jefito

Windows? Mac? Android? iOS? Web?

Moved to the Evernote Feature Requests subforum, where it can be upvoted by forum-goers...

Both of these are frequently requested, and feature requests for both already exist. I'd suggest doing a forum search, and adding your vote there, rather than making new requests.

Not being in the Real Estate business (but having moved twice in the past five years = 2 buys and 2 sells, using the same broker ), I'd aim to map this into Evernote something like the following: REAL ESTATE : A notebook containing all current real estate related notes. Each CLIENT is represented by a single master note that contains contact information plus a list of note links to relevant other notes. Tag with "Client" (so you can see a list of all of your current clients). The idea here is that the Client master note is the map to all relevant information and documents for that client. I'd also recommend having a tag for each client, so you can tag all relevant notes and be able to display them all quickly. Each Purchase Address (Property?) is represented by a single master note that contains relevant information about the property: address, MLS listing #/web link, etc. Should also have information about the property's status (Available, Under Contract, Sold, etc -- these could be tags) This assumes that you might have multiple clients interested in the same property. Tag with "Property" (so you can see a list of all of your current properties). Note title should probably contain address information. The idea here is that the Client master note is the map to all relevant information and documents for that property. Contracts: relevant contract information: PDF copy, status ("waiting for signature", "signed", etc.). Tag with "Contract". Note title should contain Client name and Contract title, at least. Relevant Client master not should link to this, possibly also relevant Property master note. Correspondence: Copies of correspondence (ail, email, SMS messages, etc.) with various parties (clients, contractors, owners). Tag with "Correspondence" Relevant Client master not should link to this, possibly also relevant Property master note. Disclosures, Inspection Reports, Title/Escrow: similar to Contracts and Correspondence above. Other stuff: I'm assuming that you have a roster of other businesses that do inspections, contracting, title search, etc.; those would seem to be ripe for inclusion in your system as well. Also, other documents you maintain (boiler-plate documents, checklists, information about your business, contact information for other brokers, etc...) Also, you might want to have separate notebooks to keep old clients and old properties (or maybe one Archive notebook), so they're still available (I'm sure that you get repeat business, right? ), but out of the way of your current set of clients and properties in your active notebook. You should probably have well-defined formats for certain items like clients and properties; you'd probably want to have note templates for these to make it easier to add new clients and properties.

Not in the 8 years since I've been using Evernote, somewhere near the time of the original post in this topic. Look for posts by user 'engberg', he was CTO of Evernote at the time.

Moved to Evernote Feature Requests subforum. Now you can go ahead and upvote it...

This is pretty much a duplicate of the existing feature request here:

Moved to the Feature Requests subforum, so that users may vote on it.

If the account was set up by a co-worker for your work, then you need to get control of that account, or the notebooks they created. If they delete those notebooks, or any of the shared notes, or remove the share, then that's going to be too bad for you. Assuming that you are using one of the desktop clients, you can save the shared notebooks by exporting them to Evernote format, and then importing them back into one of your own accounts. Do this on a notebook-by-notebook basis. Once you have then imported back in, you can share them around to your other co-workers, and you'll be able to create new tags again (under the same restrictions as previously: only the notebook's owner can create new tags). Once you've verifies that all is well, then you can stop syncing the old notebooks.

Just as a point of experience; Evernote staff don't usually comment on future features until they're pretty well into the pipeline (e.g., available in a beta or release). So I wouldn't expect an answer, though it's OK to ask, and you never know. But that's been a pretty rare occurrence since I've been coming around... On the other hand, there's nothing to stop you and your cohort from adding comments to a shared note, marked by your initials or other identifying name; maybe with highlighting. It's not great, but it might work well enough if converting your notes to Google Drive is onerous.

Just be aware that with ENML or HTML, you'll be comparing markup and text, which may be confusing.

Even better is to export to ENML or HTML, and compare those, as these are text formats, and use a file comparison tool: My vote goes to Beyond Compare. I use it every work day, and some non-work days, too. WinMerge is good too.

Please stop pasting the same post into separate threads in the forum; this is the third instance so far.

