(Archived) Transfer my entire Hard Drive (120 GB) on Evernote without saving files but only the path

[palmas69 0]

Hi. After weeks of interesting reading about GTD integration on Evernote I decided to try to organize my entire 120 GB hard drive (that is fully synchronized with Dropbox) with Evernote / GTD philosophy.

BUT the main question is:

 

1) Is it possible to create in Evernote the same structure of hard drive tree (using tags as folders) without physically transfer files/attachment but only the path (i.e. Dropbox remote path)? It could save a lot of space, because if I could have a shortcut to a Dropbox file I could save storage EN space... So I could use EN to tagging and make order to the same files in a different way, leaving an archive structure to the hard drive, and leaving to hard drive the function of simple storage of large files..

Having a Dropbox remote file could also make me able to reach the file through iPhone or iPad..

 

Another important thing to consider: If I have a paper bill and I want to transfer it on EN I create a redundancy: I scan the paper bill.. I put the PDF on my Documents/Bill/Taxes/2013/etc.. folder on my computer, and I put it on EN notebook "Tax" (so on my computer I have two same files, even if one of them is inside a EN database)..

 

What I'm searching for is a way to use Evernote as an improved, super, extension of my OS 

 

If it could be possible, I think that we could save million of bytes, reserving the storage space only for services (like Dropbox) that are made just for this function.

 

Bye!

Alex

 

P.S. Pardon for my bad english (I'm italian  ) but I hope to be understood..

 

 

[BurgersNFries 2,407]

Hi. After weeks of interesting reading about GTD integration on Evernote I decided to try to organize my entire 120 GB hard drive (that is fully synchronized with Dropbox) with Evernote / GTD philosophy.

BUT the main question is:

 

1) Is it possible to create in Evernote the same structure of hard drive tree (using tags as folders) without physically transfer files/attachment but only the path (i.e. Dropbox remote path)? It could save a lot of space, because if I could have a shortcut to a Dropbox file I could save storage EN space... So I could use EN to tagging and make order to the same files in a different way, leaving an archive structure to the hard drive, and leaving to hard drive the function of simple storage of large files..

Having a Dropbox remote file could also make me able to reach the file through iPhone or iPad..

 

Another important thing to consider: If I have a paper bill and I want to transfer it on EN I create a redundancy: I scan the paper bill.. I put the PDF on my Documents/Bill/Taxes/2013/etc.. folder on my computer, and I put it on EN notebook "Tax" (so on my computer I have two same files, even if one of them is inside a EN database)..

 

What I'm searching for is a way to use Evernote as an improved, super, extension of my OS 

 

If it could be possible, I think that we could save million of bytes, reserving the storage space only for services (like Dropbox) that are made just for this function.

 

Bye!

Alex

 

P.S. Pardon for my bad english (I'm italian  ) but I hope to be understood..

Just an FYI... Ths sounds like a nightmare to me & I can't run away from this any faster. First, you're now locked into that path. Second, what happens if your hard drive or computer is down? Sure, you can get the file from the Dropbox cloud, but youll have to do that manally. I do keep copies on my hard drive and put a copy in Evernote. It's redundant but IME/IMO when it comes to important files, redundancy is a good thing. And if I ever want/need to change the path of the files on my hard drive, it's no big deal & doesn't affect the ability of finding the file in Evernote. If my computer or hard drive is down, I can quickly find a copy in Evernote. In fact, I normally look in Evernote first & only use the copy on my hard drive if I can't use Evernote (for whatever reason). JMO.

[palmas69 0]

redundancy is a good thing. 

Well, I agree with you, in fact every week I do a "carbon copy clone" of my Documents folder to a RAID 1 external hard drive (WD MyBook)..

But what if EN server go down?!  You could remain with a multitude of notes without a path, so you'll have to rebuild all the folder tree! An impossible mission 

I don't know what is the nature of your job and what kind of files you store in your hard drive.. For a lawyer, for example, it's more easy because not often has to manage large files, photos, Autocad DWG, Photoshop PSD, etc.. I am a civil engineer and I manage a large number of project folder, full of subfolders (drafts, documents, mail in, mail out, photo, and so on) full of large files, so in my mind it's impossible to leave this mental way of organization.. The problem could be solved if Evernote disk quote was 100-200GB not 1 GB per month..

What I ask to EN is a way to find and filter in a more efficient way (a GTD way!!) all those file, even if the mac folder tree already has got a good structure..

 

The solution could be unlink the physical note attachment file from EN (leaving a shortcut)..

[gazumped 11,664]

I agree with BnF - I think the most efficient way to save and backup an existing complex folder structure is to use a hard drive and back it up conventionally.  Saving into Evernote doesn't 'save' space,  the documents still exist in the database;  and I'd say your major risk now is some sort of corruption creeping in while your data is in transit between its various locations.  Keep It Simple is always the best policy...

[BurgersNFries 2,407]

Well, I agree with you, in fact every week I do a "carbon copy clone" of my Documents folder to a RAID 1 external hard drive (WD MyBook)..

