Is anyone using EN 4?

I think it is faster in its Windows version.

However, given that it is an information program, and therefore more than a clipper of steroids which can be used on just about any known platform (a good thing for those who need it), I hope the developers begin to focus on info management more than they have.

For example, tags and highlighting.

The tagging capability is less than it was with version 2.

And highlighting of text seems to have been yet again bypassed.

My hope is that at some future point - sooner rather than later - that Neville, developer of Surfulater, can give Surfulater a cloud capability.

Even if Surfulater does not work on other platforms, I suspect there is a significant number of Windows users who would support a cloud version - enough to make it worthwhile.

Neville has shown more sensitivity than EN's developers to the need for post-clip information management tools, and though there is not a column option ( a favorite feature of mine), he has provided a way to deal with metadata which is effective. As well, Surfulater has a tagging process which allows for searches for items with both tag A and tag B. It is done very smartly.

Daly

Daly de Gagne wrote:

Is anyone using EN 4?

I think it is faster in its Windows version.

However, given
that it is an information program, and therefore more than a clipper of steroids which
can be used on just about any known platform (a good thing for those who need it), I hope
the developers begin to focus on info management more than they have.

For example,
tags and highlighting.

The tagging capability is less than it was with version 2.


And highlighting of text seems to have been yet again bypassed.

My hope is that at
some future point - sooner rather than later - that Neville, developer of Surfulater,
can give Surfulater a cloud capability.

Even if Surfulater does not work on other
platforms, I suspect there is a significant number of Windows users who would support
a cloud version - enough to make it worthwhile.

Neville has shown more sensitivity
than EN's developers to the need for post-clip information management tools, and
though there is not a column option ( a favorite feature of mine), he has provided a way
to deal with metadata which is effective. As well, Surfulater has a tagging process
which allows for searches for items with both tag A and tag B. It is done very
smartly.

Daly

Hi. I apologize for deviating from the main topic (EN 4).
Since Daly mentioned Surfulater, I just wanted to point out that I sorely miss Surfulater on my Mac. I miss the tags. I miss the cross-references... A while ago I even emailed Neville and shamelessly begged him to make a Mac version.
Currently I use Surfulater with Parallels (still on v. 5; I haven't yet upgraded Parallels 6), but the lack of integration with other Mac apps makes the process cumbersome.
To this day, I haven't found a proper Mac-equivalent to Surfulater. I clip web pages to DEVONthink Pro Office, but DTP, while an excellent solution to handling large amounts of data, just doesn't "feel" like a Surfulater replacement...

I use EN 4 - it's the primary software application in my workflow.

I think the issues raised in Daly's email are mostly questions of taste. What fits with one person's workflow might not fit with another person's. For me, EN is the right program and is evolving in the right direction. Obviously, for others, that's not as true. A few additional comments in-line below:


Daly de Gagne wrote:

Is anyone using EN 4?

I think it is faster in its Windows version.

However, given
that it is an information program, and therefore more than a clipper of steroids which
can be used on just about any known platform (a good thing for those who need it), I hope
the developers begin to focus on info management more than they have.

Personally, I use EN for a lot more than just clipping. In fact, that's why Surfulater -- with its clipping focus -- cannot replace EN for me. I use EN for 4 things, in this order:
1. fast note taking (meeting notes, ideas, reminders)
2. gathering information related to one topic of research for my work. This information generally comes from snippets of documents in PDF, Word, or Email form. Each snippet needs to be notated with topic information as well as bibliographic information and sometimes context.
3. first drafts of documents -- this is often a bullet list or less structured outline of ideas, with reference to the information collected in #2, above.
4. web clipping

For me, nothing does the first 3 of these faster and easier than EN.

For notetaking, most programs like Ultrarecall and Surfulater force me to make lots of decisions about what type (or template) of note I'm taking -- and where to store it (what notebook or category) before I can start typing -- either that, or after I finish typing, I have to make lots of decisions before moving on. With EN, I click CTRL-ALT-N, start typing, maybe add a tag, and close the window. I never have to decide what folder to keep a note in, I never have to choose a template or fill out lots of complicated fields.

The ability to enter and find notes on my blackberry and my ipod are increasingly important aspects of my use of EN for notetaking. But they are not the main things that attract me to the program.

For collecting research, EN's simplicity is again its strength. I can put 10 clips in one note, or have 1 clip per note. I basically use it just like notepad, but with rich text. Again, there is no need to figure out lots of complicated extra fields before I start researching and typing in citations.

All of this only works because of EN's fast searching, which I discuss below.

