Bradavon

21 hours ago, ziggy99 said:

Running slow is no longer the issue. Lately Evernote has stopped running on my Surface Pro 9 5G Arm device. It opens but just hangs there with only one option: File > Quit. So running the Store app instead.

Have you tried reinstalling it? 

The Store version is a packaged 32-Bit + 64-Bit installation. It's the same installation as the website download though.

If its working via the Store, it a suggests you had a faulty installation.

Mine has the SQ1, it is a great device isn't it. Microsoft should be working with Google to release Chrome.

I'm expecting Teamviewer performance to be fine? 

I found the same with Evernote, after Spotify released an ARM64 build I decided to move to Onenote.

ARM64EC even makes it possible to add ARM64 code to the 64-Bit so its part 64-Bit still but runs natively on ARM64 and fixing the performance issue. Evernote could he using it.

3 hours ago, bogorad said:

Also rclone!

But not Evernote, which is electron-based anyway, right? Cross-platform compatibility was the main driver behind the whole abandoning legacy code, right? I know, I know, no one from Evernote reads this. Ugh.

Ah nice thanks.

Yeah exactly. Electron has supported ARM64 for some time now. Meta are the same with their WhatsApp and Facebook Messenger apps. The last two apps I'm still waiting to be updated. Although WhatsApp runs fine. Facebook Messenger is a bit slow but I rarely use it.

2 hours ago, PinkElephant said:

Microsoft is currently not promoting Windows on ARM, probably because they signed a (presumably bad) deal with Qualcom.

Again, this is plain inaccurate. Microsoft have updated Phone Link and Visual Studio to ARM64 recently, Released a Developer Kit this year and only this week ARM64EC is in General Release for Developers to use.

Developers like Evernote who don't have the time to fully convert Evernote to ARM64. Microsoft already provide a route for you, you just need to take it.

I don't mean to be blunt but you keep posting your opinion on Windows on ARM as fact. Please be helpful instead of just lamanting a platform you've not used. It's not ulttimately helpful.

2 hours ago, PinkElephant said:

Technically you are running Windows on ARM either on one of the few devices sold with it natively

There's more than you think:

Acer
Acer Aspire 1 (A114-61)
Acer Spin 7

Asus
Asus NovaGo
Asus ExpertBook B3 Detachable

Dell
None as far as I can tell?

HP
HP Envy x2
HP Laptop 14 (14-eg0001na)
HP Elite Folio

Huawei
Huawei MateBook E

Lenovo
Lenovo 10w
Lenovo Miix 630
Lenovo Yoga C630
Lenovo Flex 5G
Lenovo ThinkPad X13s (first PC to use the new Qualcomm 8cx Gen 3 processor)

Microsoft
Microsoft Surface Pro X with SQ1
Microsoft Surface Pro X with SQ2 (was still marketed as Surface Pro X due to only being a very minor processor refresh)

Samsung
Samsung Galaxy Book 2
Samsung Galaxy Book S (also a version with Intel)
Samsung Galaxy Book Go

Thomson
Thomson Neo z3

2 hours ago, PinkElephant said:

not a hot experience, from what I hear

See again opinion as fact. You've not even used the platform. Excluding Video Editors and Gamers the platform is great. Speaking personally All my Apps are now native ARM64 (after years of waiting I've switched to OneNote) or run just the same as if they were (e.g. WhatsApp).

Yes there is an emulation issue but for the majority of users it's been blown so far out of proportion for the actual problem. Which would be one thing but the major benefits over Intel/AMD are also being ignored by the naysayers who written off a platform without having even used it. Intel/AMD processors ALL suck at battery, suck at fan noise, suck at overheating. All major reasons why Apple also moved to ARM.

Its plain strange many Windows users wrote off Windows on ARM whilst saying how great M1 Macs are, when Windows on ARM offers the same battery, fan noise, low energy benefits.

