I noticed that a document management system called My Digital Documents is on sale at Bits today. Has anyone used this before? If so, is it worth the price? Also, has anyone had any experience with other document management systems (for single computers)? I have hundreds of documents, image files, audio files, etc., etc., to keep track of, but so far, it has seemed more efficient to just use Windows Explorer.

Hi Gary, take a look at the recent thread on Paperport etc. http://www.outlinersoftware.com/topics/viewt/4698/0/paperless-paperport-14

Thanks. Interesting thread. I don't have any need to scan anything myself, so I guess using a document management system would just add a redundant layer of complexity. I try to keep my setup as minimalistic as possible and Windows Explorer, after all, IS a document management system in its own right.

Gary Carson wrote:

Windows Explorer, after all, IS a document management system in its own right.

I agree. What I would find useful in this regard is a lightweight Explorer replacement providing fast Boolean search of document contents and preview of just about any kind of document.

Give consideration to the Advanced Query Syntax and the viewer in Explorer...or Powershell with regex for the seriously geeky.....

http://www.howtogeek.com/73065/learn-the-advanced-search-operators-in-windows-7/
http://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/library/aa965711(v=VS.85).aspx

Windows 8 exposes more of it in the search ribbon-

http://www.tomsitpro.com/articles/windows_8_search-indexing_files-windows_explorer_ribbon-advanced_query_syntax,2-228.html

Gary, I don't if this would be helpful or not, but I have recently decided to shift my pdf file management from Mendeley to qiqqa - both are free programs.
http://www.qiqqa.com/ (qiqqa is pronounced quicka)

The free version of qiqqa only handles pdf files, but I believe the paid version handles other document types. Paid version is $3.99 per month. If one pays for 12 months, there are 3 free months.

Both versions allow for on-line storage - 200 meg with the free version; 8,000 meg with the paid version.

qiqqa features include tagging, annotations, highlighting in different colours (rather than just the usual yellow), tapping into different libraries for references, etc. Essentially it is meant for academics, writers, researchers.

However, if you have a mess of documents you want to restore order to, documents you want fully indexed for fast searching, etc. qiqqa may be a solution.

It has a built in browswer.

While I understand you may not have need of some of qiqqa's features, it may, nonetheless, be helpful with organizing documents.

Daly



Gary Carson wrote:

I noticed that a document management system called My Digital Documents
is on sale at Bits today. Has anyone used this before? If so, is it
worth the price? Also, has anyone had any experience with other document
management systems (for single computers)? I have hundreds of documents,
image files, audio files, etc., etc., to keep track of, but so far, it
has seemed more efficient to just use Windows Explorer.

Gary Carson, Jan 26, 2013 at 03:36 PM: I noticed that a document management system called My Digital Documents is on sale at Bits today. Has anyone used this before? If so, is it worth the price? Also, has anyone had any experience with other document management systems (for single computers)? I have hundreds of documents, image files, audio files, etc., etc., to keep track of, but so far, it has seemed more efficient to just use Windows Explorer.
_________________________________________
Alexander Deliyannis, Jan 26, 2013 at 03:41 PM: Hi Gary, take a look at the recent thread on Paperport etc. http://www.outlinersoftware.com/topics/viewt/4698/0/paperless-paperport-14
_________________________________________
Posted by Gary Carson, Jan 26, 2013 at 06:20 PM: Thanks. Interesting thread. I don’t have any need to scan anything myself, so I guess using a document management system would just add a redundant layer of complexity. I try to keep my setup as minimalistic as possible and Windows Explorer, after all, IS a document management system in its own right.
_________________________________________
Posted by Alexander Deliyannis, Jan 26, 2013 at 07:23 PM:
Gary Carson wrote:

Windows Explorer, after all, IS a document management system in its own right.

