(Archived) Confidential notes and encryption

[CadErik 0]

I'm been using evernote for several years and it's the application I cannot live without. I have a tablet and plenty of ink notes.

One of my concern is that in my evernote database I have many confidential notes and my employer would never allow me to synchronize that data to the internet.

So I see few possible solutions:

• 
  - have "non synchronized" categories
  - upload encrypted notes to the evernote server
  

Other than that, this new version is SO COOL! I was tester on the previous web version but this one really takes it a level higher. I can't wait to have a java client for my mobile phone, I already have a data plan and I can imagine so many uses of it... the emails unfortunately don't go through my data plan.

Erik.

[Philip Constantinou 11]

So I see few possible solutions:

• 
  - have "non synchronized" categories
  - upload encrypted notes to the evernote server
  

You'll be able to do both of these, kind of. Instead of categories, you'll be able to have local-only, "non synchronized" notebooks. You'll also be able to encrypt all or part of any note in either synchronized or local notebooks. I'm not sure if either of these features are in the current build, but if they're not they're coming soon.

[CadErik 0]

You'll be able to do both of these, kind of. Instead of categories, you'll be able to have local-only, "non synchronized" notebooks.

Oh this is so cool! I haven't found yet how to create local notebooks. Unless I haven't found it, can you let us know when this will be in a build?

Erik.

[iafanasyev 1]

Oh this is so cool! I haven't found yet how to create local notebooks. Unless I haven't found it, can you let us know when this will be in a build?

On the Windows client, local notebooks will be developed shortly (approximately in 2-3 weeks). On the Mac client, they are already implemented, so you will be able to use them as soon as the Mac version is released (same 2-3 weeks). Of course, I can't guarantee the ETA, but this is my current understanding of the situation.

[CadErik 0]

On the Windows client, local notebooks will be developed shortly (approximately in 2-3 weeks). On the Mac client, they are already implemented, so you will be able to use them as soon as the Mac version is released (same 2-3 weeks). Of course, I can't guarantee the ETA, but this is my current understanding of the situation.

That sounds very good. As soon as this is available, I'll transfer all my evernote 2 notes there.

Will the local notebooks still have the file synchronization capability from Evernote 2?

Erik.

[iafanasyev 1]

Will the local notebooks still have the file synchronization capability from Evernote 2?

Uhm, no. They are truly local (i.e. reside in single database file). Evernote 3 as a service has only centralized Internet sync.

However, you can now use Evernote 3 in portable mode (previously, there was a separate product called 'Evernote Portable'). Now you can use 'Tools > Install Evernote Portable' to copy files to the portable drive. Having your Evernote on your USB stick gives you some degree of mobility while using these local notebooks (i.e. they are local to that USB stick).

[No-Nonsense 0]

Will the local notebooks still have the file synchronization capability from Evernote 2?

Uhm, no. They are truly local (i.e. reside in single database file). Evernote 3 as a service has only centralized Internet sync.

However, you can now use Evernote 3 in portable mode (previously, there was a separate product called 'Evernote Portable'). [...] Having your Evernote on your USB stick gives you some degree of mobility while using these local notebooks (i.e. they are local to that USB stick).

Will EN3 synchronize with this portable install on a USB stick? I am using EN2 and EN2P like this to carry my notes arround and have it synchronized in both directions with my local EN2 installation.

-Jens

[iafanasyev 1]

Will EN3 synchronize with this portable install on a USB stick? I am using EN2 and EN2P like this to carry my notes arround and have it synchronized in both directions with my local EN2 installation.

Desktop and portable installations may sync over the service only. And this does not include local notebooks. Thus, to have your local notes everywhere with you, use just one Evernote client on a USB stick.

[No-Nonsense 0]

Desktop and portable installations may sync over the service only. And this does not include local notebooks. Thus, to have your local notes everywhere with you, use just one Evernote client on a USB stick.

Will this EverNote client on USB stick be full featured (i.e. AIR etc.) in comparison to the EN2 Portable version that does not have all features of the non-portable client?

