Jump to content

pbowers

Level 1
  • Content Count

    9
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

2 Neutral

About pbowers

  1. So can I be pretty confident that EN developers monitor threads not just in their own platform thread but also across all platform threads? I'm really writing the feature suggestions for devs at EN and not for forum members, so I want to do what I can to make sure the right dev sees the right suggestion... If there's a place I can go to give feedback directly rather than thru the forums, please direct me. I'm getting the idea I'm leaving my input in the wrong place, so if there's another option please help...
  2. So are you saying it's OK/good for them to produce stuff in a non-standard and illogical way? I would absolutely agree that they have the right to do so - and the free market will pretty quickly slam a company that chooses to go that direction. So EN puts forums here so we can give our suggestions ... as I did. Good for them and good for me. Did I somehow communicate that I felt I had the right to tell them how to do their business? I'm just giving feature suggestions ... which is the point of this thread, right. Curious reply... Maybe I'm just not understanding what you were trying to say... FYI I already read the sticky note re the re-write of the editor (I try to read stickies b4 participating in a forum, as is good netiquette). I mention it because you've replied to 2-3 of my posts today with the same reference...
  3. Yes, I recognize that right now the server isn't sophisticated enough to merge the changes or do something smarter with it. That's ... erm ... the reason I wrote the suggestion to them. Perhaps I wasn't clear that it was a feature suggestion?
  4. Same issue, different platforms (1 demonstrated on the PC, 1 demonstrated on the android platform). Since they use a different code-base I didn't want EN to see it and think it was an issue on just one platform. Is there a place where I can post in a platform-agnostic forum as feedback?
  5. It doesn't happen often, but periodically I will edit the same note on my phone or tablet and on my PC without giving time for automatic syncs to catch up and without doing a manual sync and I (understandably) end up with a note in conflict. The difficulty is that sometimes it is several months or even a year before I notice that the conflict occurred! I don't naturally think to go searching in the "Conflicting Changes" folder - I have a bunch of folders and there's nothing there to catch my eye so I just ignore it. I just now found a conflicted change from more than a year ago that actually caused some problems in a project because I was missing some key information (I knew I had entered the info but then when I went to look the information wasn't there and so I tried to cobble something together without my primary sources [which I had tossed after copying] and now I had this mess of inaccuracies in my primary note - now I find the actual information I was supposed to have in there in a note in my "Conflicting Changes" folder.) Tools for diff/patch (tools to merge changes from 2 different branches off the same root as long as the changes occur in different areas of the document) are absolutely ubiquitous in this day and age. And the vast proportion of conflicting changes are going to be in separate areas of the note (I add a line at the beginning on one platform and re-word a sentence in the middle and delete a line at the end of the note) which should be child's play to merge. For those changes which do occur close to one another, don't silently create a copy of the offending conflict! That's worse than nothing! Instead, *inside the same copy of the note that I am viewing - the copy that remains in my primary folder* put some textual indicator of what was in one copy and what was in the other with lots of colorful exclamation points or otherwise to attract attention. Then, to be complete, place *both* original copies in the "Conflicting Changes" folder, referenced from the textual clues in the main note so the user knows that there was a problem and knows where to look to see what was in each copy. ===(snip)=== this is a change that was added in branch #1 and copied in - no conflict these are some intervening lines this is a change that was made in branch #2 and merged in - conflict resolved these are some more intervening lines !!!!!!!========CHANGES WERE MADE ON SEPARATE COPIES OF THIS NOTE AND EVERNOTE IS UNABLE TO RESOLVE THE CHANGES=========!!!!!!! !!!!!!!===PLEASE SEE BELOW FOR DETAILS===!!!!!!! !!!!!!!===ORIGINAL TEXT===!!!!!! some context This was my line in the original before any changes were made some more context !!!!!!!===TEXT AFTER CHANGES ON PC "xyz"===!!!!!! some context This is my line that I changed on my PC some more context !!!!!!!===TEXT AFTER CHANGES ON ANDROID DEVICE "abc"===!!!!!! some context This is my line that I changed on my android some more context !!!!!!===END OF CHANGES===!!!!!!! !!!!!!===COPIES OF THE ORIGINAL NOTE AND BOTH CHANGED COPIES HAVE BEEN PLACED IN THE FOLDER "Conflicting Changes" with these titles:===!!!!!! !!!!!!===Hello World - original before changes made - last updated 2015-10-02 13:52:32 ===!!!!!!! !!!!!!===Hello World - with changes made on 2015-10-08 1:08:32pm from PC "xyz"===!!!!!!! !!!!!!===Hello World - with changes made on 2015-10-08 1:12:32pm from ANDROID DEVICE "abc"===!!!!!!! !!!!!!===After you have resolved the conflicting changes these additional copies of the note in "Conflicted Changes" should be deleted===!!!!!!! more lines just to fill up space ===(snip)=== When I see that it is abundantly clear exactly what I am supposed to do and there's no possibility that I can lose information as long as I am paying even a small amount of attention to what is going on in my note. It's the moral equivalent of what the linux utility "patch" does, but spelled out in color and with lots of words to help non-technical people understand what's going on. Or, alternately (and perhaps more intuitively) pull up a dialog box each time the user opens EN or accesses the conflicted note which alerts the user to the fact that a conflict occurred and gives the opportunity to go through a wizard interface to choose how the final copy should look.