I agree. What I would find useful in this regard is a lightweight Explorer replacement providing fast Boolean search of document contents and preview of just about any kind of document.
_________________________________________

I suspect that what might be needed is a definition of a DMS ("Document Management System").
Having had the experience of developing, installing and using DMSes (for myself and my clients) over the years, one thing in particular stands out: the general need to establish requirements - e.g. what the user requiring DMS functionality actually means when they say they want a DMS, or something like that.

The criteria that you might expect to list - i.e., the things that a DMS functional definition would need to meet - is typically likely to be largely based on perceived needs, which may often be derived mainly from experience.
If your experience is of the Windows OS' logical hierarchical filing system (e.g., consisting of nested folders on a disk drive), then you could argue that "Windows Explorer, after all, IS a document management system in its own right", and you would arguably be right in a circular fashion, as it would be so, according to your experience/perception and implicit/assumed definition of a DMS. So Windows Explorer would be a good DMS tool, and (say) xplorer² might be even better (I use it anyway, because I find it far better suited to my peculiar needs).

If you get users like this involved in trialling a DMS such as, for example, Microsoft's SharePoint (A DMS and a document development and collaboration system), the experience can sometimes "blow their minds" as they start to realise new concepts of what is possible - lots of things that they never new existed and that are tremendously useful - things they never really knew they needed until now.
What has happened is that these become newly-discovered requirements which really make a distinction between a tool for working on a purely "administrative" DMS structure and a tool for working on an arguably much more useful thing - a basis for KM (Knowledge Management).

So regardless of what you might define as a DMS, here's a suggested definition of :
KM - Definition of Knowledge Management.tif
http://docs.google.com/file/d/0B9rIby-RfgLNWEJzZXk4R2VGSnM/edit

Not forgetting something I referred to in a separate thread on this forum:
Documentation Standards and Methods: Repository documentation - File naming meta data standards and methods.
http://docs.google.com/document/d/1YtT6JaN0sOsCTbBd6UBE-1OPQSleBCbGkB8X0i-FKDg/edit

If you establish a definition for KM that works for your needs, then the requirements for a supporting DMS are much easier to identify - they are (say) all the administrative and collaborative tools/functions that you might need to support YOUR KM definition and the building of YOUR Knowledge Base.
You won't need to ask, for example, "Has anyone tried out My Digital Documents?", you will be able to go to the website and see how its functionality stacks up against your defined requirements (which presumably don't include document scanning at present). You could do the same for Paperport and any other DMSes that might be mentioned in that thread. You'd be in control, armed with a clearcut requirements definition.

Gary,
I don't know if this helps but I use the free version of Copernic Desktop Search and the Sleuthhound, which I paid less than $20 for, to locate files and documents on my hard drive. Both index every word in a saved document. Both work like a Google search and show a list of hits to your search criteria, showing the filename, path to the document and a sentence or two of the document will be shown. All you have to do is click on it to open the file/document. The reason I use both is that Copernic includes PDF documents.
~ Richard

Slartibartfarst wrote:

If your experience is of the Windows OS' logical hierarchical filing
system (e.g., consisting of nested folders on a disk drive), then you
could argue that "Windows Explorer, after all, IS a document management
system in its own right", and you would arguably be right in a circular
fashion, as it would be so, according to your experience/perception and
implicit/assumed definition of a DMS. So Windows Explorer would be a
good DMS tool, and (say) xplorer² might be even better (I use it
anyway, because I find it far better suited to my peculiar needs).

If you get users like this involved in trialling a DMS such as, for
example, Microsoft's SharePoint (A DMS and a document development and
collaboration system), the experience can sometimes "blow their minds"
as they start to realise new concepts of what is possible - lots of
things that they never new existed and that are tremendously useful -
things they never really knew they needed until now.
What has happened is that these become newly-discovered requirements
which really make a distinction between a tool for working on a purely
"administrative" DMS structure and a tool for working on an arguably
much more useful thing - a basis for KM (Knowledge Management).

Good points!