But what if EN server go down?!  You could remain with a multitude of notes without a path, so you'll have to rebuild all the folder tree! An impossible mission 

I don't know what is the nature of your job and what kind of files you store in your hard drive.. For a lawyer, for example, it's more easy because not often has to manage large files, photos, Autocad DWG, Photoshop PSD, etc.. I am a civil engineer and I manage a large number of project folder, full of subfolders (drafts, documents, mail in, mail out, photo, and so on) full of large files, so in my mind it's impossible to leave this mental way of organization.. The problem could be solved if Evernote disk quote was 100-200GB not 1 GB per month..

What I ask to EN is a way to find and filter in a more efficient way (a GTD way!!) all those file, even if the mac folder tree already has got a good structure..

 

The solution could be unlink the physical note attachment file from EN (leaving a shortcut)..

I don't get what you're saying here. If the EN servers go down, I can easily find the copy on my hard drive. The files on my hard drive are totally independent from the files in Evernote.  Which is the failing I see in your approach of simply adding the path to Evernote. In my scenario, there will be no "multitude of notes without a path" or anything that needs rebuilding.  But there is in your approach, with just storing the path in Evernote & not the file.

 

I'm not Mac but as I understand it, Mac & Windows drive/library structure is similar in that there is a folder/directory/node/call-it-what-you-will & possibly many levels of sub folders.  That is the best way to organize things on a hard drive but hardly the most efficient way to store things for easy retrieval, especially the more files you're trying to organize.  That's why Mac has Finder & Windows has Locate32 & Everything.   But trying to absolutely replicate a hard drive path in Evernote is not efficient b/c Evernote has a powerful search engine.  IE, my Cox bill for May 2013 is in this path:

 

Drive letter --> Paperport --> bills --> 2013 --> Cox

 

I have to drill down five levels to get to it or use Locate32.  I put a copy of that same bill in Evernote & put it in the Bills notebook & don't even add any tags.  Yet I can find it in seconds (out of my 62,000+ notes) by searching on:

 

intitle:201305* Cox

 

That's why I normally use Evernote when looking for documents.  It's just that much faster/better.  The copy on the hard drive is just a form of backup in case I can't use EN for whatever reason.

[anjoschu 67]

Personally for me, I support BNF's statement that "redundancy is a good thing", but with the addition "...if it's fully automated". Read: Backup. What I mean is that I still can retrieve all my Evernote attachments from my usual computer backups (I don't need a redundant file structure to do this).

 

About the original question: The way I understand it, palmas wants to keep the files in folders (dropbox or not) and use Evernote as an index from which to reference those files. The reason (I guess) is that these files are simply too big or too volatile for Evernote. I think I have seen questions like this here before. But this will not be possible without scripting (in the Mac case, that probably means AppleScript).

 

Creating a representation of the original folder & file structure in Evernote should be possible. However, the challenge will be to keep the index and the file system structure in sync! It would be impossible to try to create a script which automatically syncs Evernote and the file system. The only way I can think about making this work is if you think about some kind of protocol/standard steps (e.g. new files go into a special "inbox" folder, files to remove get the suffix "_removethis", and so on).

 

palmas, I suggest you take a look at applescript & Evernote. You might want to search these forums and the web for terms like "applescript file url Evernote", "Evernote import folder applescript", etc.

[BurgersNFries 2,407]

If the files exceed the note size, then that's a different issue.  In the past, I have stored a file path to a large file.  Or if the file is one that can be split, I've used a file splitter.  But as a general rule, I don't see any up side to saving the file path in Evernote rather than the file itself.  I know some people with existing large hard drives may try this since it's impossible to get 120 gb into Evernote in a month or two, even if you upgrade to premium & buy as many additional gigs as possible each month.  But again, I just see this as a mess & something I would avoid like the plague. 

[palmas69 0]

About the original question: The way I understand it, palmas wants to keep the files in folders (dropbox or not) and use Evernote as an index from which to reference those files. The reason (I guess) is that these files are simply too big or too volatile for Evernote. I think I have seen questions like this here before. But this will not be possible without scripting (in the Mac case, that probably means AppleScript).

 

 

Anjoschu, it's exactly what I tried to explain in my bad english 

EN is useful if I can find all the attachments (ALL, not only 1GB/month) referring, for example, to a couple of mails about a project, without going to ten nested folder, as BnF do every day. The question is: BnF, what do you do when your attachments (Cox bill, etc.) exceed the monthly amount of storage?! You stop to put them in EN or you make a selection of what has to be synchronized and what can be archived?

Thanks to all! This post is growing up! 

[palmas69 0]

@BnF: Ops, you have just answered to my previous question, while I was typing 

[BurgersNFries 2,407]

The question is: BnF, what do you do when your attachments (Cox bill, etc.) exceed the monthly amount of storage?!

There are two limits. One is a monthly upload limit & one is a note size limit. I only use the path when the file attachment exceeds the NOTE SIZE limit. If you're simply trying to circumvent the monthly upload allowance, I would not do this & would simply add files to local/non-sync'd notebooks & move them to sync'd notebooks as my allowance allowed & by prioritizing the items I want/need in the EN cloud. Sure, it's going to take several months/years when you're talking 120 gigs, even if you upgrade to premium & buy all the additional gigs each month. But you have a workable solution. Simply storing path names is not a workable solution, IMO.