Why has the local synchronization been removed? It seems to me that some good features are ripped off for no apparent reason.

-Jens

[iafanasyev 1]

Will this EverNote client on USB stick be full featured (i.e. AIR etc.) in comparison to the EN2 Portable version that does not have all features of the non-portable client?

Yes. Evernote Portable is totally the same as desktop Evernote.

[crane 40]

Why has the local synchronization been removed? It seems to me that some good features are ripped off for no apparent reason.

-Jens

I think this has already been discussed in some other thread. What I got out of it was basically that EN3 is moving towards a new paradigm, where you keep your data backed up in the "cloud". The concept of local notebooks is something that us power users have been demanding "back", so to speak, since some of us have a metric tonne of data and/or don't want to keep confidential stuff in the cloud.

I think the choices are:

1. You want synchronization over various machines - go with the new EN3 and use the cloud for both synchronization and backup

2. You want complete ownership of your data - use a (not yet delivered) local notebook and make sure you back things up yourself. Synchronize on your own time as well. One way of doing this is to make use of the portable version of EN. For me, I've always just copied my database when required. I don't know if this will work with EN3 - haven't tried it. Other people have had success with things like FolderShare.

Your mileage may vary, of course

[dstavisky 0]

The concept of local notebooks is something that us power users have been demanding "back", so to speak, since some of us have a metric tonne of data and/or don't want to keep confidential stuff in the cloud.

We heard you and will rush support for local notebooks out.

If

you want complete ownership of your data - use a (not yet delivered) local notebook and make sure you back things up yourself. Synchronize on your own time as well. One way of doing this is to make use of the portable version of EN. For me, I've always just copied my database when required. I don't know if this will work with EN3 - haven't tried it.

Yes, you can copy your .exb database files in My Documents directory, for example c:\Documents and Settings\dmitry\My Documents\My EverNote Files\DataBases3

[crane 40]

We heard you and will rush support for local notebooks out.

Yes, you can copy your .exb database files in My Documents directory, for example c:\Documents and Settings\dmitry\My Documents\My EverNote Files\DataBases3

Thanks for clarifying that.

[vogelap 27]

Uhm, no. They are truly local (i.e. reside in single database file). Evernote 3 as a service has only centralized Internet sync.

It would be best if EN3's local notebooks were kept in separate files from the synchronized notebooks. That way, there is no mingling of data (and no worries about breaking privacy restrictions for those of us that work with sensitive data) -- a real, clear, demonstratable separation of synchronized and non-synchronized data. That would re-capture the multiple database paradigm we loved from 2.2 and enable backing up to the cloud of only the data we want in 3.0.

Can you verify that this is how local notebooks will work in EN3?

[crane 40]

That's a great point vogelap. In fact, I would almost expect that each notebook should have its own file - that's how OneNote does it. That way, we can have *different* local notebooks on different computers, and yet have other *shared* ones synchronized using the cloud. Very cool. Can't wait to see it all come together

[iafanasyev 1]

In fact, I would almost expect that each notebook should have its own file - that's how OneNote does it. That way, we can have *different* local notebooks on different computers, and yet have other *shared* ones synchronized using the cloud.

Yes, Evernote will have, literally, *different* local notebooks on different computers, and yet have other *shared* ones synchronized using the cloud.

However, we are not planning to separate local notebooks from others in different files, because we don't want to loose the ability to work with these notebooks together (i.e. move notes between notebooks, search in all your notebooks simultaneously, etc.). Notebooks are just folders (or special "mutually exclusive categories", if you want).

If you want to truly separate some data, you'll have to create another account and switch between them. For example, you could keep all your local notebooks in a separate account, and synchronizable ones in the other account.

Several formulas for eggheads:

• [*:941ce]EN3 > EN2
  [*:941ce]EN3 Accounts == EN2 Databases
  [*:941ce]EN3 Notebooks =/= EN2 Databases

[vogelap 27]

However, we are not planning to separate local notebooks from others in different files, because we don't want to loose the ability to work with these notebooks together (i.e. move notes between notebooks, search in all your notebooks simultaneously, etc.). Notebooks are just folders (or special "mutually exclusive categories", if you want).