I also thought that file and folder explorers are a different category from document management software. Probably a lot depends on the volume of existing and incoming documents one needs to manage, and the frequency of having to recall them, which will call for specific solutions.

But re file/folder explorers, I think it's definitely a category where if you try a Win Explorer replacement, you'll have few reasons to return to Win Explorer, even with the free versions, such as Explorer2 lite.

I'm a very basic user of Directory Opus (just scratching the surface) but since I've tried it I couldn't live without (mostly for reasons of time-saving):
- opening pre-set number of folders (in tabs) simultaneously, when Dopus launches;
- switching on vertical dual-panes with one click, whenever needed;
- having key folders colour-coded (creating a bread-crumb trail to destination folders);
- ability to resit my pre-set default view and location with one click, when things get messy.
- a preview pane that can view pretty much any files out there.

As you said, I didn't know these features even existed until I tried my first Win Explorer replacement - which is why it's worth to keep on CRIMPing...

I will agree that my use of the term Document Management _System_ for Windows Explorer is a bit far fetched. It is first and foremost a File (including Documents) Management _Tool_.

A System implies that there is some method/procedure/framework, as shown by Slartibartfarst in respect to Knowledge Management. Though Windows Explorer has not much to offer in terms of facilitating such work, I maintain that there is some kind of underlying framework, as witnessed by specific conventions:

- Folder tree
- Default user directories
- Shared folders
- Network sharing
- File associations
- Versioning
- One document - one file
- Files can only be in one folder at a time
...

All of the above are conventions which facilitate document organisation, development, collaboration and distribution. We take them for granted, but they are not; in the thread on Paperport, a tool is mentioned which puts all documents in one big bucket and organises them via tags. There are tools like Scrivener and PageFour which take care of the file infrastructure, while the user works with 'books', 'projects' and 'chapters'. There are other tools which store multiple documents in database files, etc.

In short, one can build a Document Management System using Windows Explorer as the Document Management Tool, and standard Windows conventions as the framework to implement specific procedures. There may be more advanced tools, better suited for particular work; the advantage of Windows Explorer is that it's already there, wherever you may find yourself.

Now that you guys have brought it up, I've got to admit that I'm not sure why I need an "document management system." I'm not even sure what that is.

I don't work with PDFs very much and I have no need to scan documents. All I really need to do is keep the documents and other files that I create organized so that I can find them again. But really that's just a matter of exercising some discipline, isn't it? This is something you have to do even if you're using an actual document management system.

The one thing that I'm doing now that I wasn't doing several years ago is storing files that I need to keep long-term in OneNote. That's my long-term archive. I just use Windows Explorer to organize everything else and every now and then I'll do a backup to an external hard disk which I keep in my safety deposit box at the bank.

I don't really trust online storage services. It's a privacy/security thing, mostly, and I want to keep control of my own files.

Gary, you more or less outlined my own thinking about this.

I use PaperPort as a scanner front end and do look regularly at document management software, but they all require a lot of discipline to make them useful, reading in documents and tagging them, and they are all really overpriced. I can't see anything much in a product like My Digital Documents that I can't do in, for example, TreeProjects. That said, the same discipline is required to use that program too, and it creates files that (on my system) are too large to exchange with other computers via Dropbox/Skydrive/Google Drive etc.

With OneNote, because it creates file per section, that's no problem, and synchronising across a network is a doddle. So I, like you, put documents into OneNote for archiving (when I remember to ...). Tagging is not done optimally in OneNote, so you have to think of some very clever tags to make it useful, so I may end up trying alternative tagging programs as well.

Graham

When you say you put files in OneNote, do you mean actually embed them, i.e. import them _into_ OneNote notebooks?

And are you talking about different kinds of files (which themselves alone can be really big), including Word documents, images and PDFs?

In short, I'm trying to understand why would anyone want to put files into files for archiving purposes (if this is what we are talking about here) unless it would be some kind of .zip archive.

