soundsgoodtome

Don't hold your breath, sir. Evernote is infamously apathetic about feature requests, no matter how reasonable, logical, or productivity-enhancing said features might be.

I have dozens of notebooks, some of which contain notes that need to be sorted by date created, others that need to be sorted by date updated, and others that need to be sorted alphabetically. But as far as I can tell, Evernote is "one sort fits all." There's only one sort setting. As a result, I'm constantly digging into the nested menus to change the sort order, as I switch from notebook to notebook. I do this many times a day. Why can't each notebook have its own sort setting?

Well, don't hold your breath, because after months of complaints, NO CHANGE.

If Dropbox can do it, Evernote can. It also seems you're failing to understand that selective sync will result in less data being pushed, not more. I look forward to hearing Evernote's thoughts on this, rather than users' speculation on what Evernote can and cannot do.

I use Evernote extensively. I create about 50% of my notes on a MacBook Pro, 45% on a Mac Pro, and about 5% on MacBook Air (MBA) that I primarily use for travel. Unfortunately, each time I launch Evernote on the MBA, it can take 30 minutes or more for it to sync -- bogging down the processor and slowing the machine to a crawl -- because I haven't launched Evernote on that machine in a while. I fully understand the reasons for this and am not being critical of syncing. The problem, however, is that 90% of what's being synced to the MBA is stuff that I simply don't need on that machine. Not only is it taxing the processor unnecessarily, it's unnecessarily taking up precious space on the MBA's hard drive. Dropbox brilliantly allows us to specify which folders get synced to each computer. Don't need that folder full of movies taking up space on a certain computer? Just disable syncing of that folder on that machine. Done! Why can't Evernote do this? The UI implementation could be super-simple: At the left, we have a list of our notebooks: Notebook 1 Notebook 2 Notebook 3 There could be a menu command (with keyboard shortcut of course) to "Select Notebooks to be Synced." Upon invoking the command, checkboxes would appear next to the notebooks, allowing us to easily enable or disable syncing of individual notebooks: ▢ Notebook 1 ▢ Notebook 2 ▢ Notebook 3 When finished, we'd hit "Done," the checkboxes would disappear, and Evernote would sync — adding or deleting files, as necessary. Evernote already "knows" the names of our notebooks and knows which notes belong where. Adding Selective Sync would not be that complicated... C'mon, guys... Please!!

To clarify your post, when you say "Double-clicking on an image should behave just like double-clicking on all other EN attachments," are you saying that: ( a ) That's how it currently behaves on your Mac, so that's what I, too, should be seeing? Or… ( b ) That's how it should work, but doesn't?

While I can understand Presentation Mode being a feature that many would appreciate, I don't understand why we're forced to use it, whether we want it or not. I have many notes containing images of one type or another. Large images -- like screenshots -- are understandably reduced in size significantly in order to be displayed within a note. So, to view an image at full size, I simply want to double-click the image and view it. (Better yet -- we'd select the image and simply hit the spacebar for a "QuickLook-style" view.) Instead, double-clicking any image now automatically invokes Presentation Mode. The image is blown up to the full size of the screen, and everything else is obscured. I don't want that! Who could have thought this was a good idea as the default -- and only -- behavior? Presentation Mode is a great feature to have -- if or when needed. But it appears there's now no way whatsoever to simply view an image within a note at the image's default size -- without having to enter Presentation Mode. In other words, every image opens in Presentation Mode -- whether you like it or not. Ugh. Bottom-line: How does one simply view an image at normal size without everything else on one's screen being obscured from view? If I've overlooked a method for simply viewing an image, please let me know. Otherwise, please, please rethink this, so we can simply view our notes' images!

