(Archived) Why Evernote 3 will fail

[NeverendingStory 0]

Catchy headline, huh?

1. Storage

Maybe it's a beta thing, I just hit the roof when having about 500 notes.

18:27 32% EDAMUserException: errorCode=QUOTA_REACHED parameter="User.totalDataAllowed"
18:27 32% Session terminated abnormally, elapsed time: 12m 21s
18:42 0% Connecting to preview.evernote.com
18:42 0% Client updateCount=4014, server updateCount=4039
18:42 0% Retrieving list of changes from the server
18:42 0% Synchronizing 25 resources
18:42 0% Updating server items

The beta probably has a limited storage capacity, but then again. I don't think Evernote will supply the amount of storage that the users need at a reasonable price. So, why not have another option for notebooks while creating them: "client only" or call it "P2P". That would imply that nothing is stored on the server (which will make the web-interface fail for that datasource). For the user to have that data syncronized he must have at least two clients up and running. Those clients will sync all "P2P" notebooks and the user will only be limited to the storage capacity of the hard drives.

2. PDF / Multipage TIFF

It's been written before, PDF-support is crucial. Also, multipage TIFF-support is a good thing.

3. Printing

I tried to print previre a bunch of notes. Evernote responded with allocating all my memory and stopped responding.

Apart from that, when print previewing just a few notes a scanned page is not fitted on a printed page - ie. one scanned A4-page will become 1.2 pages of print previewed pages.

4. API

Today, there's no way of exporting the images or any other data stored in the notebooks. What if I want to export all to the file-system? Maybe I want to do a script that imports a bunch of custom files into a notebook.

That's all for now...

[engberg 89]

Skipping past the unpleasant title:

1. During the beta test, there is a 100MB limit on each account. This is to make sure that the testing goes smoothly, and we will have higher limits available before the beta is over. (We can also increase the limit on a case-by-case basis now, but we wanted to avoid people accidentally dumping their hard drives on us.) As mentioned, previously, free users will be able to upload "a lot of notes" and Premium accounts will be able to upload "a crazy amount of notes" for a few dollars per month, but we're still finalizing the details.

2. We are definitely planning to introduce PDF support before the end of the beta. Cross-platform TIFF support is a little more spotty, but we haven't ruled that out.

3. Thanks for the bug report about memory errors when printing. Could you provide any more information about the way you were trying to print? I.e. did you have a single note selected, multiple notes, etc. What type of printer?

4. You can currently export to HTML (or web archive) from the Windows client, but we plan to introduce a simple, cross-platform XML format for export and import of notes. This would be appropriate for exporting a notebook. General scripting is a little more of a long-term plan, although we plan to publish a service API by the end of the beta which could be used by third-party applications to store and retrieve notes. (This would be similar to APIs from Google, Facebook, etc.)

[Arbitrary 0]

So, why not have another option for notebooks while creating them: "client only" or call it "P2P". That would imply that nothing is stored on the server (which will make the web-interface fail for that datasource). For the user to have that data syncronized he must have at least two clients up and running. Those clients will sync all "P2P" notebooks and the user will only be limited to the storage capacity of the hard drives.

I really like this idea. I have reverted to 2.2 because I don't want my data on these servers. With p2p I could leave one of my systems up and sync between them as necessary. I would again use 3.0. That is if they had already fixed the annoying freezing every time I start a new note.

[crane 40]

So, why not have another option for notebooks while creating them: "client only" or call it "P2P". That would imply that nothing is stored on the server (which will make the web-interface fail for that datasource). For the user to have that data syncronized he must have at least two clients up and running. Those clients will sync all "P2P" notebooks and the user will only be limited to the storage capacity of the hard drives.

I really like this idea. I have reverted to 2.2 because I don't want my data on these servers. With p2p I could leave one of my systems up and sync between them as necessary. I would again use 3.0. That is if they had already fixed the annoying freezing every time I start a new note.