P.S. Copernic Desktop Search will be on sale at Bits du Jour this week http://www.bitsdujour.com/software/copernic-desktop-search-professional-2

Posted by Daly de Gagne, Jan 26, 2013 at 10:59 PM:
...The free version of qiqqa only handles pdf files, but I believe the paid version handles other document types.
_______________________________
As a KM (Knowledge Management) tool, Qiqqa (which is an academic Reference Management system) is a superb product. I use it a lot, and have only so far needed to use the FREE version.
There are 3 "editions" (versions): (http://www.qiqqa.com/About/Editions
1. FREE - uses a local (client-based) library.
2. Premium - a PAID version (uses a local and a "cloud-based" library ).
3. Premium Plus - a PAID version (uses a local and a "cloud-based" library ).

By the way, there is a useful comparison between Qiqqa, EndNote Zotero and Mendelay here: http://www.qiqqa.com/About/Compare

The FREE and PAID versions of Qiqqa currently seem to be focussed on only PDF format files, but the Premium Plus version can convert Word documents to PDF.
The "cloud-based" library and collaboration features are a major difference between the FREE and PAID versions.

There is another system worth relevant mention here, and that I use a lot for multiple document formats - including PDFs - the FREE Calibre e-Book (Personal Library/Document) Management system copes better than most (including PDF, Word and various eBook formats) - see Mini-Review here: https://www.donationcoder.com/forum/index.php?topic=29691.msg275706#msg275706

You can use Qiqqa and Calibre to augment KM, because, though they overlap in some ways, they are different creatures and complement each other. For example, they both help me to achieve the objective of improved KM on my client devices (usually laptops).
Qiqqa's highly accurate OCR scanning features of imaged PDF files are especially useful. Many PDFs are essentially a collection of images of text (documents), so the text is effectively locked away because no program can search their text, or allow you to copy and paste - unless you first use OCR - e.g., Qiqqa's powerful built-in OCR. You can then perform fast full-text searches, copy text, get automatic abstracts, keyword extraction, and so on, on the OCRed documents in the Qiqqa library.

Qiqqa does not lock you in, and enables you to copy your entire library to a combined BibTeX file for import elsewhere. All your PDFs are included with smart links in an html page, so you can easily access them by tag, author, and title, even without Qiqqa.
You can also backup all your Qiqqa work at any time for any reason to a zip file.
Refer: http://www.qiqqa.com/About/Features (Export)

Calibre is great as a document library management tool - it can also strip DRM (Digital Rights Management) locks from proprietary formatted ebooks, and save them in different (Open) formats. This restores freedom of control and use to you as the document owner, and enables you to read documents on different ebook reading devices/software. (No more lock-in.)

Alexander Deliyannis wrote:

When you say you put files in OneNote, do you mean actually embed them,
i.e. import them _into_ OneNote notebooks?

And are you talking about different kinds of files (which themselves
alone can be really big), including Word documents, images and PDFs?

It depends how one defines "archive", right? Data files which I'm not likely to need again get zipped and backed up on external media. But I have a load of customers who contact me with "We met and discussed x in 1998. Remember?". Er, no. Or "what work did you do for my predecessor in 2002". Because I have around 130000 document files scattered over my PC I need to put some of them in a place where they can be easily found, previewed and tagged, so that I can get answers to questions like that. So I both link and read any type of file (particularly Office, image and pdf files) into OneNote because that allows me to find the file and to view the file without opening it (as it is "printed" onto a OneNote page), and it allows me to seamlessly sync (properly sync, not use the same file as...) between PCs.

Disk space is not at a premium, so reading a file into a file doesn't seem as illogical to me (that's what all these document management programs are doing, plus TreeProjects, UltraRecall etc. etc.). I admit, this is not the ideal way to work - I have a very disciplined and logical brain but a very ill disciplined and illogical workspace. No wonder I need this forum!