Today I launched Evernote on a secondary Mac, and while it was updating and migrating notes to the new version, I created my document temporarily in TextEdit. It's a simple list with two columns, separated by tabs, and I was able to create it effortlessly. Then, after Evernote was finished updating, I copied the text from TextEdit and pasted it into Evernote. And anarchy ensued. :-/ And yes, both apps were using the same font: Helvetica Regular, size 13. But...anarchy! (Please see attached screenshot, showing the difference between TextEdit and Evernote.) So, I began positioning my cursor in front of the 2nd-column lines and hitting Tab to correct the discrepancies. But that doesn't work either -- because in Evernote, tabs are not really tabs. It's difficult to describe Evernote's implementation of tabs: Sometimes, tab aligns the cursor with previous columns, but often it does not. So, the user is then forced to experiment with various combinations of tab, plus-or-minus a few spaces, in an attempt to get items to sorta line up. I say "sorta," because it's often simply impossible in Evernote to get tabbed columns to align perfectly at all. Why, after all these years, hasn't this been addressed? Sure, I'll admit I don't use tabs every day. I probably use them once a month or so. Perhaps most users don't need tabs frequently. But is infrequency of use a reason for a feature not to work properly at all? :-)

math was one of my college majors. i began my college mathematics courses at the age of 15, and i ultimately graduated summa cum laude (valedictorian) with a 3.98 GPA. it was one of our math professors who taught us that "the language of mathematics is exact, concise, and precise." if you're comparing only two objects (or concepts), the word "smallest" simply cannot, and does not, apply. the fact that you believe with all your heart that it does does not change that. that's all i have to say on the matter. i didn't write "insults," per se; i simply stated facts. but, aware that they might bristle, i added smileys to indicate friendly disagreement. i'm sorry you didn't appreciate that approach. with that in mind, in the purest sense -- meaning "possessing a lack of knowledge on a subject," as opposed to lacking intelligence -- i'll just say: you're ignorant. (no smiley. better?) we're at an impasse... there's nothing more i can add, and nothing you can say that will change the facts. at this point, you'll be tempted to digress into pure insults, and i'm not going to participate in that. so, i will read/post no further, and i wish you the best of luck. (again, no smiley. i hope that's to your liking.)

with all due respect, you just don't get it. if you understood grammar, you'd realize your statement was nonsensical. you can't just decide to use the wrong word because it "sounds right" to you. though you may think the two words are interchangeable, they simply are not. the smaller of two items is NOT the smallest. it's the smaller. the word "smallest" is grammatically incorrect. period. if you use the word "smallest," the fact that someone will understand what you "mean" doesn't change the fact that it's grammatically (and mathematically) incorrect. unless there are at least three items being compared, "-est" is ineligible for use. there are no exceptions.

...except it's somewhat ineptly named, because at least 3 items (in this case, "dimensions") are required for the suffix "-est" to be applicable. therefore, since an image has only 2 dimensions, 1 dimension would be the smaller of the two, not the smallest. so, it should be the "largest smaller" dimension. but i don't think jeff coined the phrase, so it's not his fault.

Yeah. For example, if you have 3 images with the following dimensions: 75x100 100x400 200x300 The "smallest" dimensions are 75, 100, and 200, respectively. We're going to use the image with the largest of those "smallest" dimensions (i.e., 200). There are probably better ways to describe that algorithm, but that's how we've been describing it internally. with all due respect, what you really mean is the "largest smaller" dimension. for the word "smallest" to apply, you'd have to be comparing at least 3 items -- or, in this case, dimensions (such as the 3 sides of a triangle, or 3 or more of anything, really). but images are two-dimensional; they have only height and width. therefore, neither dimension is the "smallest" of the two; it's the smaller of the two.

Thanks!

Often, when filling out web forms, a section will contain several paragraphs. Before submitting a form, I like to save the text in case I need to refer to it later. So, in Safari, I'll select all and copy, then switch to Evernote and paste. But when I do so, all paragraph or line-break info is stripped from the text, resulting in everything getting pasted as one, large block. This happens whether pasting manually (⌘V) or using Clip to Evernote (⌃⌘V). I'd have to classify this as a bug. If the copied text contains paragraphs, they should remain intact in Evernote. I'd love to see this fixed. :-)