Romarain

I don't think anyone is disagreeing with your main point by saying that there is something wrong with adding more sub-levels to the notebooks. Rather, I think I hear them saying they are fine with the current system.

What do you mean?

People say "I think there is something wrong with adding more levels" and you conclude that it's not a disagreement?

Or that no one said that there is something wrong so no one is disagreeing?

You used a paradoxical form of syntax, do you see it? We can interpret the meaning in both ways (the word "by" is ambiguous).

I'll just comment the end : if 3 millions or even 3 billions of people are fine with a system, it does not mean for me that this system is valid or better than an other.

even though your notion that they are somehow easy to implement (two lines of code? seriously?)

No, that's why I said it was just a picture. Can we see a dev here?

How can we submit an idea and see them admiting/rejecting it?

Sorry, but there's too much heat here, and not enough light, so I'm checking myself out of the thread. Good luck with your quest for.. well, I'm not really sure what your quest is, but good luck anyways.

Thanks jefito, for your patience even in my darkest moment.

There is not enough light because, IMO, the approach of hierarchical tree VS tags implicate a real complex questioning about our way of thinking. It's about brain, it's about thought, it's about cognition, semantic, etc.

My conviction is human are uncomfortable with thinking/calculating and always prefer the easiest way. Our time is proving it, by deploying much more technology based on an irrational structure than a rational one. Everybody adulate Search Engines, Tags, etc, and people have a serious problem with the "traditionnal method" of building theories, models, hierarchical, pathes.

But for me, the only method wich belongs to human is unfortunatly the rational one : we can't cheat, we can't run away from it, it always came back. That's why I ask you to bring here some screenshots of your tag lists, and why I pointed the fact that => imo this list as to be, soon or later, displayed in an ergonomic way !

You can't avoid it ! You can't watch your tag list like you watch a thousand words written on little pieces of paper, chaotically scattered on your desktop, and select them (for a search function or to attribute them to a note) in a mysterious way you don't want to know neither modelize => The modelizing, the gathering, is called a rational model : concepts are gathered BECAUSE of the meaning, of the PATH you CREATE.

So I'm not ok with what is explained here : http://discussion.ev...nested-folders/

You don't have to physically dupplicate the notes, as BurgersNFries said ; no, you can virtually dupplicate it !

Just keep in mind :

• 2 Systems : rational VS irrational, tree VS tags
  
• Paradoxical where the 2 systems are complementary.
  
• It has been realized before : it's called Hard links.
  
• Moreover we're talking about a little improvment of a yet existing feature.
  

Now, here is how I see it :

• We can merge the tree and the tag : categories of the tree ARE the tags !
  
• When you create a cat/tag in a branch, if it already exists in an other branch => it is connected.
  
• Ticking a checkbox near a cat/tag, or typing his name on the search function will display only these sub-folders, in their respective branches.
  
• When you add a note in such a cat/tag/sub-folder, if there is many occurences of the tag, it ask you if you want to connect the note with the other tags (you can select eah one).
  
• Extra : We could have several sets of tree, to display the tree in different orders of sorting, depending on different path we create in our mind.
  

I know what you're thinking : "he does not understand that tags actually avoid this kind of autistic conception and laborious work".

Well, what you perhaps don't understand is the interest of doing it I guess. Hard link model is something much more intelligent and complete. Seriously, can you give me a screenshot of your tag list !

• It is rejected : "thanks, but no, everything is perfect, thanks!" (respect has nothing to do with this)
  

Thanks, but no[...]

epic. Are you trying to do an inception on me?

According to the fact I've been kicked all my life by people and socially excluded, I find the accusation funny.

I never kick people, I never sulk them (only if they exclude something, by denying it with no explaination wich is for me a defeat by forfeit), I certainly never exclude them, I never close threads (very common reaction on the web, I'm surprise this discussion isn't already locked).

Firstable, I don't think devs have reached a different conclusion. They create 2 levels of nested notebooks. Why not only 1, if tag is the final solution?

Where is the proof of that conclusion?

Secondly, yes, I think people are often wrong (not always, of course), because they use the System 1 wich is base on irrational conceptions, emotion and force relationship.

Moreover, even people are not wrong, they never see the 2nd solution that is implicated in the complete reality of the phenomenon. They only see half of the solution, their solution, and don't listen to others' point of view, or pretends to, but never apply, because they refuse to see the reality as a paradoxical object.

