therefore, the issue is one of focus; I dont like polluting a global tag namespace with lots of tags that are only applicable in one notebook. What I'm looking for is a way around this, and currently EN doesnt seem to offer anything other than discrete logon accounts (shudder). Hence my discussion regarding folders, though there are of course options, such as more flexible scoping of tags.

 

--Tim

[drtimhill 11]

 

This "audience" is no more filtered than any other message board. IOW, you can say the same thing about the regular/recurring posters of any other message board for a software application.

Additionally, I'm sure no one said you were "totally alone" in your thinking. However, Evernote does present a different (and IMO) more effective/flexible/useful approach than nested notebooks. The more notes you have, the more of a hinderance that nested folders become.

 

 

... And I'm not arguing against the current features, they are great. I'm just saying that, for me, a simple hierarchy WOULD help me get more organized. I'm not saying it has to be folders; it could be a richer tagging system (for example, scoping tags to a stack or notebook), or a true tag hierarchy. After all, if a hierarchy was bad, we wouldn't even have stacks and notebooks

 

--Tim

[BurgersNFries 2,407]

Also, I wonder how much this is a "filtered" audience? I mean let's face it, this forum is for EN users, who have already decided they can do without folders (otherwise they went elsewhere). I spent some time talking to others at my office who use or used EN and 7 out of the 9 said folders would help them (and 4 more said they abandoned EN owing to lack of folders), so I'm not totally alone

 

--Tim

This "audience" is no more filtered than any other message board. IOW, you can say the same thing about the regular/recurring posters of any other message board for a software application.

Additionally, I'm sure no one said you were "totally alone" in your thinking. However, Evernote does present a different (and IMO) more effective/flexible/useful approach than nested notebooks. The more notes you have, the more of a hinderance that nested folders become.

[GrumpyMonkey 4,320]

 

 

 

The EN assumption seems to be "Most users dont organize stuff, so make search really good". 

 

No, I think the EN assumption is "We've provided a different method of organization than folder trees".  And that's the reason I use EN rather than other information storage systems. After having spent years frustrated by the attempts to graft the real world metaphor of a filing cabinet onto digital information, EN was almost a revelation. No more "Which of the several very logical folder choices did I put that note in?" , "Should I make a copies so I can put things it two different folders?" With tags, for the first time, I can actually find things. 

 

My larger point is that what you see as a lack of ability to organize, I (and apparently EN) see as a superior method of organization. You make the statement that if EN added folders, I wouldn't have to use them. True. However, if EN spends their finite development time and dollars on adding folders across all of the many platforms they support, that takes it away from something I might find useful and interesting. 

 

Best of luck.

 

 

I completely agree with your defense of tags; as a way to locate items that might span different "buckets" they are excellent. My feeling, though, is that just as a folder system without tags is limiting (for the reasons you note), so a tag system without folders is equally limiting, though I take your point that EN has limited resources to devote to features.

 

I tend to store a pretty large number of notes that span my personal and professional areas, and find notebooks+tags wont cut it (after 18+ months of tinkering). Out of curiosity, can you describe how you use the EN features to keep organized?

 

Also, I wonder how much this is a "filtered" audience? I mean let's face it, this forum is for EN users, who have already decided they can do without folders (otherwise they went elsewhere). I spent some time talking to others at my office who use or used EN and 7 out of the 9 said folders would help them (and 4 more said they abandoned EN owing to lack of folders), so I'm not totally alone

 

--Tim

 

 

I think with notebooks, Evernote would appeal to more people, because they interpret the world with a notebook / filing cabinet paradigm in mind. I've got many tens of thousands of notes. I have two notebooks and no tags. I'd have one notebook, but I gotta distinguish between stuff I want local and stuff I want online. It isn't terribly difficult to keep organized this way.

http://www.christopher-mayo.com/?p=367

 

However, your mileage may vary. A lot of applications have tags, and a lot of them have notebooks. I think people are here on the forums because Evernote does many other things as well besides supplying tags and notebooks. The notebook limitations, once you start thinking digitally, aren't such a big deal for many people (in my opinion). Heck, a lot of people only have a few hundred notes. How can you be "disorganized" when you can scroll through all of your notes in a few seconds? 

 

Again, I agree that Evernote ought to raise the notebook limit, add hierarchies, etc. as you suggested if it doesn't impact the service too much. I don't agree because I think there is anything wrong with the current system, though. I just want to see Evernote continue to do well so that I get to use it, and I figure that these changes will bring in people who want to organize more by notebooks. I doubt many people actually "need" them to be more functional. 

[drtimhill 11]

 

 

The EN assumption seems to be "Most users dont organize stuff, so make search really good". 