I'm not sure that this suggestion is even feasible. I was under the impression that the data lives in the cloud, making it easy to sync from the cloud to multiple machines. If you have nothing in the cloud, you have nothing to sync. Based on my reading of the forum, the way sync works in 3 (up to the cloud and back down) is completely different from how it worked in 2.2 (peer to peer).

[NeverendingStory 0]

Cloud or not, admit that it's a nice feature - it's exactly the way Groove works, ie Microsoft Groove, formely Groove Networks. Not that this matters here...

So, let's say it's the cloud or nothing - how much would 750 gigabytes worth of storage cost me? That's probably where I'll start off and of course the need for more storage will be there. I just don't think Evernote can deliver on it's promise "being a tool for lazy slobs" if the storage capacity is limited or too expensive. Also, I've read about the future PDF support - that will make this even more true!

Other than that, I love this product! Still, I'll probably have to revert to something else that don't use a cloud.

By the way, what's the storage limit today? I use the excellent DropBox internet hard drive (http://www.getdropbox.com) which have 5 gigs of free storage - I guess they'll end up like Evernote, too little storage or too expensive...

[HMarv 0]

I'm not sure that this suggestion is even feasible. I was under the impression that the data lives in the cloud, making it easy to sync from the cloud to multiple machines. If you have nothing in the cloud, you have nothing to sync. Based on my reading of the forum, the way sync works in 3 (up to the cloud and back down) is completely different from how it worked in 2.2 (peer to peer).

If that's the case, then there really needs to be an option or "switch" to select Evernote 3 sync method or Evernote 2.2 sync method (peer to peer). I'm sure there must be a number of users (probably a large number) who won't upgrade because they don't want their data on the server (up in the "cloud"). I certainly don't, and if this is the only sync method then 2.2 will be the end of the line for me.

[peterblair 0]

I don't agree that EN3 will fail - quite the opposite.

I've used it since - well it seems like forever. Every time I've heard from this forum that a particular feature won't work or will be over charged, it seems that the developers come up with a solution. I was concerned about large DB size and yet, as promised, it didn't crash my system, and the search didn't seem to slow down any.

My understanding is that there is an option to create notebooks which synch (as default) and those that don't. So those users who don't like "the cloud" don't need to use it. Personally I'm delighted - firstly that there is a Mac version, and secondly that I can synch between my windows version and my Mac at home. So far I've only have Beta issues (i.e. crashes!) with the windows version. The facility to have notes everywhere I work is great - no more messing about with flash drives and swapping backups.

One last thing - we're all using Beta software (and the IMAP bit is Alpha!) - so we all know we're testing the software and should, perhaps, expect it to fail, have problems and generally be a bit tricky.

(and - no, I don't work for EN! Do love the software, though)

[ruudhein 29]

I remember starting to work with EN and OneNote'rs going "oh but Microsoft this and that". EN was and is solid.

EN3 has a killer setup. The weather is getting nicer again here and the ability to go back and forth between my laptop and desktop with my notes synced automatically .... killer feature.

Sure, I'm also in that minority group of people who were using some other features. Would love to have them. But EN is clearly not too concerned with the 10% that gets hardly used

[NeverendingStory 0]

My understanding is that there is an option to create notebooks which synch (as default) and those that don't. So those users who don't like "the cloud" don't need to use it. Personally I'm delighted - firstly that there is a Mac version, and secondly that I can synch between my windows version and my Mac at home.

Don't get me wrong - the sync feature is very good. It's just that the current limitation of 100 Mb is way too little space. http://www.adrive.com offers 50 gig of free storage space, that's just a disk drive of course.

[NeverendingStory 0]

EN3 has a killer setup. The weather is getting nicer again here and the ability to go back and forth between my laptop and desktop with my notes synced automatically .... killer feature.

Sure, syncronization is a great feature. Lotus Notes have had replication as they prefer to call it since 1989.

[JustDave 0]

Far from failing, EN3 will be huge success...dollars wise at least. Imagine what EN3 looks like to the average account executive, lawyer or engineer. I mean, the things we take for granted...they ain't got a clue. For the potential customer ignorant of the fact that there's a more capable, older sibling locked in the back bedroom closet, take a look at what EN3 (even in beta) has to offer.