For example,
tags and highlighting.

The tagging capability is less than it was with version 2.

I hated the UI of EN v.2 so much that I never had a chance to be familiar with the tagging, so I can't comment on this. I do like EN's focus on tagging as the primary method of information management. For me, tags and fast searching are the right way to handle exponentially-growing amounts of information.

Fast searching is one of the primary things that makes EN useful. In Windows v 4, search speed has finally gotten back to -- or faster than -- what it was in v 3.1. Being able to find a note or clipping instantaneously based on any remembered snippet of its contents is something many apps promise, but few deliver. EN does this for text and for images, using its own OCR engine. It's is so good at this that some folks in the EN forums copy all their emails from Outlook into EN just so they are more searchable.

And highlighting of text seems to have been yet again bypassed.

This is an example of a difference in taste. I have never cared about highlighting information in electronic documents. Highlights are not useful to me because they are not distinguishable or searchable. I.e., if I highlight 50 phrases in a document, I can't easily find the one highlighted phrase I care about without navigating through all 50 highlights.

This is a much-requested feature, so apparently it's useful to some people, though.

My hope is that at
some future point - sooner rather than later - that Neville, developer of Surfulater,
can give Surfulater a cloud capability.

Even if Surfulater does not work on other
platforms, I suspect there is a significant number of Windows users who would support
a cloud version - enough to make it worthwhile.

Neville has shown more sensitivity
than EN's developers to the need for post-clip information management tools, and
though there is not a column option ( a favorite feature of mine), he has provided a way
to deal with metadata which is effective. As well, Surfulater has a tagging process
which allows for searches for items with both tag A and tag B. It is done very
smartly.

EN can do any searches for any boolean combinations of tags. I'm not sure what "column option" is?
Again, this may be a matter of taste, but I think EN's developers are probably the most responsive and communicative of any software developers I've ever encountered - indeed, that is their strength. If you check out the forums or the EN blog, you'll find that some employees seem to spend their entire day interacting with users regarding EN feature ideas and plans.

Regarding "the need for post-clip information management tools," EN has been very responsive to ideas and questions regarding the design and use of the tagging interface, which is "post-clip." They also have greatly improved intra- and inter- note search, which is also "post-clip." They have also, after considerable criticism in the forums, started to roll out heirarchical notebooks, a decision that I think detracts from the focus on tags, but that shows responsiveness to user demands. I agree, however, that EN does not focus on how to organize your information - the whole concept is that if search and tagging are fast and easy enough, then you shouldn't have to spend hours re-organizing your data. That concept is what appeals to me, but obviously there are other applications for those who want more organizational capability.

Daly

Oops - I realized 3 more things I use EN for:

5. storing reference information (medical records, bill payments, license plate numbers, etc) - either in text or in attached files
6. capturing emails that contain important information -- including important file attachments -- since I find that Outlook search is way too slow, so I don't rely on Outlook for storing information I might need in the future.
7. general file storage - although this is evolving from dropbox to evernote, and I'm not sure where I stand on it yet.

Hi Dan,

Thanks for your post. I found your work-flow description and reasons for choosing EN to be enlightening..

However..question:
I used EN a while back (around the time of 3.0), mostly for odds and ends. As time went by, I found the more I put into it, the more difficult it became to actually "know where anything is..". A single tag would include more and more stuff (notes), and become more and more vague...and less useful at containing a specific set of information.

So do you then spend a lot of time (or considerable amount of time) adding numerous tags to each note? And then again, when searching for a note or group of notes you have to create a search query of all relevant tags to get back that information. (I guess EN does allow to save search queries...maybe that is then important for you).

Although a hierarchical tree has it's drawbacks..it seems (to me) to be the more natural way to group data together. Essentially simply adding a note in a specific place, by context, is like adding all the tags you would otherwise need to add. And then also, finding a group of related information is also simple. When you go to one note, you immediately see related information. With my experience of tags, you seem to lose that.

As said, I was working mainly with bits and pieces of data, so these points didn't matter as much, but if you are using EN for groups of serious information, I'm wondering how you get by??

Thanks
Rael
www.bauerapps.com

Hi Rael,

See below for some responses


Rael Bauer wrote:

Hi Dan,

Thanks for your post. I found your work-flow description and reasons for
choosing EN to be enlightening..

Thanks!

However..question:
I used EN a while back
(around the time of 3.0), mostly for odds and ends. As time went by, I found the more I put
into it, the more difficult it became to actually "know where anything is..". A single
tag would include more and more stuff (notes), and become more and more vague...and
less useful at containing a specific set of information.