I don't think I like the sound of that, if I am understanding it correctly.

I NEED to have a local-only, work-related (and therefore, subject to privacy laws) notebook that is separate and distinct from EVERY OTHER notebook including other local-only notebooks and notebooks synched to the cloud. Is this what I will have?

Example of how I need it:

* <accountname>.exb == notebook synched with the cloud (contains multiple 'notebooks')

* work.exb == local-only notebook

* play.exb == another local-only notebook

* etc...

My Zionist masters demand proof/evidence/assurance that my work.exb notebook is in no way, shape, or form being shared. It must be private due to the nature of the information contained therein, and must be demonstratably private.

It will not be acceptable for that data to be intermingled in any way with any other data, or for the work data to be in the same file with data being stored on the cloud. This is more important to me (since if this condition is not met, I won't be able to use EverNote3 at work!) than being able to...

work with these notebooks together (i.e. move notes between notebooks, search in all your notebooks simultaneously, etc.).

Please reassure me!

[iafanasyev 1]

I NEED to have a local-only, work-related (and therefore, subject to privacy laws) notebook that is separate and distinct from EVERY OTHER notebook including other local-only notebooks and notebooks synched to the cloud. Is this what I will have?

Example of how I need it:

* <accountname>.exb == notebook synched with the cloud (contains multiple 'notebooks')

* work.exb == local-only notebook

* play.exb == another local-only notebook

* etc...

Don't mix accounts with notebooks, and everything will be fine (see the formulas I provided above). You can have two accounts, separated as follows:

* <accountname1>.exb == account synched with the cloud (contains one or multiple 'normal' -- syncable -- notebooks)

* <accountname2>.exb == account for your private data (contains one or multiple local notebooks)

[CobraA1 0]

In other words, notebooks are a klunky attempt to bring back some semblance of hierarchy within the tag system.

. . . just make the tags hierarchal.

[iafanasyev 1]

In other words, notebooks are a klunky attempt to bring back some semblance of hierarchy within the tag system.

. . . just make the tags hierarchal.

Notebooks are not hierarchical. Tags already are.

[CobraA1 0]

okay . . . . what are notebooks for again?

[iafanasyev 1]

okay . . . . what are notebooks for again?

To exclusively group notes by several general top-level topics, to publish some notes and make others local (non-synchronizable).

[CobraA1 0]

Okay, so they allow stuff like publishing some notes and making non-synchronizable copies - sounds like a good opportunity to offer optional saving a notebook as a separate file. Note I said "optional" - you can just hide that functionality from most users.

[iafanasyev 1]

Okay, so they allow stuff like publishing some notes and making non-synchronizable copies - sounds like a good opportunity to offer optional saving a notebook as a separate file. Note I said "optional" - you can just hide that functionality from most users.

Okay, so what's the reason of this optional saving?

[vogelap 27]

To my mind, being able to save a non-published notebook in a separate file allows me to continue using EverNote at work. My Zionist masters do not want our private data going into the cloud *at all*.

[iafanasyev 1]

To my mind, being able to save a non-published notebook in a separate file allows me to continue using EverNote at work. My Zionist masters do not want our private data going into the cloud *at all*.

Create a separate account for your highly confidential notebooks, put your local notebook(s) in there. No single byte from your local notebooks will go to the cloud.

[vogelap 27]

Create a separate account for your highly confidential notebooks, put your local notebook(s) in there. No single byte from your local notebooks will go to the cloud.

Am I understanding that you mean a separate login when you say "separate account"? If so, how would I accomplish that at this point?

[CadErik 0]

To my mind, being able to save a non-published notebook in a separate file allows me to continue using EverNote at work. My Zionist masters do not want our private data going into the cloud *at all*.

