Tag filter not right in new web client

[Gear64 43]

Let's say I have 22 notes tagged with MyTag.  If I use search box with syntax <Tag:MyTag>, I get 22 results.  If I select tags item in the sidebar, I see all my tags, and MyTag shows a count of 22.  If I click on MyTag, it displays one note.  If I clear filters to show all notes, scroll to a note with MyTag, use drop down on tag at bottom of note to select 'Filter by Tag' I get one note. If I clear filter go back to search bar <Tag:MyTag> I get 22 notes.  I've noticed this with many tags, but the missed count varies by tag.  Sometimes 4 of 5, 6 of 10 etc. This may be the last barrier for me to adopt the new client as default.  I love the idea of that drop down at bottom of note to filter from a specific note, if only it was accurate.  Also, this is consistent across multiple devices.  If I use old web client search bar works, selecting tag from tag list works, I don't believe it has the filter from tag in note capability, so I think this implies my database isn't corrupted.

[jefito 5,589]

Anyways, is is possible the the extra notes that you get when you search for "MyTag" have a prefix that starts with "MyTag"? e.g. "MyTagIsCool". If that's the case, the seach bar could be sticking a '*' after your tag name behind the scenes, and generating extra matches. I'm using the new web beta, and I don't see this behavior, but they could be doing some A/B testing of this feature, hard to tell. 

[Gear64 43]

45 minutes ago, jefito said:

Anyways, is is possible the the extra notes that you get when you search for "MyTag" have a prefix that starts with "MyTag"? e.g. "MyTagIsCool". If that's the case, the seach bar could be sticking a '*' after your tag name behind the scenes, and generating extra matches. I'm using the new web beta, and I don't see this behavior, but they could be doing some A/B testing of this feature, hard to tell. 

The notes in the search are not 'extra', that's the expected quantity.  The tag statistics in tag view reflects that's the correct quantity. Works perfectly with the old web client. Also it's not just one tag it's many exhibiting the behavior.

[Gear64 43]

LATEST EXAMPLE:

I have tag 20180719-1.  I click on Tags in left side bar.  I see all my tags including 20180719-1(2).  I click on it and get 2 notes filtered.  I now add a note with 20180719-1.  I go to Tags on left sidebar see list of tags 20180719-1(3).  I click on the tag and I get 2 notes filtered.  The newest one, and one of the older ones.  I go to search bar and type tag:20180719-1 and get three notes.  I noticed most of my tags have same filtering issue 4 of 112, 3 of 4, 43 of 48 etc.

From same session, switch to previous version of Evernote.  Click tag icon in left sidebar, see 20180791-1(3).  I click the tag and get 3 filtered notes.  It works perfectly in the old client for all tags I've tested.

 

[Gear64 43]

Another anomaly.  The problem with just using search, is when the list is somewhat long, there are no options at top of list like when viewing all notes, or filtered notes.  The order of search notes is random at first glance.  It's not by updated date, or created date, not sure how it's sorted yet; just that's it's terribly inconvenient.  The old client allows you to sort search results, but also reflects something more logical by default like last changed.

[Gear64 43]

And no reminders...  I guess I'm really not ready for the new version.  The look is so inviting, but it's just not practical yet.

[Gear64 43]

And finally....  This is somewhat disappointing as I don't think it's pushed as beta anymore, it seems to be default on supported browsers. When switching from old, states "new evernote", not beta.  These things would be acceptable at the free tier, since there is a fallback; but since I'm paying and it now seems to be default, I expect near perfection not something still significantly crippled.

[jefito 5,589]

19 minutes ago, Gear64 said:

And finally....  This is somewhat disappointing as I don't think it's pushed as beta anymore, it seems to be default on supported browsers. When switching from old, states "new evernote", not beta.  These things would be acceptable at the free tier, since there is a fallback; but since I'm paying and it now seems to be default, I expect near perfection not something still significantly crippled.

There are three extant versions of the web client, exposed in the account settings, where you can switch among them: The "classic version", the "current version", and the "New web beta". The classic version is the old version, with a "heavier" fixed size left panel, notebook/stack and tag hierarchies exposed. This one is still around, grandfathered to users who used it originally, but not to people who joined after the next iteration. This was superseded by a newer version, the "current version", which I guess is the released version. Cleaner look, slimmer left panel with pop-out tag and notebook lists. Then there's the current web beta.

[Gear64 43]

19 hours ago, jefito said:

There are three extant versions of the web client, exposed in the account settings, where you can switch among them: The "classic version", the "current version", and the "New web beta". The classic version is the old version, with a "heavier" fixed size left panel, notebook/stack and tag hierarchies exposed. This one is still around, grandfathered to users who used it originally, but not to people who joined after the next iteration. This was superseded by a newer version, the "current version", which I guess is the released version. Cleaner look, slimmer left panel with pop-out tag and notebook lists. Then there's the current web beta.