Hm. I guess I haven't had that problem.

So do you then spend a lot of
time (or considerable amount of time) adding numerous tags to each note?

No. I usually tag once when I create the note. The nice thing about tags is that I don't really care if I get them right. (In contrast, with folders, you have to get it perfect because a note can only be in one folder, so you will never find it if you put it in the wrong place.) Some notes have no tags, some have 3. Rarely more than that. Some types of information I rigorously tag one way, other types I am lazy about.

And then
again, when searching for a note or group of notes you have to create a search query of
all relevant tags to get back that information. (I guess EN does allow to save search
queries...maybe that is then important for you).

No. I generally search for the *content* of the note, rather than for tags. I will often click on a tag in the left pane of evernote to narrow the search, then type in some content to search for.

Although a hierarchical tree has
it's drawbacks..it seems (to me) to be the more natural way to group data together.
Essentially simply adding a note in a specific place, by context, is like adding all
the tags you would otherwise need to add. And then also, finding a group of related
information is also simple. When you go to one note, you immediately see related
information. With my experience of tags, you seem to lose that.

In EN, If I click on a tag that specifies a client name, I see all notes related to that client. How is that different from what you describe?

The advantage of tags is that I don't have to decide on one place to store a note -- I can have multiple tags for each note. With folder-based systems I find I am always second-guessing which folder I put something in. Should it be "client name" or "IP Law" or "Team meetings?" It is much faster and easier for me to not have to make these decisions.

As said, I was
working mainly with bits and pieces of data, so these points didn't matter as much, but
if you are using EN for groups of serious information, I'm wondering how you get
by??

Thanks
Rael
www.bauerapps.com

Rael, I have a similar concern w EN in terms of having a sense of dis-ease as to knowing where everything is.

When I use folders, in Surfulater for example, I make clones of an item and put it into more than one folder.

I guess when selecting a variety of tags for an item that could be thought of as a similar kind of process except we are bringing the categorization to the item, rather than the item to a variety of folders.

Either way can be problematic once there are 1,000s of items.

Searches work well as long as the word being searched for is in the item - thus the need for tags, which often may match, but not always, specific words in an item.

I prefer a combination of tags and folders - folders being a structure which I set, and having multiple levels thru sub fodlders.

Unfortunately most tagging systems let you search for an item using only one tag at a time.

InfoHandler, once actively developed, was phenomenal at allowing one to search based on a combination of tags.

Surfulater has a neat system of automatically reflecting in its tag tree occurances of an item with two tags.

In Surfulater I use both tags and folders and have a much greater sense of where stuff is, and being able to access items quickly and reliably.

A hope I'd have for Surfulater is that it would allow me to search for only those items having tags B, F, H, and X where the alphabet letters are representing for this example specific tags in my tag tree. Then Surfulater would be as functional tag wise as InfoHandler was.

Daly


Rael Bauer wrote:

Hi Dan,

Thanks for your post. I found your work-flow description and reasons for
choosing EN to be enlightening..

However..question:
I used EN a while back
(around the time of 3.0), mostly for odds and ends. As time went by, I found the more I put
into it, the more difficult it became to actually "know where anything is..". A single
tag would include more and more stuff (notes), and become more and more vague...and
less useful at containing a specific set of information.

So do you then spend a lot of
time (or considerable amount of time) adding numerous tags to each note? And then
again, when searching for a note or group of notes you have to create a search query of
all relevant tags to get back that information. (I guess EN does allow to save search
queries...maybe that is then important for you).

Although a hierarchical tree has
it's drawbacks..it seems (to me) to be the more natural way to group data together.
Essentially simply adding a note in a specific place, by context, is like adding all
the tags you would otherwise need to add. And then also, finding a group of related
information is also simple. When you go to one note, you immediately see related
information. With my experience of tags, you seem to lose that.

As said, I was
working mainly with bits and pieces of data, so these points didn't matter as much, but
if you are using EN for groups of serious information, I'm wondering how you get
by??

Thanks
Rael
www.bauerapps.com

Dan there are a number of program which enable one to put an item into more than one folder by cloning - eg Surfulater, MyInfo, UltraRecall, to name three.

Daly
dan7000 wrote:

Hi Rael,

See below for some responses


Rael Bauer wrote:
>Hi Dan,
>
>Thanks for
your post. I found your work-flow description and reasons for
>choosing EN to be
enlightening..
>

Thanks!

