Forum Posts Feed
EML versus PST in e-mail programs
< Next Topic | Back to topic list | Previous Topic >
Posted by JBfrom
Aug 4, 2011 at 08:17 PM
The email problem can be vexatious.
My method:
1. Forward all boxes to one central gmail account. Gmail’s speed, search, readability, space and hotkey navigation is unparalleled.
2. Scan emails as they come in for urgent tasks and star them if necessary for later action.
3. Batch process starred emails.
4. Extract text I will use again, then archive the email without using folders, categories or tags.
5. If I unexpectedly need to find something I didn’t extract, just use Gmail’s search.
Every other way I tried was an unwieldy disaster.
Posted by Ken
Aug 5, 2011 at 03:49 AM
JBfrom wrote:
>1. Forward all boxes to one central
>gmail account. Gmail’s speed, search, readability, space and hotkey navigation is
>unparalleled.
While I do rely on Gmail, and I do find it somewhat speedy, I take some exception to the belief that its search is unparalleled. Unless things have changed, Google did not allow partial word searches in Gmail, and this is a huge problem for me. If you do not remember the exact phrase, or the exact spelling of a word or name, you are out of luck. I found this a bit unusual from the people who made a name on searches, but I guess that is how they keep their searches speedy.
—Ken
Posted by JBfrom
Aug 5, 2011 at 05:45 AM
That’s a good point Ken, I just realized that’s been annoying me although I didn’t realize exactly what the problem was.
http://mail.google.com/support/bin/answer.py?answer=7190
http://mail.google.com/support/bin/answer.py?answer=6593
It does have boolean logic.
Looks like this is the solution:
http://techcrunch.com/2011/04/15/greplins-chrome-extension-now-makes-gmail-search-infinitely-better/
You can also use Google Desktop Search.
Posted by Jack Crawford
Aug 5, 2011 at 10:30 AM
Graham
Like you, I still need to be able to access large PST email archives.
The only difference from your setup seems to be that I store mine on an external USB drive. Access times can be demonstrably slower (especially when the drive is idle) but disk space is only limited by the size of the drive.
It’s a question of trade-off I suppose. My system works for me.
Jack
Posted by Steve
Aug 5, 2011 at 11:08 AM
>Stephen’s mention of Intellect I’ve started testing it again (I used to be an avid Time
>and Chaos user many years ago). I see that some of the irritants that used to bug me then
>are still in there (e.g. creation of all recurring tasks at one time rather than when
>previous occurrence is done, also meaning that all recurring tasks have to have an end
>date; no undated tasks allowed etc.). But one if its greatest features is the ability
>to run on a USB stick, which could be a great boon.
Graham, you hit on one example of an “issue” that has lead me to use a unique feature of Intellect - the task “series.” There are appointment “series,” e-mail “series,” etc. Check those out.
Now, that said there are irritants within Intellect for me also. All PIM’s have them. There are just fewer here then in others….. or better yet the pluses of Intellect outway the minuses for me.
As for recurring tasks, I do miss Above and Beyond’s handling of them. I miss the way I could track my time spent on work.
>- does using thousands of separate .eml files (one for each
>e-mail) make a program using them faster or slower than a program (i.e. Outlook) using
>a single (large) .pst file?
>- what are the security implications of using .eml files?
>I.e. I imagine that if my computer was hacked into people could open the .pst file or the
>.eml files to read their contents, but my gut feeling is that the .pst file is better
>protected. Is that a correct assumption?
I can tell you that having thousands of eml files spread amoung numerous subdirectories does not slow Intellect down.
I can’t tell you much about security. My guess and assumption is it would not matter - neither are encrypted.
Steve