To what I understand, when there will be local notebooks, you'll be able to have as many notebooks in one file but only the ones you select will be synched into the cloud. I personnaly don't care if all the notebooks are in one or many files.

Unless they bring one day "corporate" evernote servers, I'll miss the ability to sync the local notebooks between all my computers. With EV2, no need to worry about backup but with EV3 and a local notebook on a laptop this is a different story :-( The folder synchronization was a great feature of EV2.

Erik.

[CobraA1 0]

However, we are not planning to separate local notebooks from others in different files, because we don't want to loose the ability to work with these notebooks together (i.e. move notes between notebooks, search in all your notebooks simultaneously, etc.).

In other words, it's a code complexity tradeoff.

Perhaps make it easier to switch accounts?

[iafanasyev 1]

In other words, it's a code complexity tradeoff.

No -- pure usability: having several notebooks in one UI means faster drag-n-drop oprations, simpler searching across all notebooks, etc.

Perhaps make it easier to switch accounts?

It's already easy as 1-2-3 (essentially the same as switching between files which reside in your MRU list -- as it was in EN2).

[CobraA1 0]

I guess I'm thinking along the lines of Thunderbird: You can have both IMAP and local mailboxes, and they all look the same and use the same UI. I can drag and drop from an IMAP mailbox to a local mailbox and vice versa easily. From a user standpoint there is no difference between the two, and they work together seamlessly.

[vogelap 27]

I strongly feel that there should be TWO types of files in EN3...

1. Those files that are synched to the cloud. Ideally, EverNote3 would support multiple files of this type.

2. Those files that are not synched to the cloud. Ideally, EverNote3 would support multiple files of this type. I really am pulling for local-only files because there are ENbases I've developed under 2.2 that I distribute to people to use on their own local versions of EverNote. I do not want to complicate matters -- such as making the users register for an account -- related to using these stand-alone databases.

[No-Nonsense 0]

Don't mix accounts with notebooks, and everything will be fine (see the formulas I provided above). You can have two accounts, separated as follows:

* <accountname1>.exb == account synched with the cloud (contains one or multiple 'normal' -- syncable -- notebooks)

* <accountname2>.exb == account for your private data (contains one or multiple local notebooks)

Will it be possible to have offline/local only accounts (i.e. that do not have an associated online account with Evernote Corporation)? In other words: can I create a EN3 account offline for example on a machine that does not even have internet access to use it with local only notebooks without having to create an online account and doing some sort of one time online activation.

Could you imagine to add a feature to create an offline/local account that is strictly local (i.e. that has synchronization etc. disabled for its notebooks, maybe with password restriction to enable it when one changes his mind). This would allow to create an EN3 database that is strictly offline (can be demonstrated) and where the employer could enforce this by owing the password.

-Jens

[No-Nonsense 0]

Okay, so they allow stuff like publishing some notes and making non-synchronizable copies - sounds like a good opportunity to offer optional saving a notebook as a separate file. Note I said "optional" - you can just hide that functionality from most users.

Okay, so what's the reason of this optional saving?

If the location could be freely chosen: store it on an encrypted partition/harddisk/network share that my employer wants me to store company cofidential data.

-Jens

[No-Nonsense 0]

In other words, it's a code complexity tradeoff.

No -- pure usability: having several notebooks in one UI means faster drag-n-drop oprations, simpler searching across all notebooks, etc.

To me notebooks are like EN2 databases. The difference is that you can have more than one database (notebook) open at a time with EN3 and that all these open databases are in fact stored in one huge database. Accounts allow to simulate the many different databases scheme from EN2. But will there be subscriptions (I assume EN3 accounts will be on subscription basis) that allow unlimited accounts?

What I do not understand: Why can't severeal physical databases (speaking in EN2 means) be open at a time as notebooks (speaking in EN3 means)? You say that this is no code complexity tradeoff, but pure usability. You could hide the fact that a notebook is a separate database to the end user (and show it to the professional user using some extended configuration means). This would allow us to have one notebook for company confidential/private stuff that is local only on a separate encrypted partition/harddisk/network share and all would be happy. I think that it has to do with code compexity as you want to do some sort of SQL query like things on all notebooks together and this is easy when they all reside in one database instead of multiple databases. You would need tables that are distributed around multiple databases depending on a column value (e.g. the notebook ID the note resides in).