Look first at the application capabilities...

The ability to capture and store web content.

The ability to capture content from PCs, cell phones, cell phone cameras, tablets, etc.

Text recognition of handwritten notes. Huge!

Text recognition of image content. Huger!

The ability (not nearly as good as the older sibling, but still there) to categorize, index, and search all previously captured content, including handwritten text and images. Hugest!

Then look at the platform options...

A version for the Mac

A version for Windows XP

A version for Windows Vista

A no-client web version with access and direct sync capabilities to/from all the desktop versions. The web version also features access via email gateway, IMAP, and a variety of cell phones.

That's Huge.

A version for the iPhone

A version for Windows Mobile, which means versions for Blackberry, HTC, Hitachi, HP, Motorola, Palm, Samsung, Sharp, Siemens, TI, T-Mobile, etc. cell phones. Huge!

A version for Java ME phones is "coming soon."

Web clippers for Firefox2, Safari3 and IE7, with more "coming soon."

I've missed or left out a ton of stuff, and we're still only in beta. Huge.

No, the more-attractive-but-not-quite-as-competent youngster isn't quite as up to snuff as the older, forgotten sibling, but business and professional communities are going to go bonkers over EN3 once the word gets out. And I'm not even a fan of EN3...yet.

Did I say huge?

[DJLunacy 0]

I could care less about multipage TIFF.

PDF would be a nice addition.

What I am really waiting for is the ink support that on the MAC client so i can get my drawings from my tablet on my mac.

For those of us who see the need to have a ton of extra storage for a price .Mac syntonization would be nice.

[NeverendingStory 0]

Oh yeah, you mentioned huge once or twice. Remember, that when you hit the storage limit.

Did I say huge?

[NeverendingStory 0]

Maybe TIFF is kinda old but personally I have large amounts of scanned books and other sources that would be great to have in EN. I second that PDF is better and converting TIFF to PDF is not too hard.

I could care less about multipage TIFF.

[DJLunacy 0]

Maybe TIFF is kinda old but personally I have large amounts of scanned books and other sources that would be great to have in EN. I second that PDF is better and converting TIFF to PDF is not too hard.

I could care less about multipage TIFF.

Multipage PDF would be nice, but AFAIK isn't TIFF let alone Multipage TIFF generally massive and inefficient in comparison to PDF especially for document purposes.

[engberg 89]

PDF support is coming in the next couple of months.

As mentioned previously, the current 100MB total storage limit is part of the beta testing process to ensure a quality experience for all testers. This does not reflect the final limits, which will change (favorably) for Free accounts and change (vastly favorably) for Premium accounts. Final limits & pricing are still being finalized, but they'll be announced in the next two months.

[NeverendingStory 0]

Well, if you guys deliver on your promise - I'll be one of the happy customers out there!

PDF support is coming in the next couple of months.

As mentioned previously, the current 100MB total storage limit is part of the beta testing process to ensure a quality experience for all testers. This does not reflect the final limits, which will change (favorably) for Free accounts and change (vastly favorably) for Premium accounts. Final limits & pricing are still being finalized, but they'll be announced in the next two months.

[crane 40]

PDF support is coming in the next couple of months.

As mentioned previously, the current 100MB total storage limit is part of the beta testing process to ensure a quality experience for all testers. This does not reflect the final limits, which will change (favorably) for Free accounts and change (vastly favorably) for Premium accounts. Final limits & pricing are still being finalized, but they'll be announced in the next two months.

I have the urge to set up some kind of pool where we guess what the limit and price/month will be. Kind of like this:

I have a very funny feeling that when Phil says a "few dollars a month" (as in the recent podcast), his idea of "few" and my idea of "few" are not the same.

On the other hand, it seems that the US dollar is being clobbered by most of the rest of the world, so we non-US residents can get a break

Note to EN folks: Since you seem to be having such trouble deciding on the actual numbers feel free to print this image and throw a dart at it

[salgud 12]

Note to EN folks: Since you seem to be having such trouble deciding on the actual numbers feel free to print this image and throw a dart at it

ROFLMAO! Crane, you just jumped ahead of me in the laffs department!