 

No, I think the EN assumption is "We've provided a different method of organization than folder trees".  And that's the reason I use EN rather than other information storage systems. After having spent years frustrated by the attempts to graft the real world metaphor of a filing cabinet onto digital information, EN was almost a revelation. No more "Which of the several very logical folder choices did I put that note in?" , "Should I make a copies so I can put things it two different folders?" With tags, for the first time, I can actually find things. 

 

My larger point is that what you see as a lack of ability to organize, I (and apparently EN) see as a superior method of organization. You make the statement that if EN added folders, I wouldn't have to use them. True. However, if EN spends their finite development time and dollars on adding folders across all of the many platforms they support, that takes it away from something I might find useful and interesting. 

 

Best of luck.

 

 

I completely agree with your defense of tags; as a way to locate items that might span different "buckets" they are excellent. My feeling, though, is that just as a folder system without tags is limiting (for the reasons you note), so a tag system without folders is equally limiting, though I take your point that EN has limited resources to devote to features.

 

I tend to store a pretty large number of notes that span my personal and professional areas, and find notebooks+tags wont cut it (after 18+ months of tinkering). Out of curiosity, can you describe how you use the EN features to keep organized?

 

Also, I wonder how much this is a "filtered" audience? I mean let's face it, this forum is for EN users, who have already decided they can do without folders (otherwise they went elsewhere). I spent some time talking to others at my office who use or used EN and 7 out of the 9 said folders would help them (and 4 more said they abandoned EN owing to lack of folders), so I'm not totally alone

 

--Tim

[megsaint 441]

 

The EN assumption seems to be "Most users dont organize stuff, so make search really good". 

 

No, I think the EN assumption is "We've provided a different method of organization than folder trees".  And that's the reason I use EN rather than other information storage systems. After having spent years frustrated by the attempts to graft the real world metaphor of a filing cabinet onto digital information, EN was almost a revelation. No more "Which of the several very logical folder choices did I put that note in?" , "Should I make a copies so I can put things it two different folders?" With tags, for the first time, I can actually find things. 

 

My larger point is that what you see as a lack of ability to organize, I (and apparently EN) see as a superior method of organization. You make the statement that if EN added folders, I wouldn't have to use them. True. However, if EN spends their finite development time and dollars on adding folders across all of the many platforms they support, that takes it away from something I might find useful and interesting. 

 

Best of luck.

[GrumpyMonkey 4,320]

I've used a number of note takers/organizers over the years, and I really like a couple of things about Evernote:

-- Pervasive sync across multiple platforms that works flawlessly ... +100 points.

-- Extensive 3rd party eco-system, so pretty much any app has "Send to Evernote" inside it ... +100 points.

 

Hooray! BUT, one thing I REALLY dislike is the lack of folder support .. -1000 points . I can simulate a folder hierarchy (badly) using a bizarre mix of notebooks, stacks, tags and note naming conventions, but it's like swimming upstream, and all the time it feels like EN is fighting me to make it as hard as possible.

 

Consider this simple problem: I want a project with sub-sections for bookmarks, notes, and documents. In EN the only decent way I can do this is with a Notebook for the project and tags for each sub-section. But that gets messy; I keep having to use tricks to see the different categories, I have to remember to tag items, the tags show up in a global space outside of any notebook and so get mixed up with other tag schemes for other notebooks. It just doesn't work for me.

 

So, I think EN still needs a better way to organize notes:

-- Folders is one way; allow notebooks to have folders that actually contain notes; stacks DONT cut it here.

-- A better tag system is another; Scope tags (optionally) to notebooks, so I can easily see which tags make sense.

-- Allow tags to truly group (I can put one tag in another, but it's still really a global tag).

 

Let's get real; I have a notebook with recipes in it. I have another with a dozen technical projects in it that are related. When I try to use tags its ridiculous to have "Breakfast" tags next to "Branch Analysis". It's cluttered and distracting.

 

The EN assumption seems to be "Most users dont organize stuff, so make search really good". Great, I love it. But "Most users dont organize stuff so no need to support any way to organize it" is bad. And with EN pushing into the Business space where the "shoebox" model breaks down, I REALLY think its time to enhance the organizational abilities of EN.

 

Just my 2c worth.

--Tim

 

P.S. Yes, I know there are lots of ways to work around this; but face it; they ARE mostly work-arounds, and cumbersome. And wouldn't EN be better if it HAD folders; you dont HAVE to use a feature if you dont want to, but you CANT use a feature if its not there!

 

Hi. Thanks for posting. As someone who only has 2 notebooks in his main account (one for online notes and another for local ones) along with a handful of shared ones in a separate account, this feature request isn't on my list of things I'd like to see.

 

However, I think it would help a lot of other people, especially those who want to work within the notebook paradigm, but find having only 250 without deep hierarchies to be unnecessarily restrictive. I have no idea what impact this would have on the Evernote service (possibly slower app operations, a rewrite of every client, etc.), but if the impact isn't too significant, the change would be nice.