-Jens

[iafanasyev 1]

You say that this is no code complexity tradeoff, but pure usability.

I think I wasn't clear. Having multiple notebooks is driven primarily by usability; but of course there are code complexity tradeoffs -- we can't search for notes easily simultaneously in different databases. That's why we introduced notebooks as means to keep your notes segregated, but in one database, so you still able to see them at once in a single click, search through all of them if needed, etc. If you want to have them separately, you can use different accounts, which will have their own local storage files.

[jshafter 4]

At present the failure to enter a password on the local client prevents synchronization but allows full access to the existing database. Given the sensitive nature of the data many of us entrust to Evernote, is this just a beta-level glitch? I believe under version 2.x a password encrypted database file could not be accessed without proper authentication. This is a critical must-have program feature.

Going forward many of the issues people have with local versus "cloud" files might be dealt with with high level encryption and authentication mechanisms (ie, biometrics). I operate under the assumption (especially as a Windows user) that file systems are ultimately vulnerable and only encryption/strong-authentication can provide a real privacy defense.

[No-Nonsense 0]

At present the failure to enter a password on the local client prevents synchronization but allows full access to the existing database. Given the sensitive nature of the data many of us entrust to Evernote, is this just a beta-level glitch? I believe under version 2.x a password encrypted database file could not be accessed without proper authentication. This is a critical must-have program feature.

I too think it would be nice. But if we were able to select the place the accounts local EN3 DB is stored, we could store it on a encrypted folder/partition/container etc. which would be an intermediate solution to me. If EN3 would incorporate authentication to the local DB it sould also encrypt the data or DB, as it is a SQLite database that could be read with standard SQLite tools (I assume - I haven't tried yet).

Going forward many of the issues people have with local versus "cloud" files might be dealt with with high level encryption and authentication mechanisms (ie, biometrics). I operate under the assumption (especially as a Windows user) that file systems are ultimately vulnerable and only encryption/strong-authentication can provide a real privacy defense.

Synchronization with high-level encyrption would be a solution for some of us (I assume not all). But I assume Evernote Corporation is trying to push web-based access, that would not work with high-level encryption (when not sending the password to the server). There are some solutions to have client side java-script or plugin-based RSA encryption though. Therefore I doubt this will be integrated into EN3.

-Jens

[iafanasyev 1]

At present the failure to enter a password on the local client prevents synchronization but allows full access to the existing database. Given the sensitive nature of the data many of us entrust to Evernote, is this just a beta-level glitch? I believe under version 2.x a password encrypted database file could not be accessed without proper authentication. This is a critical must-have program feature.

In 2.x, there were no such a thing as database encryption. Yes, you could password-protect database, but the data was left un-encrypted, and such 'protection' could be easily defeated. So, what you had is the wrong illusion of security, but not the security itself.

In 3.x, there is no password-protection of the local database. We ask for synchronization password at opening the account data for convenience only, so you would not have to enter the password when sync starts while you are in the middle of typing the note, for example.

As for truly protecting your data (e.g. encrypting the database file), there are built-in OS or third-party encryption facilities, either software or hardware, which do the job well.

[Dribbler 0]

I don't need strong encryption on my notes, just something to deter people looking at my personal stuff.

Either an option to password protect opening the database as in 2.x, or the option to automatically encrypt any entry created in a particular notebook would work for me (with an auto decrypt option I could set for home, but leave them encrypted at work)- It could leave the title of the note clear.

Simon

[roland 0]

For me it is absolutly essential that I can store my notes locally without any web access.

I don´t need to access my notes via mobile device or web interface (even though I´m travelling a lot).

I would never store my notes anywhere else but on my local HD (at least there is stuff that I don´t want to give away, like my diary, secret stuff from my job, account info). That´s why I don´t want to create an "account", I simply want to have a local file as my DB.