>However..question:
>I used EN a while back

>(around the time of 3.0), mostly for odds and ends. As time went by, I found the more I
put
>into it, the more difficult it became to actually "know where anything is..". A
single
>tag would include more and more stuff (notes), and become more and more
vague...and
>less useful at containing a specific set of information.
>

Hm. I
guess I haven't had that problem.

>So do you then spend a lot of
>time (or
considerable amount of time) adding numerous tags to each note?

No. I usually tag
once when I create the note. The nice thing about tags is that I don't really care if I get
them right. (In contrast, with folders, you have to get it perfect because a note can
only be in one folder, so you will never find it if you put it in the wrong place.) Some
notes have no tags, some have 3. Rarely more than that. Some types of information I
rigorously tag one way, other types I am lazy about.

> And then
>again, when
searching for a note or group of notes you have to create a search query of
>all
relevant tags to get back that information. (I guess EN does allow to save search

>queries...maybe that is then important for you).

No. I generally search for the
*content* of the note, rather than for tags. I will often click on a tag in the left pane
of evernote to narrow the search, then type in some content to search for.


>
>Although a hierarchical tree has
>it's drawbacks..it seems (to me) to be the
more natural way to group data together.
>Essentially simply adding a note in a
specific place, by context, is like adding all
>the tags you would otherwise need to
add. And then also, finding a group of related
>information is also simple. When you
go to one note, you immediately see related
>information. With my experience of
tags, you seem to lose that.

In EN, If I click on a tag that specifies a client name, I
see all notes related to that client. How is that different from what you
describe?

The advantage of tags is that I don't have to decide on one place to store a
note -- I can have multiple tags for each note. With folder-based systems I find I am
always second-guessing which folder I put something in. Should it be "client name" or
"IP Law" or "Team meetings?" It is much faster and easier for me to not have to make these
decisions.



>
>As said, I was
>working mainly with bits and pieces of data, so
these points didn't matter as much, but
>if you are using EN for groups of serious
information, I'm wondering how you get

>by??
>
>Thanks
>Rael
>www.bauerapps.com

@Dan

(In contrast, with folders, you have to get it perfect because a note can
only be in one folder, so you will never find it if you put it in the wrong place.)

Unless the search is good...

The advantage of tags is that I don't have to decide on one place to store a
note -- I can have multiple tags for each note. With folder-based systems I find I am
always second-guessing which folder I put something in. Should it be "client name" or
"IP Law" or "Team meetings?" It is much faster and easier for me to not have to make these
decisions.

Oh well...your needs / way of working must be different to mine..

I haven't really used tags all that much. In my experience though, as you say with tags "the nice thing .. is that I don?t really care if I get them right" - so then if you use slightly different tags, your info gets split into different parts. And on the other hand if you are careful to put info into the same tag then the tag gets "overloaded" i.e. contains unrelated stuff, and loses it's meaning.

I guess for me, when I move to a note it is important to see related information (in hierarchical fashion - i.e. closely related...sub related..etc..). With tagging you don't seem to get that easily.

Anyway interesting discussion :)

-Rael

@Daly

Unfortunately most tagging systems let you search for an item using only
one tag at a time.

Well for example EN allows multi tag search..

-Rael

I'm not sure I can use multitag search in EN.

Let's assume I want EN to give me all the notes with the following tags in common: psychology; therapy; Freud; object relations .

I do not want any other notes with those tags -- just the notes that have those four tags in common.

How can I do that with EN?

I may be mistaken, but I think it is probably impossible. I tried to find an EN help file dealing w tags, but no success.

Daly




Rael Bauer wrote:

@Daly
>Unfortunately most tagging systems let you search for an item using only

>one tag at a time.

Well for example EN allows multi tag search..

-Rael

This is one of the key features of EN: the ability to show all notes with a particular set of tags. I'm surprised you haven't used it before.

The way I usually do it is by clicking multiple tags in the tag list. For instance, when I click "Law" I get only the notes tagged "Law." Then if I hold down CTRL (in order to select multiple tags) and also click the tag "disability" then I will only see notes tagged with *both* "law" and "disability." I do this all the time.

You can also do the same thing using the search syntax, by typing "tag:law tag:disability" in the search field.

(In contrast, if you want to see the superset of everything tagged with EITHER law OR disability, then you have to show search options and change option "All" (the default) to "Any".)


Daly de Gagne wrote:

I'm not sure I can use multitag search in EN.

Let's assume I want EN to give me all the
notes with the following tags in common: psychology; therapy; Freud; object
relations .

I do not want any other notes with those tags -- just the notes that have
those four tags in common.

How can I do that with EN?

