(Archived) Storage limit for v3.0...

[equationlab 0]

What are the current storage limits imposed for the 3.0 beta version of Evernote? Furthermore, what will be the storage limits when v3.0 has completed its beta phase? Thanks.

-Rod

[iafanasyev 1]

Underlying database layer is capable of storing gigabytes of data easily. Our application layer currently works pretty good for databases having several thousands of notes and about thousand of tags. To extend these limits, we will need to address some UI scalability problems later. But generally speaking, EN3 is supposed to work much better with big databases than EN2.

[dnagy 0]

While the technical limits are high as noted by Igor above, there is an artificial limit of 100MB per account for the current beta test. We are now considering what the limits may be for the official service launch.

[vogelap 27]

Limits? LIMITS?!

My local-only ENbases (2.2.1) are limited only by the size of my storage. Now, in addition to everything else I have to think about, I need to consider how much I can store in my notebooks?!

[equationlab 0]

While the technical limits are high as noted by Igor above, there is an artificial limit of 100MB per account for the current beta test. We are now considering what the limits may be for the official service launch.

Would it possible to request additional storage space? Thanks.

-Rod

[dbcoyer 0]

Yikes! 100 Mb seems like a pretty low limit considering how you advertise Evernote to be used. All those images in notes will quickly eat through storage. I'm already at 21 mb and only have 250 notes.

[vogelap 27]

Would it possible to request additional storage space? Thanks.

I'm $ure that additional $torage will be available, $hould you de$ire it.

[crane 40]

Yeah, I can't wait to see the pricing scheme

[dylandamian 0]

I'm imagining the storage restrictions would only apply to synchronized notebooks, with local ones being only constrained by available storage (within reasonable scalability limits), right? Please confirm.

[vogelap 27]

I think the pricing stucture should be as follows:

* buy the software

I do not like/want/intend to use software that has an ongoing fee. I don't play World of Warcraft for this reason, preferring instead Guild Wars (which carries NO monthly fee -- buy the software once and you're done paying). I use Beyond TV (http://www.snapstream.com) for my PVR since it doesn't have any fees for guide data.

[crane 40]

But the whole subscription model is where the money is! I can't get over how many things are going to the subscription model (thinking here of a whole raft of Web 2.0 services). Sigh.

[jskahan 0]

Relax everyone, this is a BETA. Not only are there s/w issues to work out but also hosting.

There could be 2 options for marketing the product:

1. Hosted, you get the s/w for free and pay a small amount per month for hosting.

2. Non-hosted, you pay for the software but there is an option in the setup to use a webdav/ftp/sftp location of your choice to store sync'd notbooks.

Each one would appeal to a different group. It would only need a single version of the s/w where the custom location option is only available after registration.

Everyone would be happy. The developer makes money either way, which they do deserve to do.

[dnagy 0]

There will always be a free level of access to the Evernote 3 Web service and all Evernote client applications will be free to download for registered users. The storage limit for synchronized notebooks will probably be 1GB, but we haven't finalized that decision. We are planning premium fee-based service level(s) which, among other features, will include additional online storage.