Some features in EN3 are very nice and I´d like to update, but if it forces me to do the "cloud" thing, then I´d go back to 2.2

[vogelap 27]

For me it is absolutly essential that I can store my notes locally without any web access.

I don´t need to access my notes via mobile device or web interface (even though I´m travelling a lot).

I would never store my notes anywhere else but on my local HD (at least there is stuff that I don´t want to give away, like my diary, secret stuff from my job, account info). That´s why I don´t want to create an "account", I simply want to have a local file as my DB.

Some features in EN3 are very nice and I´d like to update, but if it forces me to do the "cloud" thing, then I´d go back to 2.2

My thoughts EXACTLY, though I would clarify that I don't mind storing SOME notes (that I choose by putting into cloud-based notebooks) in the cloud. I must have the ability for local-only notebooks in addition to cloud-based notebooks.

Ideally, my local-only notebooks would be in different file(s) altogether than the cloud-based notebooks. Because the information I intend to store in one of my local-only notebooks is work-related, it therefore belongs to my office and must be surrendered if/whenever they request. Having all work-related information in one notebook (and not intermingled with cloud-based notebooks) makes this easy.

[CobraA1 0]

I would never store my notes anywhere else but on my local HD (at least there is stuff that I don´t want to give away, like my diary, secret stuff from my job, account info). That´s why I don´t want to create an "account", I simply want to have a local file as my DB.

A valid topic for discussion, I think.

It seems to me that the whole idea of how to do this "cloud computing" hasn't really solidified, and that there are still many unsolved problems, especially when it comes to trying to work with the old way of doing things.

It seems that it's not just that people want to be able to access their data everywhere - they want to be able to control where their data is available from, because honestly not all access points are secure and private.

In addition, people like having security, such as a login and password - but they don't want to do it repeatedly, and for devices they have exclusive access to (such as a personal computer), they have already identified themselves to the OS and feel it is unnecessary to repeat that identification to individual applications.

In addition, the ideal situation is that accounts have a one to one correspondence to humans, for both security and for convenience purposes. Web based email especially suffers from people creating lots of accounts just to send spam from them. That's why multiple accounts is rarely a good idea. In addition, you have to go to the menus and re-login every time you switch accounts, so it is much less convenient than simply clicking on a new notebook.

By the way - TrueCrypt provides for fantastic encryption, so I'm not too worried about encryption support. It's the whole account/database thing that seems to be the biggest issue. Perhaps it needs to be re-thought; I don't know what the best solution would be.

[vogelap 27]

I believe that physical security (having all my data stored on a USB key that remains in my control, for example) is more secure than the very best security on the cloud. I call this "security by absence". If my data exists in one place (a USB key) that you cannot get to (because it is in my possession), it is infinitely secure. The responsibility is on ME (the owner of the data) to make sure I keep track of my USB key.

[Valma 0]

So we can have separate "notebooks"/databases having different accounts. Could we open those different "supra-notebooks"/ databases/accounts at the same time?

Well, anyway, even if we could, I still don't see why signing up is not an option instead of having to do it anytime you connect. That's complicating things too much and unnecessarily. Again, if revenue is the issue, make that an advance option you have to pay for... Of course I'd prefer not having to pay for that, but we should clarify if we are talking about simplifying things from the point of view of the user or because of other matters (technical, economical or whatever) which are also understandable as soon as they are not entangled with the first.

[Valma 0]

I retract my previous comment. Actually changing accounts from within the desktop EN, works pretty well and fast... I assumed and misunderstood something, my apologies. There´s no sign-up process. I think I won´t need to have several of them opened if the switching accounts is so immediate.

It seems it is not possible to open more than one account at the same time online though.

Of course all notebooks are automatically synced so privacy is still an issue. But I´d rather have particular notes not synced instead of the whole notebook. I understand others could need the whole notebook, so probably both whole notebooks and particular notes not-sync options should be allowed.