As an Evernote user and not an Evernote developer, there's nothing that I can do to actually address the presented issue but to 1) present workarounds if they exist, 2) advocate for bugs to be fixed, and 3) vote up the topic. I'm happy to also discuss software development stuff if someone brings it up and if it seems related, since that interests me, but of course that's not actually addressing the issue. My point in writing that was -- in response to a question -- to show how some companies, at least, approach a wide range of bugs, issues, feature requests, etc. in their commercial products, with limited amounts of resources (time, money, staff) while adding new features to keep the marketing folks (and hopefully users) happy. Prioritizing that stuff is a balancing act, and you run the risk of losing customers if you're too buggy, not responsive enough, or not implementing customer requested features in a timely fashion, or add features that nobody wants. That's my experience in the industry, anyways, but I don't claim any inside knowledge of how Evernote prioritizes things. Again, this address nothing about the actual problem, but maybe it provides some context for the conversation. There's endless discussion about this on the forum. My take is that -- evidenced by Dave Engberg's forum comments (he was the original CTO) -- this is a design choice, and not a bug to be fixed (his usual recommendation was to just use tags) Will they ever change that? I can't say. Fortunately for me, I don't need sub-notebooks, so it's all worked out fine for me, and is probably one reason I've satyed with Evernote for the last 8 years. Maybe I'd see that feature, if implemented, as bloat, myself. (OK, in reality I just wouldn't use it). Anyways, I appreciate the comments, and I do understand the frustration. Cheers.

This is not made up, nor is it in any way making excuses for Evernote's development process. There are known reasons in the software development world why bugs/feature requests might not get addressed quickly enough for customers. It's all just information for folks who aren't familiar with the software development process (many users of software aren't). A question was asked -- maybe rhetorical -- and I offered an answer. But note that nowhere did I ever claim anything at all about Evernote's internal practices. Of course forum feedback is important; that's why they have a forum (and it's one of the reasons that I participate). Nobody said that it wasn't important. So is collected quantitative data. It's all grist for the mill. Not sure what your point is. Non sequitur. Evernote Food never had anything to do with any perceived "bloat" in the Evernote application. My take is that it was more of a marketing/branding thing, as well as -- at a guess -- being another, separate testbed for their API, which is a cornerstone of their 3rd-party integration/development efforts. As a product, it wasn't useful to me, but some people liked it. Nobody's arguing here, or covering for Evernote. I've said several times here that these bugs should be fixed. And I'd surely welcome more feedback about this stuff from the Evernote folks. But I also believe that new features need to added. You cannot throw a whole team onto a single problem; it just doesn't work that way. You're correct, but again, when forum users go past merely reporting problems in the software to speculating/opining about Evernote's development choices, they've opened the door to discussion on that topic as well. I would hope that I can add to that without it being taken as excuse making. But perhaps not... We all want a better Evernote, can we agree on that at least?

I don't disagree with that. I'm just offering up an explanation of why bugs may languish unfixed in a bug database, and why things that may seem simple from the outside may not actually be so. On the other angle, if it were hindering my workflow significantly, then I'd probably be looking for a replacement myself.

"Reasonable" is for each of us to decide. If they're a killer to your workflow, that raises the stakes for you; if not, then it lowers them. Development teams -- at least the ones I've been on -- do naturally prioritize showstoppers (e.g. crashes, data integrity issues, etc.), but have to balance with fixing non-fatal usability problems and also, yes, adding new features. You typically don't (or can't) throw everyone onto a single bug, since all team members may not have the required familiarity with the area of the codebase, or expertise in the techniques required to find/fix it. Moreover, some problems are just plain difficult to fix; they might be hard to reproduce in a way that makes it possible to deduce the actual problem (not the effect), or have difficulty coming up with a stable solution or one that performs well, or require an architectural change that would be onerous. There's all kinds of reasons bugs may languish unfixed -- we outside the bubble don't have enough actual information to know the actual reason. So we out here need to go with our instincts and our own experience using the program. None of the above is to suggest that bugs shouldn't go unfixed; they should if feasible. But you don't just wave your wand and bugs go away as if by magic. It can take time. Um, I think that a lot of people who complain about "bloat" are just overstating it or don't understand how programs are actually used (not that I know how David Pogue feels about it). My take is that many programs have multiple uses and while everyone may use the same core 10-20% of the application all the time, each individual user may use only some percentage of the rest of the features. But different users use different segments outside the core. So for example, in MS Word, a program that I use reasonably frequently, and is one that's often cited as being "bloated", everyone uses the basic formatting functionality, but I might use its Review capabilities a lot (to take a top-level menu item), but never use Mail Merge (another top-level menu item). Mail Merge isn't at all useful to me, but I'd never call it "bloat", since I know that it's extremely useful to a significant number other MS Word users. Not everyone has the same use cases. In Evernote's case, a lot of the most recently added features that I've seen in the Windows client are ones that have been requested fairly often here on the forums (and elsewhere, since the forums are not the only way of communicating with Evernote). Notebook-specific view/sorting? Check (plus you do the same based on tag or saved search). Hierarchical tag search? check. Dark theme? Semi-check (I think this is a work in progress). I may or may not use these, but I don't call them bloat.

