Jump to content

Kazum

Level 1
  • Content Count

    3
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

7 Neutral

About Kazum

  1. This is a perfect argument from the workflow perspective. I love the innovation that Evernote has in its products compared to MSFT ones, but the innovation can sometimes be disruptive, and it's not always a good thing. It seems to be a gamble to stay on a boat, building your workflow and personal knowledge data on that platform, not knowing whether it will head towards an unfavorable direction. Your mention of product testing is another great point . Evernote folks should know what they are doing in general, and I'm less worried about the lack of prototype testing for the desktop version. But a web clipper is probably not as important as it seems to be to go through a formal product testing cycle, but guess what, it CAN BE the most important part of the whole workflow, and if it's broken, the whole offering is broken.
  2. Though I understand it's probably discouraging to say this considering all the hardwork behind this big upgrade, the new version is a major stepback in usability / function for collecting web articles, with disruptive user experience, slow performance, confusing UI, no article title editing, and very clumsy tag editing. Also the shadowed clip region highlight is far less user friendly than the simple highlight box in the older version. I'd encourage the product manager at Evernote to spend more time understanding the user needs, before investing heavily on packing more stuff into this tool and making things look pretty. Also, it's always a good idea to give user a separate choice (i.e. introduce it as a new extension for such a disruptive upgrade, like Evernote did with Clearly). This tool totally replaced Clearly and some other screenshot tools, while basically making the old web article clipping function crippled.
×
×
  • Create New...