jefito

'Super gurus''and 'gurus' are users just like you are, not Evernote employees. They are typically ardent Evernote users who are also allowed to express their own opinions on the forums. Nobody, but nobody, is being silenced (modulo forum posting rules).

I tried this in the current Windows client, 6.9.6.6729. I noted the following: * if you select text (not cells) in a table, then Ctrl+Shift+Space will remove the formatting from the selected text * if you select one or more cells, then Ctrl+Shift+Space removes formatting from the text in all of the table's cells * if , you just have the cursor anywhere in a note with no selection (including in a table cell), then formatting is removed from all text in the note. Note that link formatting (blue underscore, clickability) is preserved with Ctrl+Shift+Space, as are bullets and checkboxes. Ctrl+Shift+Space then appears to act only on formatting specific to a piece of text, and not structural formatting like tables and lists. I don't know of a single operation that removes a table but leaves the content, but you can fake it by selecting all cells in the table, and then using the little dropdown arrow at the top right, select "Merge cells". You should wind up with a single celled table with all of your content present. Select that, and copy/move it elsewhere, and delete the table.

Always remember that Evernote is a cloud service. The note database is a local cache of the account information stored in the Evernote servers. There is no "pinned" designation in Evernote at this time, so what you're really suggesting is a local change to the Windows client that would not ripple through your global Evernote account. In other words, a note pinned in your Windows client wouldn't be pinned, say, on your phone, unless the changes were made to Evernote's architecture and API (and the phone's Evernote application). https://dev.evernote.com/doc/

The Windows application is (mainly) written in C++, as far as I know. The clients for other devices (Android, Mac, iOS, and the web) are not. The server software, I don't know. Modifying the Windows application, were it open source, could certainly be done. In fact, there's a feature quite similar that exists already, where selecting a tag causes its subtags to also be included in the search, though it turns the search from its default of an AND search to an OR search. You'd could do something like that to implement synonyms, but it would be strictly local to your local machine. Oh, and you can spelunk the local Windows SQlite database (.exb file) too, if you want. To make global changes to Evernote's architecture, which is cloud-based, you'd need to do quite a bit more, and use more than C++ technologies. This would be the proper approach. The APIs and general architecture are all documented starting here: https://dev.evernote.com/doc/. There's more stuff in the Evernote Tech blogs here: https://blog.evernote.com/tech/ Ultimately, it's not a question of whether Evernote could do it; it's a question of whether it makes good business sense for them to do so, the same as any other feature request or other technical issue or bug. I don't have any say in that, as I am not an Evernote employee. It's a fact that I wouldn't have much use for this, and my opinion that it wouldn't rate very high on Evernote's list because it probably wouldn't have a lot of use for most users, but that carries no stigma on the idea itself. Heck, I've suggested any number of changes myself, knowing that they probably wouldn't have a huge audience, but I don't hold it against Evernote for not implementing my bright ideas...