Thus, developers are reluctant to add a simple checkboxe in option panels, to add a feature, even the tiniest, if they don't see the utility in their own way of using their product.

Finally, I need to clarify something :

• Everybody in the world, I mean e-v-e-r-y-b-o-d-y, we've all experienced at least one some good discussions, with a friend or anybody else, where we admit we are wrong somewhere, or that our argumentation lacks from something and has weakness on some parts.
  
• So I've experience this. Yes, I confirm. So your accusation is not only impossible, but also really emblematic of the mentality you are in.
  
• The actual mentality I'm talking about is as follows : you [all defenders] don't agree with me, I don't agree with your disagreement wich is irrational, I explain why, I explain the 2 kinds of intelligence/paradigm for you to get the picture in mind, and finally you use it to exclude my proposition, when I never wanted to excluded the use of tags, wich is, wheter you like it or not, an irrationnal method (that's what makes you mad). We're not even in a traditionnal opposition of paradigm, where only one must survive : we're in a dual and paradoxical paradigm, and nobody has to be excluded (nb : very funny/exciting about brain, thoughts and quantum physic, isn't it?). But nothing works in front of your state of mind.
  
• System 1 always take over System 2. You confirm the conclusion of Kahneman.
  
• Q.E.D
  

I understand your point of view about respect, GrumpyMonkey, and you're right about it. But what you perhaps don't understand, is the effect of being often if not always faced with this kind of situation and absurdity. If I was always fully "respectfull", my contributions on internet will always proceed like :

• I propose something.
  
• It is rejected : "thanks, but no, everything is perfect, thanks!" (respect has nothing to do with this).
  
• I say goodbye and the communication is over very quickly.
  

Finally, I would never start a discussion, and progressively lose interest in proposing suggestions, because it would not have the tiniest interest.

I remind you we're talking because of a simple sub-level feature, already implemented !

I won't insist, it would be in bad taste and I've yet exceeded the limits of your patience, to all of you, I'm fully conscient of this.

But it breaks my heart to drop a soft like this, just because of a stuff like "one or two more sub-levels on a left panel".

So pathetic and representative of our world : we always see the millions of followers, without seing the millions ones who would follow if an absurdity was not driving them away.

My opinion now, is the following.

When I discovered the web, I instantly had all this thoughts coming to my mind :

• Information is drowned under a sea of useless information for me at the moment.
  
• Indeed I need to read an entiere page before finding it, and often I don't find it and I go back into the search result to try something else.
  
• It take time for me to find information : many results displayed in the search engine.
  
• When I find it, information is partial/fragmented.
  
• I need to search again : so, in fact, information is dupplicated everywhere.
  

So, I asked myself : why not sort websites and even gather information into a tree?

I discovered Internet directories, like http://www.dmoz.fr/

I say to myself "yeah, cool", but very quickly I was disappointed :

• Categories are not very relevant.
  
• Ergonomy don't seems to not be an important part of devs mentality (yeah again), and they don't see the link between such projects and the very important need of ergonomy.
  
• This kind of project are not very provided, and quite deserted.
  

I asked myself : but... why? Why people don't understand the interest of such philosophy?

It's not about sorting ALL the internet and forsaking search engines, but about trying our best to give a human alternative and sorting manually information.

Why? Because of this :

• It's always better to have a full vision for trivial question like, for example : what are the actual website giving information about... let's say, politic? Or ecology?
  
• I can give you ideas : by seing the entiere "tree" or a branch, you can explore what you never had the idea to explore.
  
• So you can increase and stimulate your knowledge.
  
• And even solve some of your problem, because discovering mysterious things can be usefull for something else you did not solve in the past and forget...
  
• etc.
  

And after a couple of years, I saw the birth of tags in websites, and social networks (with bulk and anti-ergonomic display of information) and news-podcasting like Twitter (idk if it's the exact english term to define this kind of application). And I laughed. I said to myself : lol, always the more irrationnal way to do things.

Not that I don't like the ideas : but they are always fragmented, limited and filled by a prehistorical way of thinking.

Dematerialization give us bad ideas, wrong approaches : it give us the believe that using a non-linear way to think is the best way.

And unfortunatly, it is not the best way. It's just a way.

Recently, by reading an article in Philosophy Magazine (a french magazine), about financial markets and trading, I find that a psychologist, named Kahneman, explained the functioning of humans in a familiar way compared to my own experience of society and interacting with people : for him, there is two systems.