Like I said, if you Video Edit or Game WoA isn't for you, but general purpose use the platform already offers major benefits.

2 hours ago, PinkElephant said:

The very short list of apps is proof that its time has yet to come.

It wasn't intended as a conclusive list, just what I know of 🤦‍♀️

2 hours ago, PinkElephant said:

Currently the working solution if you want to run on an ARM-based device is a Mac with a Mx-processor.

I suggest you try the platform for yourself.

These apps are Native Windows on ARM:

Microsoft Edge
Microsoft Office 365
Microsoft Teams
Microsoft OneDrive Sync Client
Zoom
Google Chrome (unreleased 😪)
Mozilla Firefox
Adobe Photoshop
Adobe Lightroom
VLC Media Player
Spotify (Beta released on 30/04/2022)
Leonardo Photo/Drawing Editor
Cisco AnyConnect VPN
Viscosity VPN
WireGuard VPN
7 Zip
FileZilla
Netflix for Windows

2 hours ago, RMorgan said:

DDL version contains both 32 and 64 bit versions and will use the appropriate one based on the current platform.

Thanks. It works. I'd prefer long-term to switch back to the Store version, being one of the few properly packaged apps it makes use of Windows Store Update process. The less App Updaters the better in my book. But it's definitely a small thing. 64-Bit is an improvement.

Can I suggest the System Requirements are updated to make clear there is both a 32-Bit and 64-Bit build. All it says is:

Windows 10 (32-bit and 64-bit)

I assumed it meant you'd get the 32-Bit build on both 32-Bit and 64-Bit Windows.

2 hours ago, RMorgan said:

Just for the heck of it I turned on ARM64 builds on Windows and it built a huge installer that must have had all 3 (32, 64, arm) versions in it.  I don't have hardware to test.  Just thought it was interesting that it combined them into a "universal" build.  I'll see if I can get some of this work prioritized and get an ARM laptop.  QA would need machines too.  It all depends on business focus and value return.

Thank you. These will be of interest to you:

11/2021: A $219 Windows on Arm PC is finally available for developers - The Verge
Dated Today: Project Volterra: Microsoft announces Windows 11 on ARM developer kit with Qualcomm SoC | Windows Central

2 hours ago, RMorgan said:

I'm hoping to set up an "experimental" area where we release unsupported versions for advanced users who want to play around and take the risk.

I'd be interested in some type of Insider programme.

17 minutes ago, RMorgan said:

It appears the Windows App Store version is misconfigured for 32 bit only.  Direct download version from the website supports both.  Looking into it.  Thanks for bringing this to my attention.  

My EverNote comes from the Microsoft Store. I prefer this route as EverNote is one of the few properly Packaged Store apps, therefore offering a central/silent update process. Thanks for the info a 64-Bit build is available though.

Do you mean you can download 32-Bit or 64-Bit here? -

https://evernote.com/download

I ask as the page only offers me one download and doesn't say whether it's 32-Bit or 64-Bit. Making me think 32-Bit is only available or does it detect the Bit during installation?

Its annoyingly common developers don't make all their versions available on the Microsoft Store. Appreciate this sounds like a mistake here.  Firefox and VLC only offer the 64-Bit build, despite both having ARM Optimised versions for download.

17 minutes ago, RMorgan said:

 ARM version is slow because of emulation just like the M1 until native support was added.  Adding new platforms is costly and adds additional requirements for testing and technical support.  Desktop versions already supported - Windows App Store, Windows Direct Download, Mac App Store, Mac Direct Download, Linux.  And then there are platform variations - X86, X64, and M1.  There is also testing requred to support Windows S Mode.

Thanks RMorgan your points are entirely fair. The main reason for posting was to start the conversation. Two thoughts:

• Do you really still need to offer a 32-Bit build of the Current Builds? Uptake must be low.
• Isn't the Windows on S Mode version the same as the Windows Store App?

Fair points though, thanks for the update bw.

Besides other Windows on ARM users will see this post and over time may want to contribute too.

