|
|
|
|
|
by jsmthrowaway
3442 days ago
|
|
Interesting is one word for that, given the main thesis that venture capital is universally to blame for the failure of centralized things we rely upon (with zero evidence to support this assertion), and that building another centralized service with less functionality is somehow the better answer. Speaking personally, I completely rely upon PDFs and images and things accompanying my notes because of the nature of the work I do (I have about 4,700 pages of research and almost a gigabyte of imagery all tied together in a Scrivener project for a single piece of work, for example), and the frozen feature set so proudly advertised smacks of "people need to take notes exactly the way I do," which is an immediate turn-off for me. That it's taken further and somewhat arrogantly called "standard" notes really chills me on liking this product at all, given that it completely and intentionally omits useful things to a lot of people -- including me. Then there are extensions, of course, pushing out all the useful features to extensions which will work even less over time. Maybe some people will like this, but the motivations and decisions just seem ill thought out so far, particularly when it's "VC is going to kill Evernote, so you should rely upon a hostname I personally administer instead and you get exactly what I give you" as the main call to action when I go to the page. |
|
Speaking realistically, investing your personal data in this project is currently a much greater risk than using Evernote.