I'm a relatively new user so may not have three.  I have this one:

 Works great functionally, but less attractive, not ideal layout.

And this version:

More attractive, has better layout for my workflow, but crippled functionally.  At one time this was transparently marketed as beta, but I no longer see that designation when switching from the previous version, in the new interface directly, or from this link in the drop down for account info https://help.evernote.com/hc/en-us/articles/209006027?utm_campaign=help_whats_new&amp;utm_medium=account_menu&amp;utm_source=evernote-web, or the help link landing page https://help.evernote.com/hc/en-us.  I do not see where any version is still beta, from easy intuitive version checks.  If this is, it's unethically hidden from the average user, and it seems to be default on supported browsers now.

[gazumped 11,664]

10 minutes ago, Gear64 said:

If this is, it's unethically hidden from the average user

Don't think removing the label is 'unethical' - plus AFAIR it happened a while ago.  It appears you have the middle version of the web app,  which was a beta,  but as @jefito noted is now (and has been for a while) regarded as the 'current version' it is the default.  Like (presumably) ~jeff,  I also have access to the previous version and can switch back and forth between the two.

The latest web beta currently works in Chrome only (AFAIK) and is related to Evernote Business.  It includes a feature called 'Spaces'.  It's not clear what other updates / upgrades might be involved.  I was seeing an invitation to try that one out each time I logged into Evernote.com,  and in various email 'reminders'.  Thankfully,  that seems to have stopped...

Given that Evernote say they are intend to introduce their new Web product across all account levels,  I can't see that they'll want to do much work on the current version if it can be avoided.

[Gear64 43]

9 minutes ago, gazumped said:

Don't think removing the label is 'unethical' - plus AFAIR it happened a while ago.  It appears you have the middle version of the web app,  which was a beta,  but as @jefito noted is now (and has been for a while) regarded as the 'current version' it is the default.  Like (presumably) ~jeff,  I also have access to the previous version and can switch back and forth between the two.

The latest web beta currently works in Chrome only (AFAIK) and is related to Evernote Business.  It includes a feature called 'Spaces'.  It's not clear what other updates / upgrades might be involved.  I was seeing an invitation to try that one out each time I logged into Evernote.com,  and in various email 'reminders'.  Thankfully,  that seems to have stopped...

Given that Evernote say they are intend to introduce their new Web product across all account levels,  I can't see that they'll want to do much work on the current version if it can be avoided.

Part of the problem, unprofessionally in my opinion; is there don't appear to be absolute version numbers, so it's hard to follow your comments.  I don't know which of my screenshots you're referencing.  Whether unethical or not depends...   Is it beta or not?  If beta, and not marked as so, it is unethical.  The darker of my screenshots, is not marked as beta, but it sure behaves like a beta.  I believe it is not considered beta, and has become the default on Chrome.  I was just saying if....  On the other hand if it's formally released it's half baked, and shoddy QC.

[jefito 5,589]

45 minutes ago, Gear64 said:

I do not see where any version is still beta, from easy intuitive version checks.  If this is, it's unethically hidden from the average user, and it seems to be default on supported browsers now.

Unethically? Really? It's right there in the Settings. When I'm using the web beta:

When I go back to the "Current version":

Maybe checking the Settings isn't intuitive enough for you? *shrug*

 

[gazumped 11,664]

There was a post a while ago from a Web developer commenting on the difficulty of updating a project which had been written from the ground up in (what now seems) a very old and basic web design language.  My impression (and I could very well have been completely wrong) was that the then beta version of Evernote had been 'improved' from the original,  using the same basic coding - which by that time was 10+ years old.  The developer talked about the need to redesign and re-code everything from scratch using 'modern' tools,  in order to achieve the performance that users expected from their experiences with current versions of Android, Mac, iOS and Windows.

Rewriting something completely is not usually a good idea - you face the same immense learning curve that the original developers already had to overcome,  trying to find ways around all the practical problems you encounter;  and you'll be inventing brand new bugs for the testers (and users) to not enjoy.  It takes longer than you might expect - that Evernote blog was written in 2016 and looked forward to a new product 'next year'...

While the company is spending (a lot of) money on the rewrite,  they'll naturally be unwilling to 'waste' funds doing much to the existing product.  Out of pure commercialism,  they'll dress the thing up until it looks passable,  fix any obvious bugs,  but mainly put everything on hold until the shiny new app arrives.

There's no formal definition (AFAIK) by which you could judge whether or not an app should be called a beta.  If Evernote regard the current web UI as being an end-of-line version,  then it's just the 'general release'.  Like all software it can (and should!!) be improved upon,  but that will be a 2.0 or 3.0 edition,  not 'just' an upgrade.

Please note I have no intent to 'defend' Evernote here - I'm just laying out the practical considerations and the commercial pressures that -probably- put us where we are.