It's one thing to say that you want a notebook hierarchy, it's entirely another to claim that tags are not useful for organization. And yet many people, including me, do exactly that, because that's what Evernote offers for organizational facilities. You just need to understand how to use them effectively. So first there seem to be a couple of models for tag use: one is a hierarchical model that is used like a file folder tree for navigational purposes. The second is as a mini language or vocabulary that is used to describe notes for purposes of searching. Evernote seems better set up for the latter, but the former is also feasible. You are correct in that there's no unified hierarchical browsing starting at notebooks and moving into tags; I think that the UI could be improved there (you can also mimic that to some degree by mirroring you notebook list using tags, but that's onerous) . The latter system is the one I use, though. As far as too many tags, I don't find that to be a problem: you just tag as you would describe a note; notes then can have multiple tags (e.g. in my world, a note might have tags "software" , "algorithm", and "C++". The UI in the search panel will help you to narrow down your tag list to tags that are applicable in the current note list context: I look in my Development notebook, then open up the tag picker. I see "algorithm" first, so I select that; the tag list narrows down, I see "C++" and click that. The tag list shrinks again, but I see the note I'm looking for, and don't need to look further. My tag language is small, but it has combinatoric richness. I have <300 tags across two accounts, and most of them are short, simple and common. I add new ones only occasionally. Your vocabulary as an English speaker is somewhere north of 10,000 words, I'd guess,; much larger than my tag language . I never use the tag tree to navigate my notes; frequently I can just type them in the search panel, or use the tag picker control as above. I really, really do not like clicking up and down hierarchical structures, including file systems. Done enough of that in my life; if I can search effectively and get a result of < 10 results, I can pick things out by eye. That's my Evernote strategy. The tag picker UI can help there to some degree; it would probably be nicer for some folks if it exhibited the hierarchy to facilitate that kind of navigation. Notes already exist in one location,, one notebook. That they can be found using different approaches just speaks to the power of tags. A tag isn't really a location; it's an adjective. Strongly disagree there. Most things in the universe have multiple attributes, none of which are primary in and of themselves. What's important is context. What's primary about my C++ algorithm? Is it the "algorithm" part? The "C++" part? Depends on what I need at the time I'm searching. "Taxonomy" is really a general term; it doesn't just mean the biological tree of life, though that's certainly a common usage: https://en.oxforddictionaries.com/definition/taxonomy The branch of science concerned with classification, especially of organisms; systematics. Example sentences Synonyms 1.1 The classification of something, especially organisms. ‘the taxonomy of these fossils’ More example sentences 1.2 count noun A scheme of classification. ‘a taxonomy of smells’ Regardless, biological entities can be classified in different ways: you could start with flying vs flightlessness, for example, and flesh it out to include all creatures, just in a different way. They're all just attributes (or categories, or labels, whatever). Not to mention that some of the existing categorization can be capricious/contentious (https://www.theatlantic.com/science/archive/2017/02/to-name-a-mockingbird/518013/). But to me, taxonomy just means a vocabulary for classification, and doesn't imply a single tree. That's not really true. Evernote, at least in its current incarnation (that's 9 or 10 years old now) was designed with notebooks and tags. Stacks were added later on (at least a couple of years; I forget now) as a way to organize notebooks for UI purposes: a flat list of the then 100 max notebooks (now 250) isn't great to work with; they're kind of bolted on, architecturally. The earliest posts by @Dengberg in this topic speak to that. I do understand that Evernote's system doesn't jibe with everyone's view of the world. I can't dissuade you from yours, and I don't mean to tell you not to request that Evernote support yours better. But given the current state of Evernote, I do want to help others -- if they're interested, and if possible -- in seeing how Evernote's current system can work for them, because that's what we have to work with today...

Oh? Are you sure about that? You know what I do for work? Hey, great development strategy: "hide it from the noobz!". If you hide it, then how do the "superduperpowerusers" get to learn about it? Do they need to take a test? If you make it obscure/hidden, then you're probably going to make it hard for the to get at conveniently for those who require it. Cool. I'd fix Facebook is it were open source, too. So: You'll be handling the case where a user wants to search for exactly the tag, and not its synonyms? And it'll work with wildcards in the search language (e.g. tag:xyz*)? And synonyms work with shared notebooks, so a group can have a shared vocabulary? And you're gonna fix the Evernote servers, too, since not all Evernote clients have local storage? Don't forget, you need to update the API and all of the underlying data storages across all client programs to accommodate the new stuff. And you'll do it all without turning a standard AND search into an OR search? (This is the downfall of the 'Automatically select child tags" search option -- or one of them -- in my opinion). Did I miss anything? Short of just agreeing on a canonical tag language that you share among your colleagues, I agree. It's just a matter of how large an audience this would have among the the general Evernote user population versus level-of-effort to implement that feature versus other features. I find it an interesting idea on one hand, but I'd doubt that it gains much traction compared to other widely requested features. I wish you luck anyways.

Bad start, right there: your opinion notwithstanding, tags are a de facto way of organizing notes, conceptally identical to keywords, labels, and categories. How is "creating links between notes" (your definition, mind) not an organizational method? Show me a definition of 'organization' that excludes what tags do. Indeed, tags are great for categorization, a very powerful organizational concept that recognizes that not all of the objects of interest (notes) belong to exactly one spot in a hierarchy. Notes don't have to live in the same notebook to be organized. Or you could have one big notebook, and just organize using tags. There's no one ideal here, there are only better or worse ways that work for specific use cases. There is *zero* conflict between notebooks and tags.You can use tags to create hierarchy, for sure, but you don't need to (I don't). Regardless, Evernote notebooks are useful in and of themselves as designating discrete collections of notes for sharing, or for keeping on a mobile device. And tag hierarchy doesn't destroy anything about notebooks; indeed they can cut across rigid notebook divisions. I can organize (identify, categorize) notes that belong together in different notebooks. Notebooks, stacks, and tags are conceptually both filters on your note collection. The difference is that while a note belongs to exactly one notebook (and hence zero or one stack), it can have multiple tags. Aside from that, you can filter your notes by a notebook, a stack (multiple notebooks) or a set of tag, thus enabling you to look on a subset of related notes. Sorry, but you really haven't made your case very well (and name-checking 'Neanderthals' doesn't help you). If you dig back into what tags are and can do, you should be able to come up with a good scheme to solve your stated problem: How about: One notebook per paper. Tags: 'Dataset', 'Email', 'Experiment', 'Meeting', etc. One note per dataset, email, experiment, or meeting. Reuse the same tags across papers. When you want to work on a paper, select its notebook. You see all of its notes.