Graham

Having looked into DMS to manage our fairly sophisticated requirements, I heartily concur that you have to define exactly what you want if you're going to get any value out of a full-scale DMS. There are many purported DMS around, and many of them are vastly overpriced and decidedly underwhelming in actual practice.

We never did find the perfect system. But we have come up with some working procedures that have effectively made a DMS redundant.

First, we have a very controlled file system. It's not complicated, but all client-related work is stored on a central network server (based on Linux, as a matter of fact), organised by: client, then under each client, project, then under each project, draft documents in separate folders, labelled alphabetically. So our central server structure looks like:

[top level]
/ Client A
/ Client B
/ Client C /
[second level, under e.g. Client C]
// Correspondence
// Project A
// Project B
// Project C /
[third level, under e.g. Project C]
/// a - source docs /
/// b - external drafts /
/// c - internal drafts /
/// d - out to client /
/// e - feedback from client /
/// f - external response /
/// g - internal drafts 2
/// h - out to client 2 etc. etc. etc.

We've been using this system for ca. 20 years, and it works very well. Especially when combined with a powerful search engine.

We've used various search engines over the years - Windows' own, then a version of Lucene supplied by IBM. But most recently, we've started working with Soonr.com, which means our current working directories can be hosted on multiple PCs, where they are kept synchronised (very efficiently - soonr has the best sync engine I've ever encountered, with the possible exception of Dropbox). This also provides a kind of redundancy that acts as a backup.

Stuff that's more than 6 months old is offloaded to the central server, where it can still be searched (using Lucene).

This in turn means we can use Copernic Desktop Search Pro on individual workstations, so stuff that's more or less current can be searched at high speed, with full document preview and highlighted search hits, and instant navigation from hit to hit. After much experimentation and dallying with other search engines, I've reluctantly concluded that Copernic Desktop Search is the best of the lot - first, because of its flexibility, second, because of its preview and highlighting, third, because of its speed.

Reluctantly, because its support for 'exotic' characters (e.g. Arabic, Russian, Chinese) is occasionally iffy.

This simple solution is very low-cost compared to the vast prices charged by enterprise DMS providers. It also pretty much obviates the need for tagging, because Copernic is so quick and convenient, and also because it supports Boolean searches (including date-bounded, subfolders etc.). I have major reservations about tagging in any case (the much-explored 'what you know you've got' vs. 'what you don't know you've got' issue).

Soonr has a reasonably good built-in search engine, which works well on the web and in its iOS client. The latter also has document editors which do a reasonable job on e.g. MS Office files.

But I like the idea of 'printing' documents to OneNote, especially the portability aspect. That's definitely worth exploring, especially in view of the very good OneNote clients now available on other platforms (notably Outline+ on iOS).

We take a similar approach to e-mail, archiving everything in our various e-mail accounts to the outstanding MailStore (http://www.mailstore.com/ The latter is available as a standalone - desktop - program that's free of charge; but the price for the server is extremely modest. I cannot speak highly enough of MailStore - it's utterly reliable, archives e-mail fast and efficiently, and has a great built-in search engine (with support for 'smart search' folders).

This remarkably simple system means we can generally isolate specific documents relating to specific projects from specific clients for any time over the past 10 years or so (or even further back, in fact), which in turn means that we are often able to help our clients who've lost copies of their own documentation (despite their complex in-house enterprise DMS!). All part of offering a value-added service!

MadaboutDana wrote:

Copernic Desktop Search is the best of the lot - first, because of its
flexibility, second, because of its preview and highlighting, third,
because of its speed.

Copernic Home version does occasionally surprise me with not finding files that I know I do have. I do like it overall but due to these blind spots (for which I don't know the reasons for) I find it necessary to complement it with Everything Search. It's nice that both are free though, and between the two of them I seem to find everything I need.

