Skip to main content

Evernote: a Landscape of Experiences



I’m going to take some time out of absolutely loving Evernote for keeping me on task and organized throughout the day to talk about what, I think, is absolutely the worse thing about it.
Evernote is a completely different application on every platform and device it supports.
For a product who’s main gimmick is keeping you organized and your data synced between all of your platforms and devices, that’s sort of a really hard knock against them. The Evernote for Windows application is great, but so is the Evernote for Mac application. These are quite different, and not just in the ways that usual differ between Windows and Mac to fit the platforms well. They are just fundamentally different applications which coincidentally happen to be sharing your data.
Beyond the two desktop Evernotes, the problem only gets worse. Evernote for Android is yet another experience, with yet other features different from the two Desktop versions.
The most jarring differences between these versions are differences in the editing of your notes themselves, something that (given the nature of the tool) seems like being consistent should have been priority number 1. How am I supposed to work on my notes everywhere if my notes may be different everywhere?
Perhaps the most frustrating part of all this comes down to what is definitely the most overlooked face of Evernote from their development team: Evernote for the Web. This version of the product has, by far, the most missing features found at least in some form in most of the other versions.
This Web version being so limited is especially troubling because, would it be better supported, the differences of all the other versions would barely scratch my notice. I’d just use the web version everywhere.
Moving forward, these discrepancies are killing my loyalty to Evernote and I can’t see there is anyway I’ll be able to continue as a user much longer. Honestly, I’ve gotten a lot out of it, and I’d hoped this situation would improve. That hope is what kept me around this long. As it continues to only appear more divergent over time, not less, it seems my hope was misplaced.
I’m still looking for the replacement, but I’m going to find it (or make it) and then it’ll be “so long” to Evernote, I’m afraid.

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

Respect and Code Reviews

Code Reviews in a development team only function best, or possible at all, when everyone approaches them with respect. That’s something I’ve usually taken for granted because I’ve had the opportunity to work with amazing developers who shine not just in their technical skills but in their interpersonal skills on a team. That isn’t always the case, so I’m going to put into words something that often exists just in assumptions.
You have to respect your code. This is first only because the nature and intent of code reviews are to safeguard the quality of your code, so even having code reviews demonstrates a baseline of respect for that code. But, maybe not everyone on the team has the same level of respect or entered a team with existing review traditions that they aren’t acquainted with.
There can be culture shock when you enter a team that’s really heavy on code reviews, but also if you enter a team or interact with a colleague who doesn’t share that level of respect for the process or…

CARDIAC: The Cardboard Computer

I am just so excited about this.


CARDIAC. The Cardboard Computer. How cool is that? This piece of history is amazing and better than that: it is extremely accessible. This fantastic design was built in 1969 by David Hagelbarger at Bell Labs to explain what computers were to those who would otherwise have no exposure to them. Miraculously, the CARDIAC (CARDboard Interactive Aid to Computation) was able to actually function as a slow and rudimentary computer. 
One of the most fascinating aspects of this gem is that at the time of its publication the scope it was able to demonstrate was actually useful in explaining what a computer was. Could you imagine trying to explain computers today with anything close to the CARDIAC?

It had 100 memory locations and only ten instructions. The memory held signed 3-digit numbers (-999 through 999) and instructions could be encoded such that the first digit was the instruction and the second two digits were the address of memory to operate on. The only re…

How To Care If BSD, MIT, or GPL Licenses Are Used

The two recent posts about some individuals' choice of GPL versus others' preference for BSD and MIT style licensing has caused a lot of debate and response. I've seen everything as an interesting combination of very important topics being taken far too seriously and far too personally. All involved need to take a few steps back.

For the uninitiated and as a clarifier for the initiated, we're dealing with (basically) three categories of licensing when someone releases software (and/or its code):
Closed Source. Easiest to explain, because you just get nothing.GPL. If you get the software, you get the source code, you get to change it, and anything you combine it with must be under the same terms.MIT and BSD. If you get the software, you might get the source code, you get to change it, and you have no obligations about anything else you combine it with.The situation gets stickier when we look at those combinations and the transitions between them.

Use GPL code with Closed S…