I may be mistaken, but I think it
is probably impossible. I tried to find an EN help file dealing w tags, but no
success.

Daly




Rael Bauer wrote:
>@Daly
>>Unfortunately most tagging
systems let you search for an item using only
>
>>one tag at a time.
>
>Well for
example EN allows multi tag search..
>
>-Rael

I am, admittedly, a newb to Evernote, but doesn't the ability to nest tags hierarchically; or in combination with the ability to place them in a particular notebook of your choosing (and creation) help to address the filing, labeling and retrieval issues? I am genuinely hoping so (see "newb" comment from moments ago)

Dan, I am glad to read what you wrote.

I went online and found the info in the 3.5 PDF users guide.

Searching for the combined product of multiple tags is a key selling point. Why is Evernote so quiet about this?

Thank you for correcting me.

Daly


dan7000 wrote:

This is one of the key features of EN: the ability to show all notes with a particular set
of tags. I'm surprised you haven't used it before.

The way I usually do it is by
clicking multiple tags in the tag list. For instance, when I click "Law" I get only the
notes tagged "Law." Then if I hold down CTRL (in order to select multiple tags) and also
click the tag "disability" then I will only see notes tagged with *both* "law" and
"disability." I do this all the time.

You can also do the same thing using the search
syntax, by typing "tag:law tag:disability" in the search field.

(In contrast, if
you want to see the superset of everything tagged with EITHER law OR disability, then
you have to show search options and change option "All" (the default) to
"Any".)


Daly de Gagne wrote:
>I'm not sure I can use multitag search in
EN.
>
>Let's assume I want EN to give me all the
>notes with the following tags in
common: psychology; therapy; Freud; object
>relations .
>
>I do not want any other
notes with those tags -- just the notes that have
>those four tags in common.
>
>How
can I do that with EN?
>
>I may be mistaken, but I think it
>is probably impossible. I
tried to find an EN help file dealing w tags, but no

>success.
>
>Daly
>
>
>
>
>Rael Bauer wrote:
>>@Daly
>>>Unfortunately most
tagging
>systems let you search for an item using only
>>
>>>one tag at a
time.
>>
>>Well for
>example EN allows multi tag search..
>>
>>-Rael

A quick note on yesterday's Evernote update for Windows and Mac. Two of the new features I had been hoping for for ages:

- Added support for note links, create links to individual notes that can be pasted within Evernote and other applications
- Added support for copying notes within a notebook and between notebooks (AD: Believe it or not, this was until now not possible)

An additional goody for the Windows version:
- export selected notes as separate web pages with a table of contents page all in HTML.
(Note that this is a feature that many classic outliners have; Evernote only provided the option to publish notebooks online for sharing)

More here: http://blog.evernote.com/2011/06/15/big-evernote-desktop-update-windows-and-mac-get-note-links-note-copying-and-much-more/


Sideline: I try to post updates on software we've already discussed within existing relevant threads. I do this to maintain the context. Too often I find that some items are rediscussed in absence of their background. If however you find my practice confusing, I can start a new thread and link to the older relevant one.

Alexander,

Your Evernote Blog link speaks of "Evernote Desktop." I had thought that Evernote had pretty much abandoned desktop info storage for cloud applications. Am I wrong? Does Evernote currently have a version that is a desktop application with desktop file storage?

Thanks!

Hi Cassius,

All Evernote desktop applications store the material locally, in sync with the cloud. That's what I personally find brilliant about the product. You can get information into Evernote in many many ways and the material will always be available whether online or offline. In addition, even the Android application (probably also other mobile ones) will store the list of notes locally; once you select a note, this will be retrieved from the cloud and stored locally too.

That said, people who do not want their information to travel around the internet can choose to create local notebooks. This option (local/synced) is available separately for each notebook.

I agree, Alexander, with your identification of the most valuable new features in Evernote. Linking is great; what is more, these are "application links," which means you can past them into any application, not just other EN notes. This has long been a standout feature of Ultra Recall for me. This make EN notes much more useable in my overall info management scheme. The new html export option is also a nice addition to similar existing export formats. I also agree that the previous absence of the capacity to copy a note to other notebooks was unbelievable. I had figured out a clunky workaround, but I was completely stunned when I first want to copy a note and discovered that it could not be done within the application! This is a pretty exciting update.
critStock

P.S. Alexander, my vote is in favor of your practice of adding new posts to old threads, when the threads are general and have not grown to enormous proportions. This does, however, give me a chance to whine about the fact that users of this forum can't choose the option of viewing a thread in newest-posts-first mode.