Posted by Richard06118, Jan 27, 2013 at 04:45 AM:
...I use the free version of Copernic Desktop Search and the Sleuthhound
______________________________
Posted by Dr Andus, Jan 27, 2013 at 11:47 AM:
I also thought that file and folder explorers are a different category from document management software. Probably a lot depends on the volume of existing and incoming documents one needs to manage, and the frequency of having to recall them, which will call for specific solutions.
But re file/folder explorers, I think it's definitely a category where if you try a Win Explorer replacement, you'll have few reasons to return to Win Explorer, even with the free versions, such as Explorer2 lite.I'm a very basic user of Directory Opus (just scratching the surface) but since I've tried it I couldn't live without (mostly for reasons of time-saving):
- opening pre-set number of folders (in tabs) simultaneously, when Dopus launches;
- switching on vertical dual-panes with one click, whenever needed;
- having key folders colour-coded (creating a bread-crumb trail to destination folders);
- ability to resit my pre-set default view and location with one click, when things get messy.
- a preview pane that can view pretty much any files out there.
As you said, I didn't know these features even existed until I tried my first Win Explorer replacement - which is why it's worth to keep on CRIMPing.
______________________________
Posted by Alexander Deliyannis, Jan 27, 2013 at 03:38 PM:
I will agree that my use of the term Document Management _System_ for Windows Explorer is a bit far fetched. It is first and foremost a File (including Documents) Management _Tool_.
A System implies that there is some method/procedure/framework, as shown by Slartibartfarst in respect to Knowledge Management. Though Windows Explorer has not much to offer in terms of facilitating such work, I maintain that there is some kind of underlying framework, as witnessed by specific conventions:
- Folder tree
- Default user directories
- Shared folders
- Network sharing
- File associations
- Versioning
- One document - one file
- Files can only be in one folder at a time\
...
All of the above are conventions which facilitate document organisation, development, collaboration and distribution. We take them for granted, but they are not; in the thread on Paperport, a tool is mentioned which puts all documents in one big bucket and organises them via tags. There are tools like Scrivener and PageFour which take care of the file infrastructure, while the user works with "books', "projects' and "chapters'. There are other tools which store multiple documents in database files, etc.

In short, one can build a Document Management System using Windows Explorer as the Document Management Tool, and standard Windows conventions as the framework to implement specific procedures. There may be more advanced tools, better suited for particular work; the advantage of Windows Explorer is that it's already there, wherever you may find yourself.
______________________________
Posted by Graham Rhind, Jan 28, 2013 at 08:18 AM:
Alexander Deliyannis wrote:

When you say you put files in OneNote, do you mean actually embed them, i.e. import them _into_ OneNote notebooks?
And are you talking about different kinds of files (which themselves alone can be really big), including Word documents, images and PDFs?

It depends how one defines "archive", right? Data files which I'm not likely to need again get zipped and backed up on external media. But I have a load of customers who contact me with "We met and discussed x in 1998. Remember?". Er, no. Or "what work did you do for my predecessor in 2002". Because I have around 130000 document files scattered over my PC I need to put some of them in a place where they can be easily found, previewed and tagged, so that I can get answers to questions like that. So I both link and read any type of file (particularly Office, image and pdf files) into OneNote because that allows me to find the file and to view the file without opening it (as it is "printed" onto a OneNote page), and it allows me to seamlessly sync (properly sync, not use the same file as) between PCs.

Disk space is not at a premium, so reading a file into a file doesn't seem as illogical to me (that's what all these document management programs are doing, plus TreeProjects, UltraRecall etc. etc.). I admit, this is not the ideal way to work - I have a very disciplined and logical brain but a very ill disciplined and illogical workspace. No wonder I need this forum!