This is a voting thread. If you want to add your vote, then you should click the up-triangle at the top left of the topic header.

Not sure what the issue is -- a PDF file is *always* going to be a part of a note in Evernote: PDF doesn't match the Evernote note format, so it needs to be wrapped up in at least minimal ENML markup (you can't add Evernote tags to a PDF file, for example). And that means that you can add other, non-PDF content to the note, and that a PDF will always be an attachment. Second, the Windows client allows you to view PDF files as "attachments" or as single page display. Could the display be better? Sure: on Windows they use a third-party library to do display (and I guess) annotation; on MacOS PDF support is native. Oh, and one more thing: in Evernote for WIndows, you can right-click on a note in the note list, and select "Save attachments...".

Tone doesn't always come out on the screen the way it does in your head when you're writing it... Might be worth a try, if you've a spare afternoon. I just set it running, and then examined the results later on. Didn't really work out for me, but I'm not really looking to leave Evernote anyhow. As a company, you want to show that you're adding features with some degree of regularity, even if you're not able to solve the tough ones quickly (if they were easy to fix, don't you think that they'd have dome it by now?). Otherwise you look completely moribund. So we've been getting a pretty good stream of nice-to-haves (mainly popularly requested features). Hopefully they'll crack the hard ones some time soon but those can take time.

Don't kid yourself, no non-trivial program is bug-free. I'll grant you that Evernote's editing has some quirks and glitches that aren't helpful -- and should absolutely be addressed -- but I use it daily, and it works for me. Anyhow, the trip to OneNote for many is not bound to be trouble-free; you first need to get your notes in there, and its architecture is not really conducive to that, see, e.g., http://www.makeuseof.com/tag/evernote-better-onenote/. I myself tried recently to import my 6000-odd note database into OneNote, and it was a disaster. The folks who wrote the OneNote importer totally mishandled Evernote tags, among other things. It was not "bug-free"..

Tags are useful for describing things (if that's what you mean by 'taxonomy'), and that's how I tend to use them, but because they can be organized hierarchically, they can be used to reflect hierarchical organization as well -- indeed, multiple independent hierarchical organizations -- with some caveats. The big one is that tag names are unique: if you use a, say, 'Language' as a tag name, it can only exist in one location in your tag hierarchy (or hierarchies). If you assign a single tag from your hierarchy to a note, or to reverse that to resemble a folder analogue, put a note into a single tag in your hierarchy, then you can navigate the tag tree in much the same way as you navigate a folder tree (in the Windows client, anyways). And that's across notebooks, if you wish it, or restricted to a single notebook or a single stack if you wish that. Sure, you need to tag every note if you want them to appear in your tag hierarchy, but you'd need to make sure that you're creating a note in the correct notebook if there were notebook hierarchies. Level of effort seems similar. Beyond that, I'd suggest that you already know how to operate taxonomically: if you use Google or any other search engine, it's pretty similar, mentally. Or just describing objects in your world of discourse. Mind, that's with or without tags, as you can filter on either tags or text in a note: you add tags or text terms to filter your note database down to a smaller set of results. But getting used to thinking that way with respect to the world of computing seems to be a hurdle (even though I guess we overcame it somewhat when we kicked the Yahoo approach to the curb after Google appeared). Don't know what to tell you otherwise. It doesn't look as though Evernote is going to change its mind on nested notebooks any time soon, if at all. I find it to be a great tool regardless, but it's certainly understandable that some folks may not be able to do without notebook hierarchies. Good luck...

"Sort by relevance" was apparently added to Evernote for Mac sometime in 2014: http://blog.evernote.com/blog/2014/09/22/evernote-mac-better-tables-image-resizing-hundreds-fixes/. The, er, relevant quote: See also: I don't know whether this was withdrawn later...

Which Evernote client are you using? Windows? Mac?

Just guessing, but this is most likely just a matter of the various platforms getting new features at differing rates. This is a brand new feature, implemented first on the Windows client, and I'd expect it to be implemented on Mac at some point, but the teams are largely independent and this doesn't appear to depend on any Evernote API changes that would require simultaneous rollout across all clients. They do aim for feature parity, though, particularly for larger features like this one; it just takes a while to implement across all of their supported clients.