• The System 1 is under automatic pilot : it generate a flow of thoughts, by association of ideas, by intuition, without control neither efforts. This flow is often together with emotions.
  
• The System 2 (the one I personnaly think I'm in) is the one of rational reasoning. It's slow, meticulous, analytic, and it has a cost : thinking in a rational way takes efforts and concentration, and no one is capable of using it permanently.
  
• The System 1 often takes over the System 2, even with people who are trained to mathematics etc.
  

I think I don't have to explain you the conclusion.

Since the begining of this thread, we're talking and talking... just for adding more sub-levels, and it seems to be a problem for you and the devs, because it does not match with your paradigm. An unsignificant.... miserable... tiny modification is discussed... just because you can't understand the whole picture !

It's a mistake to think that Evernote should be the singe piece of software that anyone requires - extra features will always be available; it's what your laptop / smartphone / pad is there for.

I understand your point of view, but I don't have enough money to have iPhones, iPad etc. Moreover I don't like the idea to switch from a device to another for the same activity, just because people don't want to gather them on the same software. We should do Notemanagers / Stickies / Driagrams both on computers, smartphone and tablets, and let the people chose what they want to use instead of forcing them.

I'll tell you "Wtf" happened:

People realized that depth-first exploration of deeply nested tree structures is not efficient (though better search tools can help).

Correction : "is not enough efficient, and need to have a complementary feature".

People also realized the hierarchies are not always the best way to organize objects that are multi-attributed.

Not the best way don't mean to replace it with an other. You'll understand what I mean just below.

The "limitation of intelligence" you posit is in people who can only think hierarchically (I'd phrase that more charitably, something more like a limitation of experience).

Wrong. I don't think only hierarchically, people think only with tags.

I know what you're talking about : building a tree is an imperfect solution. Because anybody can came and say "I'd prefer to sort it like... this!"

It's a matter of relationship between concepts : thoughts have no begining, and no end.

In real life (not in mathematics, in our brains), to prove/explain something, an argumentation can start anywhere, pass throught a certain path, and reach a conclusion. And you can prove the same thing by using not exactly the same path, or even by trying a complete different path !

BUT... (the next is below)

Trees give you one way to categorize objects; any object is in exactly one place in the tree. Tags afford the opportunity to create multiple independent organizational schemes; any object can have any tag

When I start this post to answer to gazumped, I talked about the way to display the tag list. I explained that anyway, we go back to the problem of gathering things. So, now I'll give you the solution : use a hierarchical display of categories that can be used as tags !

Then, you can "dupplicate" instantly files and give them an infinite localisation ! By deploying the tree and editing a note, the note is edited for each of its occurences ! Under Windows, it's called a hard-link : http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hard_link

When I said this exist since the holly ancient times, I was not kidding, and when I say limitation of intelligence is a common problem of devs' world, I was meaning it.

I think Evernote devs are humans, and they make mystakes. And I don't think hierarchical or tag organization was a central discussion during the development. Tags are born few years ago, in people's heads directly from the experience of Search Engines wich were the fastest way to proceed about listing the web.

What Search Engines "inspire" us, is to find stuffs by entering words. It's not like the entiere web was sorted by humans in categories. We could have done this way, but it was too much work, and the way we discovered/build the internet induced us in one mentality.

So naturally, devs finished the work by inventing tags, and everybody, included Evernote's devs, just mechanically used this conception without questioning it.

However as I got used to the tagging system I began to see many advantages in using tags, not folders

I don't see this as an advantage, but as a disadvantage :

- the list of tags can be... infinite !

- how having a full visibility of all the tags existing (to choose the good ones), when they are displayed in a bulk list?

- folders make possible to gather some similar concepts : without them, how do I sort my bulk list of thousands of tags?

Some visitors to the forum have insisted that post-it notes are essential if they are to use Evernote; others that a Mind Mapping layout is required.

Not me. I don't want to add a new feature. I just want the devs to "unblock" a feature. They created the possibility to create one sub-level, there is no valid neither logic explaination to limit this function during the development. They're just lazy to take 5 minutes, go on the source code and change 2 lines. I'm exaggerating guys, don't flame, it's just a "picture".

I don't suggest that Evernote disregard all such requests - the owners of the software have to make their own decision what development is physically and economically feasible within their own business plan.

Same argument seen in every project I criticized. We're not talking of something new, complex to implement : we're talking about something that exist in a limited form and wich DOES NOT requiere to change anything around.