A web search for "evernote tag delete confirmation" turned up the following:

Perhaps this article might help? https://support.microsoft.com/en-us/help/259459/how-to-allow-users-who-are-not-administrators-to-install-msi-packages or this one: https://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/library/windows/desktop/aa369519(v=vs.85).aspx

This is the general problem for Evernote with respect to Markdown: Evernote can contain and display formatting (https://dev.evernote.com/doc/articles/enml.php), at least some of it Markdown cannot express. Think of web clipping, and all of the crazy formatting out there that can wind up in an Evernote note. As best I can figure, Markdown and Evernote would be an input-only proposition: once Markdown goes into Evernote, it's converted into some kind of style attribute based markup that may or may not be recognizable as Markdown-specific, so then you're stuck editing in the general Evernote editor anyways (note: I don't know what Marxico does, as I'm not a Marxico users, so the preceding is a little theoretical). Maybe they could add some sort of id attribute based system for dealing with semantic styles, including predefined or user-defined styles, since a lot of people want those (I do too). But I don't know; it all sounds kind of clunky to me.

IFTTT uses the Evernote API. If it used to work, it still should, unless something changed with the API. Have you tried asking IFTTT about this?

Sure, we'd all probably like more feedback on what features are important / interesting enough for Evernote to want to implement. But it's generally not been their policy in the past to announce such things (it's on our todo list, we're not interested in that, we'll never do that, etc.) in the forums much. Hopefully that will change, but that's the way it is now. BTW, have you checked out the 3rd-party Marxico application, which works with Evernote?

They've never said whether they'll ever support it or not. They do offer Markdown-ish shortcuts in their desktop applications, but obviously that's not the same thing. There is a third-party solution, Marxico, which may work for you. But if Markdown is a requirement for you, and Marxico doesn't cut it, then yes, you should be looking for a new tool.

For Android, I believe it's the latter. The note is created (you can see it if you sync), but it's populated later on.

It's also worth pointing out that storage space is less often the issue with Evernote than are its monthly upload quota limits. User storage limits in Evernote in Evernote are governed by the note limit (100,000 per user) and the note size limit (25MB Basic, 50MB Plus, 200MB Premium), so even a Basic level user has a pretty high upper limit (2.5 terabytes by my calculation, before my morning coffee, mind). Once you get content into Evernote, everyone can use it. But if you have someone in your group who needs to upload a lot of stuff to Evernote in a short amount of time, then you may hit the upload quota limits (60MB Basic, 1GB Plus, 10GB Premium). Even so, you can upgrade them to Plus or Premium temporarily and then drop back them down later on.

Moving this and other Mac-specific topics to Mac Help forum.

Evernote employees have certainly said so in the past. Do a forum search on "we read every post" and you'll find some (ex employees @Jackolicious and @engberg, notably). It's been some time since I've seen that said, so take that with a grain of salt.

Both are valid, even at the same time. Evernote users just need to figure out what each mechanism is good at, and how to make it work for their use case. It can take a little time to sort it out and find what works best for you. Anyways, since a note belongs to exactly one notebook in Evernote, notebooks partition your notes into discrete collections. Notebooks are also the way to share a collection of notes with someone else, or specify a set of notes that are held on a mobile device for offline use. On the other hand, you can apply multiple tags to a note, which makes them great for categorizing notes, either uniquely or into separate collections. Tags may also be organized into trees, so you can do some hierarchical organization of your notes if you want. I use both tags and notebooks, but maintain relatively few of the latter, but more than one, since I need to share notes between two separate accounts, my personal account and my work account. It's pretty simple, but that may be more complicated than many people need. Ultimately, it all really depends on what you're trying to do with Evernote.

It could also be a good way to get ignored. But we can let this be a test case. Wouldn't it be ironic if you bailed, and then they implemented this, though? Sorry, but in Evernote, tags are not useless at all. In fact, they're more expressive than notebooks, since they can be applied to multiple notes. If you're not using them in Evernote, then you may indeed be better served by using a different program. Hard to tell, since we don't know your use case. It is kinda funny you're using the "dammit, I bought this screwdriver and I'm so mad that it doesn't drive nails, I'm going to threaten to go on over to https://www.workzone.com/blog/screwdriver-alternatives/" approach, though.

