McClausky

To @gazumped and @PinkElephant I'm surprised how you can consider any opinion as "final judgement". A word of advice: don't take forum opinions as impositions. They are what they are: opinions. Common sense will always save you from getting offended from a user's opinion. Regarding the level of IT experience, I could bother showing my IT credentials proving 20+ years of working in the industry, but....in a collaboration forum like this one, asking and showing IT credentials descends into deep ridiculousness . When I initially posted my opinion about V10, I received at least 8 opinions that were on the "disaster V10 crowd". This is enough for me to realize that I'm not alone here, so I'll keep testing and reporting, in spite of your delicate feelings of being imposed or judged.

Blah blah blah. I'll soon test V10 and report here if it's still sucks or not.

Wrong. Legacy 6.25 is quite fine at the moment. I'll find some time to test the very lastest v10 and will report if there are any notable improvements.

Well, I've been using paid Evernote for 11 years now. My first attempt at using Desktop v.10 was October 2020. Of course it was impossible to use and after some support tickets, I went back to 6.25. Today, I tried V.10 again and tested it thoroughly. My conclusion is that Evernote seems to be on a route to self-destruction. I perfectly understand we have the choice of keep using the legacy version as long as it's still supported. However, if, at some point in time, Evernote decides to disable access to it or make it obsolete (end-of-life), forcing us to use version10.x (which is basically a masked Web App), then I will be forced to look for other companies/solutions/alternatives and a way to migrate all my hard worked data, the years of research and the tag tree structure. It will be a time consuming and stressing task, but that's why I hope Evernote gets back on track in terms of decent software development. Some reasons why I will never install Desktop version 10.20.4, and I will keep using legacy v.6.25: Clicking on a note the first time takes 3 or more seconds. Opening a note on a separate window STILL takes 6 to 10 seconds, sometimes 15 seconds on long notes, but never less than 6 seconds (yes, ten months after V.10 was launched, hard to believe). One would think that after a first click on the note, it would be downloaded or cached, but no, it's always like opening a note for the first time. Unacceptable and impossible to work on it. Compared to this, version 6.25 feels rocket-fast. After clicking on a few notes, v.10 went crazy with the system resources and started using 1GB of ram, while version 6.25 never surpassed 100MB. The only app that uses this outrageous quantity of ram is Chrome, but it's because it has 30+ tabs opened. Offline access is only partial. All your notes get a "Download Incomplete" message when you're offline. I understood that V.10 was using a local database, but the evidence generates confusion. You don't know which tag is selected on the left sidebar (isn't this absolutely basic behavior?) We cannot multi-select tags. Only one at a time? Can't select more than 50 notes at a time. Why? Is the app going to use 3GB of ram if we try? performance issues = software development issues. Moving notes from one folder to another takes unacceptable times. We can't have the shortcuts located on top, horizontally, near the menu bar. On V.6.25, this is one of greatest time-saving useful features. One simple click to access your favorite notes or tags super fast. We can't change font size or font family anywhere. Why do you impose font types on us? We can't change left sidebar background color. Impositions. We cannot choose the location for Evernote local files (Database). Sometimes our C drive is full and it's required to install everything to D drive I try to understand the reasoning behind the erroneous development decisions listed above, perhaps driven by all these "bring all the apps together" vision, having one universal GUI for Desktop and Web. And I corroborate that desktop v.10 looks and works just like the web version. But, the truth is we rarely use the web version. When we work on our desktops, we need a much more powerful app, with true offline sync features (not because we need to disconnect from the internet, but because performance is greatly increased as evidenced with V.625). It's like Evernote is tripping over the same error Microsoft made with Windows 8, which is trying to unify one single GUI for all devices, and you know the results, catastrophic. Desktop is Desktop. A Desktop device is aimed at serious work and also fast work. The Web app is used less than occasionally (ask the users in this forum, they report that in the past they used the web interface on the rare occasion). Aiming so much efforts to unify Desktop and Web is like pretending everybody works only on Chromebooks. If you can't bring your laptop with you, then you use your phone and end of story. Maybe the web and android versions were a mess before v10 and now they got better. That's a good thing, but why do you have to butcher the Desktop App? A proper Desktop App utilizes the power of a desktop computing, and lets users customize and configure the app in great detail. Now with V.10 it seems that local computing resources are not needed anymore because the Desktop app runs inside some kind of browser back-end framework. The desktop app feels like software-as-a-service, basically cloud software disguised as Desktop app. I know V.10 has a local database, but it truly feels like it does nothing locally (other than using an obscene amount of ram), which is definitely less efficient for users, but probably easier for the Evernote development roadmap. Evernote seems to be taking the short path, and dangerously decreasing the quality of the product, not understanding its own customers.