Graham
______________________________
--------------------------------------------------

COMMENTS:
The above and other comments in this discussion thread generally go to illustrate that the de facto Windows file structure can be said to provide a viable and logical DMS (Document Management System) framework - for example, as outlined by @Alexander Deliyannis.
The opening post seemed to indicate that @Gary Carson was interested in a DMS which somehow operated at some kind of (presumably higher) other level - different to the otherwise adequate Windows File System.
I tried to make the point that one's definition (and criteria for) a DMS would largely be dependent on how one wanted to use the Knowledge incorporated in the documents, and I suggested a definition for KM Knowledge Management. The implication was that if you had such a definition for KM, then your criteria/requirements for a supporting DMS would be more easily identifiable.

@Alexander Deliyannis is arguably spot-on about the existing Windows File System and Windows Explorer. I have also long treated the OS and file management system as a DMS. The frustration for me has been that the OS was never really designed as a DMS but as an OS and associated file management system, so it has shortcomings as far as my peculiar needs go. However, there are various features and functions in the current incarnation of Windows 7 and NTFS that give it much more exciting potential as a DMS. For example (and building on @Alexander Deliyannis' list):
- A hierarchically rigid folder Tree - each branch is unique and cannot be connected back to the tree at any other point than the origin.
- Built-in visible system default user directories/folders in the Tree.
- Built-in invisible system default user directories in the Tree.
- The ability to add folders to the Tree at almost any point.
- The ability to nest directories.
- The ability to Share directories with other users in the LAN/WAN.
- The ability to set File Associations to single programs that will automatically open/operate on those files.
- Versioning (not sure about how to control this)
- One documentone file principle.
- The ability to attach metadata, tags, etc. to a file via NTFS alternate data streams (e.g., using the Comments and a hundred or so other fields). However, this to some extent arguably breaches the One documentone file principle.
- A single unique copy of a File can only exist in one logical folder at a time.
- Logical views of files and folders to create logical flat file "Libraries" that cut across many folders - Microsoft seems to have kludged the reparse point or "junction" concept to enable this.
- There are built-in standard system Libraries.
- The ability to create new user Libraries.
- The ability to create logical reparse point or Junction folders, so that files can seem to be (have the illusion of) existing in more than one logical folder at a time (changing a file changes the file across all views).
- Windows 7 Index/Search:
(a) The OS' built-in file index/search feature (Search via the Start menu or via Windows Explorer) enables instant full text searching across *all* the file/document types and their metadata, and all the directories that are default and/or that you have additionally defined for the index/search system to operate upon.

(b) The OS' index/search can include *any text* in single and multi-page .TIF/.TIFF files (which text is automatically OCRed by the index/search feature, if you tell it to do that) and in OneNote Notebooks (databases), but it *excludes* the text in documents embedded as whole files saved within OneNote Notebooks.

(c) The OS' index/search can include all text in OneNote Notebooks - that includes all text, and any text in any images in OneNote Notebooks (OneNote automatically OCRs any text in images saved in Notebooks, if you enable that facility).

(d) The OS' index/search can include *Searching for information in audio notes in OneNote*, which includes various audio file types with speeches, songs, and dictation - refer https://www.donationcoder.com/forum/index.php?topic=31755.msg302855#msg302855
____________________________

CONCLUSIONS:
1. The inbuilt Windows 7 File System, Libraries and Windows Explorer generally seem to provide an adequate and very good DMS with powerful file index/search/find and retrieval functionality. You can build on this with additional search utilities - e.g., Locate32, Copernic, .Everything, etc.
2. Using Microsoft OneNote as a standalone tool - which is integrated with the OS - has the potential to realise some very useful extended DMS and PIM (Personal Information Management) functionality.
3. Using a Windows Explorer replacement (e.g., such as xplorer², which I use) can further extend the DMS and PIM functionality (QED) - e.g., search functionality, flat files, scrap panes, bundle-to-go NTFS files and extended data streams, bulk edit/update of files' metadata (esp. Comment fields), mass duplicate check/removal, mass folder/tree file comparison.
4. Given the above, and if your database is a client device (desktop PC or laptop) with minimal need for cloud-based storage or collaboration capabilities, then you might *not* need a separate/new DMS.
5. You could gain some very useful DMS functionality by incorporating Reference Management (e.g., Qiqqa) and Library Management (e.g., Calibre) functionality into your solution set. This might carry an overhead/disadvantage of duplication of data.
____________________________