24 minutes ago, PinkElephant said:

…. and developing a new version (even if it only means swapping the Electron release) will cost a significant amount of money.

Given that Windows 64-Bit is used by millions porting to at least 64-Bit Electron would make financial sense.

24 minutes ago, PinkElephant said:

P.S. The perspective of maybe getting a Mediatec ARM chip as a competition to Qualcomm is not really encouraging. Mediatec is pretty much known for basic processors, underperforming in most benchmarks except maybe power efficiency. And Surface Pro X is not really a match for even a base specced MacBook Air.

Fair point but then who?

Qualcomm are considered the best in the business next to Apple and you've already said you think their chips are poor. It seems you're against the platform in general.

That's again just not factually true. Surface Pro X has the same low power, low heat, no fans, instant on from sleep as MacBook Air M1. Its performance is comparable to an Intel Core i5 and besides this is the EverNote forum. How much performance are you inferring EverNote needs?

Yes the M1 is a better SOC than the Qualcomm 8cx Gen 2 no question but millions of people buy PCs with Intel Core i3's remember. A capable Windows PC doesn't need to match M1, it needs to work well. Remember the majority of Windows users aren't buying Intel Core i7 or i9 PCs.

For me personally I find my Surface Pro X very capable. I literally only have issues with EverNote and Spotify, they're the only Windows apps I have to use under emulation. You'll find the majority of negative Internet comments around the platform are by users who've not actually used it.

Unless you need a PC for Gaming or need the Dropbox/Google Drive Sync clients I'd recommend a WoA PC to someone. In terms of heavy hitters Microsoft Office, Adobe Photoshop, Adobe Lightroom are optimised for both M1 and Windows on ARM. I imagine Adobe are working on Premier Pro too but haven't kept up on it.

6 minutes ago, gazumped said:

A great light (finally) dawns.  I agree - it's fair,  and you should ask.. subscribers can raise queries here - https://help.evernote.com/hc/requests/new and Free users here - https://twitter.com/evernotehelps (or use the feedback option in the mobile client) 

 

Just for the record the first link says this, which brings me back here:

I appreciate if I were a paid customer, I could also raise a Support ticket. But as a Free customer this is a better place than Twitter. The benefit of a forum is other users can see posts too.

I don't get why I'm being actively discouraged from posting technical questions in EverNote's own recommend place to post technical questions.

7 minutes ago, PinkElephant said:

Simple Answer: Because ARM on Windows sucks - as long as Microsoft is linked up with Qualcomm, no improvement in sight.

The only ARM based technology that is currently working is Apple Silicon. The Mac client is running natively on it (after quite a wait), Mac M1 users are happy.

On Windows use the web client.

This is just not factually accurate.

The sole issue with Windows on ARM is 32-Bit/64-Bit emulation, of which EverNote is part of this problem. There are no performance issues using Windows on ARM with Snapdragon chips with ARM64 optimised apps. I'm guessing you've not actually used a Windows on ARM PC.

On Windows 11 they're very capable, but to respond to your point Qualcomm's exclusive contract with Microsoft expires this year. Mediatek are rumoured to be releasing a Window on ARM chip too.

In any case none of this is relevant to a developer supporting a platform.

Mac M1 users are happy because EverNote pulled their finger out and did the developing. It's fair to at least ask EverNote do the same on Windows.

p.s. I use the Web App on ChromeOS but it shouldn't be the go to on a platform as mature as Windows.

Just now, gazumped said:

I do use Windows and Linux on 64-bit machines,  but ARM (I thought) is a relatively new development with which I have no experience.  Doesn't Evernote work on Qualcom-based kit?

-And Evernote staffers will get around to reading posts here,  but there's a lot of traffic and it won't necessarily be soon,  or generate any sort of response.  Best option is still feedback via an app,  or raise a support request.

Windows on ARM has been around since 2016 and properly since 2019 with Surface Pro X.

