Re: Vista's Hair-Brained Search... Any Other Choices/Configurations?

On Tue, 20 Jan 2009 15:55:53 -0800, Susan <> wrote:

>Although I have learned how to make some searches for folders and file
>names successfully I find no reliability in it. I've created dummy
>folders and dummy text.txt files and been unable to apply what I
>thought I understood and find them successfully. I like the format
>concept basically now that I understand just where Search is located
>but I've got to get the reliability and trust up higher before I'll
>really feel comfortable. My test folder and file was made in
>Windows\Temp\ and the 'searching in system areas' option has been
>selected and not. And in Advanced I've tried 'everything' and 'other'
>and from that screen still not find it. But I might find in
>immediately from the original search line--and if I go to the features
>window it is missing. Very confusing.
>
>Are there any alternatives/fixes?

Hello Susan,

You should not use a folder named "Temp" for search tests because folders
by that name are never indexed, regardless of index settings. This
restriction is unrelated to the option to search system files.

The only way to use WDS to search within folders named "Temp" is to do a
non-indexed search.

Doug M. in NJ

On Tue, 20 Jan 2009 19:17:41 -0800, "Tyro" <> wrote:

>Search finds folders named Temp on my machine using the regular indexed
>search. I created a folder named temp under my user name and search found it
>no problemo.

Interesting. Let's see if we can sort this out. I'm using WDS 4 on Vista
SP1, fully patched. What are you using?

Doug M. in NJ

I use Vista Ulitmate SP1

Tyro

"Retroman" <> wrote in message
news:...
> On Tue, 20 Jan 2009 19:17:41 -0800, "Tyro" <> wrote:
>
>>Search finds folders named Temp on my machine using the regular indexed
>>search. I created a folder named temp under my user name and search found
>>it
>>no problemo.
>
> Interesting. Let's see if we can sort this out. I'm using WDS 4 on Vista
> SP1, fully patched. What are you using?
>
> Doug M. in NJ

On Wed, 21 Jan 2009 07:19:00 -0800, "Tyro" <> wrote:

>I use Vista Ulitmate SP1

I'm on Home basic, but perhaps the WDS version affects this behavior.
There were a lot of changes from WDS v. 3 to v. 4. If you don't have v.
4, I recommend it.

I just retested, and again all folders named Temp were ignored by the
indexer and by search, regardless of location. This behavior makes sense
to me, since otherwise the indexer would be constantly churning away as
temp files are created and deleted.

Other than a WDS version difference, I can't explain what you report.

Doug M. in NJ

I use Windows Search.

"Retroman" <> wrote in message
news:...
> On Wed, 21 Jan 2009 07:19:00 -0800, "Tyro" <> wrote:
>
>>I use Vista Ulitmate SP1
>
> I'm on Home basic, but perhaps the WDS version affects this behavior.
> There were a lot of changes from WDS v. 3 to v. 4. If you don't have v.
> 4, I recommend it.
>
> I just retested, and again all folders named Temp were ignored by the
> indexer and by search, regardless of location. This behavior makes sense
> to me, since otherwise the indexer would be constantly churning away as
> temp files are created and deleted.
>
> Other than a WDS version difference, I can't explain what you report.
>
> Doug M. in NJ

On Wed, 21 Jan 2009 14:12:02 -0500, Retroman <>
wrote:

>I just retested, and again all folders named Temp were ignored by the
>indexer and by search, regardless of location. This behavior makes sense
>to me, since otherwise the indexer would be constantly churning away as
>temp files are created and deleted.
>

This is non-sesnsical.If MS wants to ignore THEIR temporary folders,
that's their business, but ignoring anything named temp is just plain
stupid on their part.

But, search indexer is not needed anyway. Having it running all the
time is like take time to install roof racks on your car everyday
before going anywhere just because you need them to hold your canoe a
few times a year. You waste time installing them and you get worse
mileage every day when you drive - when you really only need them once
in long while.

Install Agent Ransack and dump the whole performance wasting,
non-intuitive Vista search system.

On Wed, 21 Jan 2009 13:46:31 -0800, Susan <> wrote:

>To everyone in this thread...
>I use Windows Search too or at least I'm trying too. I assume WDS is
>WinDows Search--but where is it?
>
>Under Programs & Features (P&F) Installed Updates I found Windows
>Search 4.0 but Search does not reveal its .exe location.

Susan,

Navigate to the \Windows\System32 folder and then enter this query:

search ext:exe

That will return the three executables for Windows Desktop Search. I
don't know why their location should matter, since "there are no
user-servicable parts inside", as they say.

>Is it a problem now that the unindexed search feature in Advanced
>Search is seemingly permanently both checked and grayed out?

Have you have disabled indexed searches in the Search tab of the Folder
Options dialog? Look for the item "Don't use the index when searching the
file system" and un check it.

Doug M. in NJ

On Wed, 21 Jan 2009 17:10:42 -0800, Susan <> wrote:

>I don't understand what you are describing above... Once I navigate
>to Windows\System32 there is no option to make any search...

The search entry window is on the upper right of Windows Explorer. It's
available for all folders. Just paste in the query that I gave you.

>What this question was partly leading to originally though was how can
>I tell, if I didn't know, what version of Windows Search I have
>installed? Where is the version number located?

Go to Control Panel|Programs & Features|Installed Updates and scroll down
the list. Look for the entry "Windows Search 4.0" (it will be near the
bottom). If you have that entry, you are up to date.

>I searched for help using Windows Search and got back 60 pieces none
>of which seemed pertinent on how to configure and use Windows Search.
>Did I miss something there?

The configuration info is buried in there, but for most people, the
supplied defaults are fine. Here are the detailed MS references for
Windows Desktop Search 4 (WDS), as well as some general tips:

http://www.microsoft.com/windows/pro.../advquery.mspx
http://www.microsoft.com/windows/pro...filetypes.mspx
http://www.microsoft.com/windows/pro...andtricks.mspx
http://windowshelp.microsoft.com/win...529ec1033.mspx
http://windowshelp.microsoft.com/Win...6426d1033.mspx
http://windowshelp.microsoft.com/Win...dc0d51033.mspx


>What is "Natural Language Search"? Would it help or only confound
>things more?

I did not find this option useful. Far better to learn the new query
syntax, as shown in the links above. Once you get the general idea of how
the syntax works, your searches will be faster and more accurate.

>I assume (I love to use that word) that by checking to Include
>Subfolders When Typing Search that you don't have to...that you can
>still make a search without typing subfolders if you don't know what
>subfolder what you are looking for are in?

Yes. Good luck!

Doug M. in NJ

On Wed, 21 Jan 2009 21:43:29 -0800, Susan <> wrote:

>Interesting... I just deactivated and stopped Windows Search service
>and turned off file indexing in C: and D: properties. Include
>non-indexed, hidden, and system files is once again checked and grayed
>out. And Modify Index Locations is not running. Search will find now
>find a file regardless of location, even in Windows\Temp or more
>importantly in Windows\System 32. I don't have to keep jumping
>through hoops to make this work now or to live with uncertain
>findings.

That is interesting - but for me, sort of like looking at the autopsy
results of someone who had a heart attack and noticing he had a wart
we could have removed.

>I'm pretty sure it will no longer search for a string
>inside a file but I've never needed or used that feature before except
>to play with it.

That would be interesting too - although there's no reason they'd need
to shut it off unless their search is just too inefficient to handle
it.

>I can live with what I've got now. Should I need
>more I'll just install Agent Ransack. Thanks.

See how it works. I greatly reduced any frustration by going to AR -
it just does the job, plain and simple, no pain.