[ruudhein 29]

Even though storage will be in the premium picture, I suspect it isn't a price issue at all. Mozy and Carbonite deliver online, unlimited backup for about 50/year. Unlimited...

What they must be looking at right now is how many times people sync how much information. What's the bandwidth they're looking at? How's the access to the server's AIR vs. local AIR?

No, I would be really surprised, and puzzled, if storage itself is what will define the premium level(s).

[salgud 12]

Not sure about this. I ran across a site yesterday (was it from a post in this forum?) where I can get 50Gb of storage for free! That's a hard price to beat. So why pay EN? What are they offering to make it worth paying for, and worth the risk?

I'm very leary of online storage. After the Kodak fiasco a couple of years ago, I wouldn't store anything online that I didn't have backed up locally. And with storage so cheap, (less than 50 cents a Gb) why would you put it online unless you needed it from anywhere? Even then, you can get software to give you access to your local data from anywhere. Who would trust any corporation to keep your data stored if their financial situation changed and it was no longer economically feasible to keep paying for those servers? Not Kodak. Not any corporation I know of today. When the time comes, and they realize they're losing money storing your data, they'll also figure out pretty quickly that it's a lot cheaper to just pull the plug than to notify all their customers and give them time to download their data. What then? I'm glad I don't have anything terribly precious or valuable that requires a great deal of storage space. For those of you who do, who do you trust that much?

[engberg 89]

You've pointed out a great difference between Evernote and a lot of online-only services like these. With Evernote, you have a full local copy of all of your data on your computer, and multiple ways to export and extract that data. This means you aren't locked in to our service ... you always have options.

Thanks

[NeverendingStory 0]

Possibly, the cheapest option is to create local EN databases and use byte-based syncronization software that sync to those 50 gig free server...

[stecks77 0]

I just hit the wall, maxed out on 125 notes. Very disappointing. I've scanned a good number of documents into the program, but nothing was over 100 dpi. I understand this is beta but I've only been using the software for two weeks! If I have to wait 2 months to expand storage I don't want to waste my time adding stuff. I can't tell you how much I love the software and I've already incorporated it into my daily life. I feel like this has been a tease.

[ruudhein 29]

Wow, that sucks. On the other hand -- you knew there was a 100MB limit, right?

My main Db contains mainly text, 1000+ notes with a few images and is around 16MB so...

[stecks77 0]

I had no idea there was a limit. I just started using the program when 3.0 came out recently. I was either blind or didn't read the fine print.

If I was just using text its easy to see how you would remain way below the limit, but I would like to use EN as a way to go paperless. I don't have a ton of hard documents to input, only things that may be good to hang on to, nothing frivolous. Maybe I can drop the dpi lower but I thought resolution would be poor or if I needed a hard copy it might not be clear. I've also clipped a lot of info off the web, basic pages that do include pictures, but nothing obnoxious. What's the point of clipping just text when the web experience is so much richer and informative with all the content, especially when relevant to the text?

I'm still going to work with EN but I'll have to wait and see what the finals plans are and maybe adjust my expectations.

[engberg 89]

The current (beta test) storage limit is a temporary placeholder to just prevent any Bad Things from happening while we work through functional and performance testing. I'm pretty confident that your desired usage should be supported by our Premium service when it launches (for "a few dollars a month" with a non-silly interpretation of "few").

[ Helped stecks77 in the interim via PM, and suggested checking scanner settings to reduce image size, etc. for future. ]

[CypherGary 0]

Stecks77

Go to EN, and create another notebook. Make it local.

You can then use it all you want.

-Gary

[stecks77 0]

Thanks Gary.

[CypherGary 0]

Thanks Gary.

Note that what you put into a local notebook is only on your hard drive.

It does not get synced.

Once the beta is over, you can just move the notes from the local, to the Private notebook, and you should be all set.

-Gary