[Brad_I 5]

I retract myself. Actually changing accounts from within the desktop EN, works pretty well and fast... I assumed and misunderstood something, my apologies. There´s no sign-up process. I think I won´t need to have several of them opened if the switching accounts is so immediate.

It seems it is not possible to open more than one account at the same time online though.

Of course all notebooks are automatically synced so privacy is still an issue. But I´d rather have particular notes not synced instead of the whole notebook. I understand other´s could need the whole notebook, so probably both whole notebooks and particular notes not-sync options should be allowed.

hmm... I am not seeing where to create another account that I can switch to. Are you using the MAC version? Portable?

I am on the windows version and I don't see another way to open more than one account without another invite.

[vogelap 27]

hmm... I am not seeing where to create another account that I can switch to. Are you using the MAC version? Portable?

I am on the windows version and I don't see another way to open more than one account without another invite.

Having to switch accounts is kludgy at best. Very interruptive and workflow-disrupting. No good, which is English for no bueno.

[Brad_I 5]

Having to switch accounts is kludgy at best. Very interruptive and workflow-disrupting. No good, which is English for no bueno.

But it does provide the security you mentioned above. What better way to separate the two than to have to switch from online to local account?

Yes, you might argue that you can have two different data stores. But that introduces the far more likely scenario of copying sensitive docs to your online profile than what can be done from a purely local logon.

[Valma 0]

I don't see another way to open more than one account without another invite.

Well, at least initially, it seems you´ll have to invite yourself, yes. I don´t know how accounts will work later...

Apart from that, changing accounts in the windows version is as easy as changing notebooks, you´ll see your accounts pressing ¨Account¨ in the menu bar (the one on the top). Just click on one of them and you´ll see it instantly. ; )

Valma

[Valma 0]

Having to switch accounts is kludgy at best. Very interruptive and workflow-disrupting. No good, which is English for no bueno.

Tranquilo (this is Spanish for 'relax'), it is really quite neat. Have you actually tried it? It works like the notebooks, but allows you to keep things separate. You don't lose any time (complies with the two seconds rule, and even with my less-than-one-second need), you can even use the keyboard (Alt+A and the first letter of your account).

I think databases shouldn't be compared with notebooks but with accounts. Notebooks are a bad metaphor for what we have on EN3; they should be called with the not so appealing name of Folders.

Regardless of the name, we still should have local databases. Whether they should be accounts or notebooks/folders I still don't know. Ideally one should be able to make a folder/notebook local or an entire account as one pleases. But then 'account' is probably not the best name for that. Perhaps Collections or even Notebooks are a better option for this. In the last case the actual notebooks/folders could be recalled just folders, or Notepads if this sounds more alluring.

Valma

[ruudhein 29]

You want complete ownership of your data - use a (not yet delivered) local notebook and make sure you back things up yourself. Synchronize on your own time as well.

This something of EN3 that I don't complete get -- and what I suspect about it, irks me.

In EN2 there's already this feature. It works. The code is done. Why can't I have this in EN3 as well? Is it to force me to use the web sync? Why?

[u00000000 0]

You're not the only one. I am using the older Evernote 2 at work, they have no problems with me using it as an electronic logbook.

I just tried Evernote 3, and I can already see it will be an issue. Just requiring to log-in to an account online brings the masters some doubt...I mean, will it let me start up at all, even the 1st time, if say my network cable is unplugged?

I'm not saying the "cloud" thing is a bad idea, in fact, it's great for personal use. Just not for corporate use...

I also wish it were a plain Java application that I could carry on a stick and run "anywhere" to get at my stuff, but that's another story.

[rkadowns 0]

I need to add my to cents to this discussion.

As i see it, EverNote 3 is severely flawed in its current state. Here's my reason why.