  6. The other day I copied/pasted the contents of a note as an interview template that was about 100 lines long, with questions interspersing the answers. As I proceeded through the interview I deleted the previous guy's answers and replaced them with the current guy's answers using my BT keyboard on my android phone. At one point I typo'd and just reflexively hit ctrl-Z. IT RESTORED NOT JUST THE TYPO BUT EVERY SINGLE CHANGE BACK TO THE VERY BEGINNING (the note that I copied/pasted originally with the other guy's answers!) AND NO REPETITION OF UNDO OR REDO COULD EVER GET MY NEWLY ENTERED CHANGES RESTORED!!! Fortunately my interviewee was understanding and helped me restore the answers, but this was not a small bug in my eyes... SUGGESTION: when someone presses undo, choose the last word they deleted or the last word they entered rather than taking all their changes of the last hour and undoing all of them in one fell swoop
  7. One of the important things I do with EN notes is to organize them. Sometimes I get overzealous (or a missed-shift-click) and I end up filing a whole bunch of notes into a notebook when I only meant to file one or a few. My natural response is to press CTRL-Z to undo the action. Result? Nothing. Then when I am editing I sometimes make mistakes (I know, shocking). My response is to press CTRL-Z to undo the action. EN, in its exuberance, undoes HUGE swathes of changes rather than just undeleting the word I accidentally deleted or deleting the typo I just put in. Example: I just created a new note and typed the following text, 1 line after another: ===(snip)=== this is a test and another test and a line that I will delete the extra extra word===(snip)=== then I selected the 2nd occurrence of "extra" and deleted it. Then I pressed undo, expecting the deletion to be undeleted. Instead the last paragraph got deleted. I tried redo and it gives me back the paragraph without the deletion, but no number of hitting redo will allow that deletion to be restored. The other day I copied a note as an interview template that was about 100 lines long, with questions interspersing the answers. As I proceeded through the interview I deleted the previous guy's answers and replaced them with the current guy's answers. At one point I typo'd and just reflexively hit ctrl-Z. IT RESTORED EVERY SINGLE CHANGE BACK TO THE VERY BEGINNING AND NO REPETITION OF UNDO OR REDO COULD EVER GET MY NEWLY ENTERED CHANGES RESTORED!!! Fortunately my interviewee was understanding and helped me restore the answers, but this was not a small bug in my eyes...[1] SUGGESTION: Make undo work consistently for filing operations as well as properly for editing operations (selecting appropriate sized "chunks" to undo/redo). [1] I just remembered that I was using my BT keyboard and my android phone on this document so technically I'm putting this feedback in the wrong forum, but I still think it demonstrates well the difficulty with poorly chosen "chunks" for undo and redo. My (snip) example above demonstrates that it is a problem in windows as well, so hopefully the later example will just give a little emotional pathos to the issue...
  8. When I press ctrl-f to search for something it pulls up a little bar at the bottom allowing me to enter the search text and click on the next/prev occurrence. When I have found the location I want to work in, I naturally hit ESC (or click on the X in the search-mode bar) to exit from that search-mode, assuming that my cursor will now be exactly at the location of the chosen occurrence of my search word. Search-mode is exited, but my cursor is taken to the top (bottom?) of the note instead of staying where I want to be to edit/read in that location. To see the nearly universally standard behavior in windows, try out adob reader or m$ word or open office writer - in all cases you ctrl-f, type your search, press enter to move through occurrences (next, next, next), and then ESC or click on X to exit the search mode leaving your cursor location at the final chosen occurrence. EN acts differently. (Yes, I know that I can click in the text while search-mode is still active and that will exit search-mode and put my cursor wherever I clicked. That is one way to exit search-mode. But this other way is also legitimate (otherwise why would you respond to the ESC or place an X to exit there) and the resulting behavior doesn't make a whole lot of sense - who wants to go to the beginning/end of the note when they exit search-mode?
  9. Across almost all (well-designed) windows products there is a standard way of selecting things in a list: click - select current item (loses selection on all previous selected items) shift-click - select from first selected to current item, losing any selected items outside that area ctrl-click - leave existing selection alone and select (or de-select) the current item ctrl-shift-click - select from last ctrl-click-selected item to here, leaving existing selection untouched EN does pretty well at all these except the last. When I try to select several items with ctrl-click and then several in a row with ctrl-shift-click it fails out on me, acting just like a ctrl-shift. SUGGESTION: operate according to universally recognized windows hotkey standards when selecting from list view
×
×
  • Create New...