This feature is still a reach for me, in terms of general utility. In terms of workarounds, if you don't have a huge number of synonym clusters (e.g. "Ibutamoren/MK677/159752-10-0"), then you could possibly use saved searches. What synonyms actually express, under the hood, though, is really an OR search. In this case, you're saying a search for notes with tag "MK677" should return all notes that have any of the tags "MK677", Ibutaamoren" or "159752" (we'll ignore the fact that a tag with dash characters in it like "159752-10-0" can be problematic in Evernote). That search would be expressed in Evernote as: any: tag:Ibutamoren tag:MK677 tag:"159752-10-0". So do that search, and save it as, say MK677. Note that you could dispense with the 'tag:' portion, and your search would include notes that have any of those literal values in their titles or content. Of course, if you have a lot of synonym clusters, then this becomes very awkward in short order. Also, you can't really combine these saved-search synonyms in a simple way, partly because you can only invoke one saved.search at a time, and partly because Evernote's search language is weak in the area of Boolean expressions. I have a lot of doubts as to whether many people would find a synonym feature of much use; my guess is that it would cause more confusion about tag and tagging practices. I can see synonyms being useful for general content search, but for a tag collection that your organization controls, I'd just come up with one tag name for each synonym cluster (I'd use the shortest convenient name, like "MK677"), and use that exclusively. Put the tag names in a list that's shared by all users so that everyone knows what your tag vocabulary is and what it means.

You can certainly store your database on a different drive with the Windows version (dunno about the Mac). Tools / Options / General / Evernote local files / Change

The web client generally isn't fully featured. In fact, it's missing some features that are really important, at least to my use case. It's up to you to determine if it works for you. If you're low on disk space (how low, and how many notes do you expect to have?), then you might want to try the demand sync feature in the Windows client. That way you can use whichever of the web or Windows application works best for you with particular operations...

Can we stipulate that it's generally a good idea to keep a topic's focus as narrow as possible? Simple inputs like votes lose meaning if they're applied to a topic that has multiple requests or issues. Sure, topic drift occurs, but this seems like a good starting point to me. So the idea here is to generate new ideas to improve Evernote, and try to gauge interest in those new ideas. Feature request subforums here (like this one) offer the ability for forum users to vote on the original request and also individual posts in a topic. Oh, and other users can 'like' any other user's post. These are capturable / tabulable separately via the forum software. But there's nothing guaranteeing that a popular reply (whether by vote count or likes) is actually topical -- often they are, of course, but it might also be a funny wisecrack too. Moreover, many forum users don't know about the voting stuff, hence the myriad posts whose content is mainly "+1", or just "great idea' or 'that wouldn't work for me' or whatever.. And then there are piggyback posts: "Yes I want that, and by the way, I want something else, too". So all in all it's a bit of a tangle -- there's raw data (votes, likes), and maybe they can automate collection of "+1's", but beyond that it's probably a bit of handwaving, but it means that actual people need to read the comments (and in the past, Evernote has assured us that all posts are read) and come to some at least partially subjective measure of how popular a particular request is. And they also need to collect information from duplicate forum requests and other sources (twitter, hangouts, etc.) Not rocket science, for sure, but time-consuming. In my view, mashing unrelated suggestions together would seem to make things more difficult; if the intent is to make one of them more popular than other requests ("If you combine these two feature requests, they would become the second most requested feature here... over 350 at the time of this writing (vs 424 for the current to request") then that seems especially unhelpful. Note that Evernote moderators do occasionally pile related posts together; I'm pretty sure that the old (and very popular) nested notebooks topic (https://discussion.evernote.com/topic/96180-nesting-multiple-notebooks-creating-sub-notebooks/) comes from several separate topics, for example. Anyways, that's just my take on it. There's no actual rules, and posts won't get deleted or moderated, etc. But this is obviously a popular request (heck, I probably even voted for it), so Evernote has noticed it. But popularity isn't everything; from the text at the head of the forum:

In the Windows client, at least (since nobody has specified which Evernote client this pertains to), you can sort the reminder list by Date (which does indeed sort reminders with actual data above reminders with no date) or not, in which case you can move reminders to arbitrary locations in the list (so sorting by hand). I find reminders to be very handy, but, like keeping extra tabs open in your browser, having too many of them kinda defeats the purpose. I do actually prefer sort-by-date, as that puts reminder notes that I have specific dates for up front, as opposed to reminders that don't, which for me are a sort of bookmarky, get-to-it-sometime kind of marker (i.e. lower priority). YMMV, per usual.

They could be, but why? They're different features, and therefore different feature requests.