Off line processing of OCR. I think I understand why this is being done. Portable devices don't have the processing power to make it feasible to do locally so to make EverNote accessible everywhere the decision to process centrally was made. Unfortunately this is also a key drawback to the data in the cloud model because in order for the centralized processing to occur the data cannot be encrypted. How can their servers decrypt my images to OCR them without my encryption key? If local OCR processing could be returned to the desktops, then the data could be encrypted across the wire and stored in an encrypted state on the servers. Data could still be added by mobile devices however OCR and indexing will have to occur whenever the data is synced with that user's desktop, either manually or whenever a desktop copy of EN3 running and synced via schedule. I would feel much more comfortable with the idea of leaving my data in the cloud if it worked this way.

Additionally, I need to revisit the licensing terms. Regardless of what was written in these terms, I'm not so inclined to trust anyone with the remote processing of my data. EverNote is reading my files and images. The decision to do it this way is questionable. What is being done with that data? I don't know, however I can see a similar model being developed and implemented that's similar to Google's. Will EverNote be free in return to giving up my privacy? These models sicken me.

I'm am a Windows sys admin at work and a Mac user at home. I currently use EverNote 2 at work and DevonThink at home. I love the idea of having my data accessible from everywhere from a common platform and knew eventually this feature would be developed by someone. I would be more than happy to make EverNote 3 my one and only personal KB but if I cannot be assured my privacy through very strong encryption and local data processing, EN2 will be then end of the line for me on Windows.

I'd like to add one more thing. Let me ask this. Is there any real reason why the data has to live in the cloud? It's my data and I don't see any reason why my desktop cannot be the place where OCR and indexing happens and the place where my mobile devices and your web portal gets it's data. I pay for both download and upload bandwidth to my ISP.

I love what I see in EverNote 3, but its design is flawed and not a viable solution for me.

[vogelap 27]

Excellent insights in your entire article, rkadowns.

Personally, I am of the opinion that the encrypted USB key I carry my 2.2.1 ENbases around on is more secure than ANYTHING in the cloud. With my USB key in my possession (but not plugged into a computer), there is absolutely no way for bad guys to access my data. Taking proper care when configuring EverNote backups, etc, ensures that my data is impervious to mischief.

When the EN team described EN3.0 to me, I immediately (and forcefully) asserted that there must be a completely off-line notebook operation because I simply. will. not. store some sensitive data (SSN, CC numbers, etc) in the cloud. One of the gentlemen I was speaking with (leaving names out) said that he would implement it, "just so he didn't have to answer that request any more". While I appreciate that they implemented it, he seemed to be doing so unwillingly, which makes me wonder about how well they understand the needs and usage patterns of their customers. To my mind, the EN team's most compelling reason make EN3.0's notebooks online is revenue. I bought EverNote 2.2.1 once, as they might see it, and can use it to my heart's content without another dime going into EN's tills. This will, likely, not be the case with EN3.0's model. I don't blame them or fault them for wanting to make money. However, I believe their approach is flawed. I was reading an article today on Consumerist that said that most companies that deal with such things seriously underestimate how important privacy/data security is to their customers.

I'd like to add one more thing. Let me ask this. Is there any real reason why the data has to live in the cloud? It's my data and I don't see any reason why my desktop cannot be the place where OCR and indexing happens and the place where my mobile devices and your web portal gets it's data. I pay for both download and upload bandwidth to my ISP.

This part of your post really caught my attention. I absolutely adore the idea of one of my personal computers being designated the repository for my data and not using external servers. I currently use a piece of software (BeyondTV -- http://www.snapstream.com) for my Personal Video Recorder and it stores and serves everything from the local box. The machine is the PVR, a webserver (provided by the PVR software), and a repository for all recorded shows. All in one. No need to access some $ervice to get/store/use/access my data. I am technologically advanced enough to set up and secure a server on my own. And, the responsibility for any data loss would rest squarely on my shoulders. I can imagine the PR nightmare if/when EN3.0's online data storage is compromised. That would be terminal.

[vogelap 27]

I also wish it were a plain Java application that I could carry on a stick and run "anywhere" to get at my stuff, but that's another story.

You do know about EverNote Portable 2.2.1, right?

[rkadowns 0]

BUMP

:?