Evernote works for some - I rarely use the web app other than to test out issues reported here.  Evernote Desktop and Android don't always work for me in ways that I'd like,  but beyond reporting issues and suggesting the odd feature I'd rather find other software or ways to work around the issue so I can get the job done.  I don't have a boss as such,  but I find my partners and customers can shout at me quite a lot if things don't happen as they'd like,  and 'my software ate your project' doesn't usually fly very well...

If the (whatever) web version doesn't work for you I'd suggest trying out the installed desktop version (but NOT the current beta 6.14.2!) or maybe looking at other web-based solutions.

.. and since ~jeff replied while I was pontificating here,  I'll withdraw the 'beta' comment! 

[Lynngineer 1]

I realize there was some editing of the Beta and "Release" section, so I may be missing the mark, but I need to say that software releases are defined. (Bold is mine)

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Software_release_life_cycle#Beta

"Beta, named after  the second letter of the Greek alphabet, is the software development phase following alpha. Software in the beta stage is also known as betaware. Beta phase generally begins when the software is feature complete but likely to contain a number of known or unknown bugs."
"The alpha phase of the release life cycle is the first phase to begin software testing (alpha is the first letter of the Greek alphabet, used as the number 1). In this phase, developers generally test the software using white-box techniques. Additional validation is then performed using black-box or gray-box techniques, by another testing team. Moving to black-box testing inside the organization is known as alpha release. Alpha software can be unstable and could cause crashes or data loss.... Alpha software may not contain all of the features that are planned for the final version."

Evernote would probably be better positioned to call this web release Alpha; as, per their announcement it is not feature-complete, but I totally understand them using Beta since more people probably recognize it as "it's not finished, but here, try it out.".  There's nothing wrong with that.

However, "Beta" is not a synonym for "1.0" or "Release". Even if you skip "Release Candidate" (many products do go from Beta to Release), eventually there still should be a "Release" (effectively 1.0).  And this "Release", or at least the state of feature-complete, should be clearly communicated. With the "Beta" they've clearly said not all features are supported so that's a great start, but where do they even plan to go? What features are they planning on adding? Do they internally have a definition of "feature-complete" for a web version? Is there any way for me (customer) to know if they ever intend to support feature(s) that I rely on?

It is my impression (and to be honest I haven't read every bulletin ever) that Evernote has not made these distinctions clear in the past, and they aren't doing so right now either. The "middle" UI view being a prime example. It went from "Beta" to just no longer having any "Beta" labeling, yet still having a different feature-set, etc, from previous. And now there is a new "Beta"; which is likely their improved codebase, so good, but we're just flying past the last "Beta" existing and it never had any wrap-up. Now we're on a new Beta and have no visibility of where it's going.

As @Gear64 said, there being no version numbers and not enough information around "Beta" or Releases just adds to the confusion. And this confusion adds to customer frustration. I would like to use the web client, but I would like to avoid it until it is deemed feature-complete, or at least has the features that I rely on daily. But, I have no way of knowing anything about where/what/when this Beta is headed. Do they plan to take this Beta to feature-complete?  What is "feature-complete" for their web development? Will they announce it when/if they think they arrive there? If I miss an announcement would there be any way, in the UI, for me to discern if I am using Beta or Released?

I do understand the challenges of resource contention when supporting old codebases and production systems while trying to rewrite with current tools and frameworks. I painfully understand it as it's my job (Software Engineer & Team Lead supporting numerous products including legacy applications and web services). However, the way to get through that hurdle is through very clear versioning and communication; giving customers FULL (two-way) choice of which version to use (at least until feature-complete), and communicating enough information around these versions for customers to decide when to try the next version. To be clear, I am not saying they should support the older versions forever; that's not possible or advised. But they should support a version until its replacement has at least feature parity or has been clearly communicated what features are not intended to be supported. As the customer I can decide if that feature and their intent to discontinue it is a deal breaker for me. Otherwise my experience is just frustrating retries.

As the customer, I want to choose the Classic UI or maybe the middle UI or the Beta UI, with the ability to switch back and forth easily. I want clear information about each version to be able to make an informed decision. Ideally what features are intended in future releases from this Beta. I wouldn't be frustrated if I could clearly pick which UI, could clearly identify which UI and version it was, and could clearly lookup what features it currently supported and/or intended to support. And, if that page were kept up to date; i.e. as features are added to Beta they move from planned to delivered, then I could easily pick when to try the Beta. I could easily help find bugs (and be less irritated that Evernote uses customers for QA) and report them and I could easily pop back to a version that works for me if I wanted to or if the feature I tried in Beta was broken.

This iterative approach to development that they take works well when communication is on point. But without version numbers and with spotty communication and with no insight into versions/features/roadmap it's just frustrating for customers.  

[Gear64 43]

Final thoughts on my part...   I was initially reluctant to install the desktop client on every thick client I use, but the tool is rich enough it's been worth it.  As far as I'm concerned the web client is 'break glass in case of emergency', but considering I typically have phone or tablet at hand, it's rare I'll feel the urgency to use the web client going forward.