CONSTRAINTS:
1. The 255 character path length max limit seems to still be a limitation in the OS under certain circumstances.
___________________________
2. Using reparse point or Junction folder is risky for the uninitiated. The user could inadvertently/unintentionally wipe out their data, as anything you do to change (e.g., edit or delete) a file actually changes the real file, not some kind of image or copy.
____________________________
3. Reparse points do not exist in entirely happy union with the OS - e.g., backup:
Microsoft support note (KB973455) - http://support.microsoft.com/kb/973455/en-us
"By design, Windows Backup does not traverse reparse points on a computer. However, if a reparse point is directly added to a Windows 7 Library, or if any of the child nodes of a reparse point is directly added to a Windows 7 Library, Windows Backup traverses these locations. This could cause several issues during the backup process."
____________________________
4. You can share Libraries across LAN/WAN, but may encounter difficulty in handling or sharing reparse points/Junction folders.
**Recommended reading re the latter: XXCOPY TECHNICAL BULLETIN #050 - http://www.xxcopy.com/xxtb_050.htm
____________________________
5. The OS' index/search capability can apparently include .ZIP files and contents, but does not always work on them for some inexplicable reason.
____________________________

Gary Carson wrote:

Now that you guys have brought it up, I've got to admit that I'm not
sure why I need an "document management system." I'm not even sure what
that is.

I don't work with PDFs very much and I have no need to scan documents.
All I really need to do is keep the documents and other files that I
create organized so that I can find them again. But really that's just a
matter of exercising some discipline, isn't it? This is something you
have to do even if you're using an actual document management system.

The one thing that I'm doing now that I wasn't doing several years ago
is storing files that I need to keep long-term in OneNote. That's my
long-term archive. I just use Windows Explorer to organize everything
else and every now and then I'll do a backup to an external hard disk
which I keep in my safety deposit box at the bank.

I don't really trust online storage services. It's a privacy/security
thing, mostly, and I want to keep control of my own files.

For personal or limited pdf usage, one reason you use DMS is because it's a form of isolater.

Sometimes folders can work if you just need a separator but other times you need to isolate your work into something that if put on a folder, simply does not function as well. Take index cards if you are not using a software like SuperNoteCard.

Another reason to do this is to have a "profile" of what goes into which usb drive.

Finally you can simply treat it like a to-do list/outliner "with an attachment" because many lightweight or simpler software still don't do this.

Any type of Management System can be basically honed down to one crucial issue:

What do you define as storage and what do you use to "hoist" documents in that storage?

Google Docs for example is a DMS disguised as an "online word processor".

...however it's tough to form that picture if you do not pay attention to the fact that you can hoist it as a collaboration software, as a real time novel writing viewer or as a shareable public webpage that is essentially a better blogging interface on a poorer same themed all white no ads no plugins static webpage.

For reference, I add here a link to Paperless, a simple and modestly priced (compared to other offerings) DMS for Windows and Mac https://www.marinersoftware.com/products/paperless-win/

Among things I found interesting is that it's in partnership with Fujitsu on the ScanSnap range of printers. This means that you may already own a copy of it if you have a Scansnap.

This is not an endorsement in any way, in fact as I've implied previously, it's rather unlikely that I would feel the need for a DMS of this kind.

Sohodox (http://www.sohodox.com/ hasn't been mentioned yet on this forum. It looks like they've been around for a while, and looking at their video, the software seems decent.

It's 55% off today on Bits:
http://www.bitsdujour.com/software/sohodox

here is one for you, check out document management tutorial:
http://www.rasteredge.com/how-to/vb-net-imaging/tutorial-doc-manage/