The existing customer base will get unhappy if the product slows down, or adds unwieldy bloat to the menus, so EN have to keep massaging their infrastructure to keep pace with demand.

Same here.

For the forseeable future, Evernote will look pretty much like it does now - that's the "if it ain't broke" principle we all know and love - so if you really, REALLY require something else before you'll accept the product, it's not an unhelpful attitude to say "try elsewhere", it's just realistic.

It is unhelpfull since there is no other note manager with such quality and features, moreover using a cloud conception.

And it is NOT realistic to say "try elsewhere", just for a miserable tiny improvment of a yet existing feature !

There are apps out there that add in the post-it feature; there are MindMapping and dozens of other specialist tools (I use several myself) to add functionality to Evernote.

I have X-mind for drawing diagrams. I'm not talking about adding a feature like that.

(I need to separate my answer in several posts)

The attitude of many devs and moderators, wich is fanatism and close-minded, is much more negative than fighting it.

Here again, what is being close-minded :

[EDIT:] Content deleted by moderator. Please watch the language. http://discussion.ev...ore&module=help

The bolded sentence is very important.

Evernote proposes... notes, notebooks. So, the logic of development is : I open my eyes, I watch around how we usually make a Notes Manager, and I use the best ideas. What people need? They need to save their ideas, not only like traditionnal reminders, we have Stickies or PNotes for this. Ideas are complex. Some note managers have trees with unlimited levels, it's cool to store complex structures of notes. Not only mathematicians or physicians need it, but anybody who wants to store information and sort it in many categories, and store categories in other categories to be more logic.

Since the begining of ancient holly times, arborescences in computing are unlimited :

- Windows Explorer (folders, sub-folders, etc)

- Help Files (.chm)

- Even bulleted lists in text editors

Wtf did happen? What did happen is limitation of intelligence in certain people who usually work in softwares development. It's very current.

Until I have a real argument to explain the limitation of Evernote's tree feature, my explaination is the devs only think in 2 levels and want to create a tool FOR THEM.

Thanks for the links ! I'll see if I'm wrong.

It's not an ordinary tree structure.

Please explain what is the problem with implementing more sub-levels.

Thanks a lot.

Cheers.

Thanks guys for your answers !

@jefito : unfortunatly tags are not the solution, because I feel the need to deploy trees, sub-trees etc. Let's imagine I want to create a 2nd sub-level by cheating and using tags, all these tags will be bulk (is this the right expression in english?) and not connected to any stack/notebook. I could have a thousand tags bulk, lol ! Impossible... Anyway, thank you for this idea.

@JMichael : Yeah, MyNotesKeeper is impressive :

- for the tabs

- for the hierarchical

- the possibility to export in .CHM (Windows Help File), I love this !

One other similar software is TreeDBNotes, but no export in .CHM !

What brings me to Evernote is :

- I was searching something more "modern". I'm a perfectionnist in ergonomy, I like having smooth designs, even if I lost features by using an other software I'll always prefer having a better design (ex : I prefer "Musique" to "Mediamonkey").

- Evernote propose an online account (cloud).

Moreover I love :

- The web clipping feature.

- The attachment possibilities

- The Share function

- The interface...

- Etc, Evernote is well done.

Excepted the problem of the left tree, and the fact that a portable version of Evernote is no longer released, Evernote is perfect for me.

But the fact that the devteam don't want to listen to users and implement the sub-tree feature is a strong sign that I won't adopt this software.

I absolutely HATE when developpers are blinds, depth and bounded. "I don't see the utility, so I won't implement it" = bye bye !

The entire computing is slowed and filled by this kind of mentality.

What is the use of Evernote for me? Nothing.

Why? Just because of a miserable consideration of sub-level.

Bravo !

A guy talking with a car-dealer :

- Your cars don't have trunks?

- No. No need to.

- Yeah yeah... =>Bye.

Hi

I'm new in Evernote. I'm basically a MyNotesKeeper user, and I've a request about the tree on the left panel !

In MyNotesKeeper, we can have main categories displayed by tabs (on the top), and we can create as many notes and sub-notes as we want in these categories ! I absolutely need the possibility to create as many sub-trees as I want !! For me, it's a must-have, a basic function.

Why?

Because of this :

http://www.evernote....41d6785f24375d9

My use of a notes manager is more complex than what you propose : I sort my thoughts in many subtrees, as you see.

I don't understand why you didn't work about this aspect, wich is, in my opinion, a priority : how represent what is inside our brains, how let people express the complexity of their thoughts ?