Things really took off in 2020 with Apple's M1 MacBooks and I see EverNote do have both 64-Bit and ARM64 builds for MacBooks:

It's fair to at least ask EverNote do the same on Windows.

In any case I said in my comment above what the issue is, every Windows on ARM user will be having the same technical issue with EverNote. I didn't mention web browsers.

Fair point on developers not announcing their roadmap but it doesn't mean users shouldn't post their issues and feedback. This way others can do the same and EverNote we should expect will see this. Electron is available in 64-Bit (see WhatsApp, Facebook Messenger, Microsoft Teams) and ARM64 (see Teams again).

EverNote being 32-Bit only is causing issues for users of Windows on ARM PCs and this is the "Technical Issues" subforum.

With EverNote being 32-Bit only in 2022 it's fair to ask what a developer's roadmap is on 64-Bit and ARM64. Lenovo just announced their first Windows on ARM PC, this is alongside Samsung, Huawei and Microsoft.

And all OEMs have only sold Windows in 64-Bit since roughly Windows 7, back in 2009.

Thanks.

This is the first time I've posted about ARM64. I couldn't find a post on the subject so started one. I won't be the only user of Windows on ARM.

If you mean 64-Bit, 3 posts since 07/2021 isn't a lot. It doesn't seem like a lot to me anyway. Odd comment.

In any case it's unhelpful to point out how often someone asks a question, better yet to just help. I've posted a total of 5 times in 3 years, not enough to have must've realised.

You're saying EverNote don't read their official forum? This is feeding back to EverNote.

Fair enough you're irritated by my question but seems odd to be, it's a perfectly fair question really. Anyway, this is a waste of our time, I'd like to concentrate on the issue in question.

If you don't use Windows this post isn't for you, if you do, you'd benefit from a 64-Bit and/or ARM64 build too.

Thanks.

Hi,

Is there a plan on your roadmap to update EverNote to 64-Bit and ARM64?

EverNote for Windows is the ONLY platform where it's still a 32-Bit only app and in 2022 this is particularly embarrassing. This is also a problem on Windows on ARM PCs, like the Surface Pro X. There's a noticeable delay in opening EverNote and in general usage on ARM PCs.

Microsoft doesn't even make a 32-Bit build of Windows 11. There's no good reason to still be coding in 32-Bit this late in the day.

What is the plan to make EverNote modern and replace the 32-Bit build with 64-Bit + release an ARM64 build?

Thanks.

No it's 32-Bit Only on Windows.

There's isn't any technical reason it couldn't be 64-Bit + ARM64 but the developers are to lazy to update it. EverNote isn't the only 32-Bit Only app in 2022. Spotify for Windows is the same.

And most of those Windows 7 installations will be 64-Bit.

Windows has been available in 64-Bit since Windows XP. Windows 11 will only be 64-Bit or ARM64 (it will support 32-Bit Apps though).

In 2021 there's no reason to still be releasing apps in 32-Bit. Evernote and Spotify are the only apps I use that are still 32-Bit only.

Apple even cut off 32-Bit app support.

Yeah come on Evernote.

I appreciate a significant base of browsers are Webkit or Chromium based but even Microsoft have learnt they didn't help move the web forward by forcing IE6 standards on everyone.

Firefox remains a popular browser too. On anything other than Chromebooks, where Firefox for Linux is odd, I always use Firefox. Chrome is decent but Firefox is just sop much better.

I've come here too due to the obnoxious message telling me to use Chrome or Safari.

I don't ******* want to use Chrome or Safari. Safari on Windows sucks and Firefox Quantum s a significantly more powerful browser than Chrome.

Why did you design your site to use a specific rendering engine? Why aren't you using Open Standards that work on all modern browsers, of which Firefox is one of them?

Please don't remove the old version of the site, which seems to work fine in Firefox.

Incidentally I didn't get this message using IE11 or Edge both of which don't support Webkit?