Windows explorer 7 search

[Gene E. Bloch]

Unless the location on the disk been changed, it is always at the same place.

Sponsored by the department of tautology...

 

[Jeff Layman]

Sponsored by the department of tautology...

Well I suppose it is a bit clearer if the words "on the disk by default"
are added at the end.

"Eschew obfuscation, espouse elucidation", eh? ;-)

 

[Gene E. Bloch]

Well I suppose it is a bit clearer if the words "on the disk by default" are
added at the end.

"Eschew obfuscation, espouse elucidation", eh? ;-)

I meant that what you said amounts to:
"Unless it has moved it hasn't moved"

See
http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/tautology?x=6&y=6

....especially paragraph 3.

 

[Ken Blake]

If you decide to try the third-party program route, I would suggest
taking a look at Agent Ransack, AKA FileLocator Lite. It’s free for both
personal and commercial use.

Agent Ransack is a good program, and I too used it successfully for
many years. But Everything, which Monty recommended, is even better.
I've been using that instead for the last few months.

 

[Dave \Crash\ Dummy]

Agent Ransack is a good program, and I too used it successfully for
many years. But Everything, which Monty recommended, is even better.
I've been using that instead for the last few months.

Will Everything search files for content? One of the things I like about
Agent Ransack is the ability to search for files containing a particular
word or string.

 

[Nil]

Will Everything search files for content? One of the things I like
about Agent Ransack is the ability to search for files containing
a particular word or string.

'Everything' doesn't appear to be able to search file contents.

It is real fast, but it's not as flexible as Agent Ransack. I'll keep
them both around for a while.

 

[Jeff Layman]

It's a little over the top with the Chicken Little.

http://www.simplecarver.com/tool.php?toolname=Windows Search Index Extractor

http://www.edbsearch.com/
(In particular, have a look at the final paragraph at:
http://www.edbsearch.com/forensics.html

 

[Gene E. Bloch]

http://www.edbsearch.com/
(In particular, have a look at the final paragraph at:
http://www.edbsearch.com/forensics.html

Very convenient, but if I had the required access to your computer, I
could use other methods, such as Agent Ransack, just as easily.

BTW, I don't plan to do that

 

[Char Jackson]

IME, I almost never needed to search the content of files.

Then you're a perfect candidate for the Everything search tool.
<http://www.voidtools.com/>

Your search will be complete within a few milliseconds of your fingers
hitting the keyboard and there's no need to learn any wildcards. Just
type any part of a filename, with or without its extension.

 

[KCB]

Firstly, it indexes contents as well as file names. That
makes it a security risk.

It appears that you favor protecting the user from him or herself by not
letting them search the content of their own files. If you really want to
do that to yourself, simply disable content indexing.

Secondly, even if you turn off the indexing (and just use it like XP's
search), it is pretty slow. I just asked it to search for *.doc in C:\.
It took 45 seconds before anything appeared on the screen, and then
about a dozen files appeared (why? Why not list files as it finds them).
It stopped after 145 seconds, having found 90 files.
[snip]
So why the difference? The W7 search found dozens of files called
HPAdvisor.MainFrame.Windows.DockViewWindow.User.Marketing.dock.
In other words, it found *.dock files as well as *.doc files. But it
failed to include any *.doc files in the recycle bin. Those are, of
course, still available for use if they are restored.

Unfortunately, this comparison is worthless because you (and the other
respondents in this thread) have not learned the basics of using Windows
Search 4. The query syntax has changed. The correct query to find files
with a given extension is to use the ext property, like this:

ext:doc

That searches *only* file extensions, not file names or contents. It is
fast, accurate, and does indeed include items in the recycle bin. The
query that you used searches all strings, including content and file
names, which of course is much slower and returns many unwanted results.

Using a property query on a file extension, my Vista PC took only 45
seconds to complete a search of all locations on C drive, including system
files. Excluding system files shortened the time to 20 seconds.

Wild card searches are rarely needed now and I almost never use them. You
can learn about the new query syntax here:

http://www.microsoft.com/windows/products/winfamily/desktopsearch/technicalresources/advquery.mspx

Doug M. in NJ

Is Search 4.0 part of Windows 7? AFAIK, previous Windows versions could
only get it by downloading from Windows Update.

 

[Char Jackson]

'Everything' doesn't appear to be able to search file contents.

Correct, it does not. Fortunately, that's not a feature I desire, but
you might.

It is real fast, but it's not as flexible as Agent Ransack. I'll keep
them both around for a while.

I use Everything multiple times a day and can't imagine being without
it. Actually, I can imagine it, but it wouldn't be much fun.

Everything also doesn't search network shares, but you can work around
that by installing Everything on those hosts and then using a web
browser to search them.

 

[Stan Brown]

[quoted text muted]

You are not doing anything wrong. W7 search really stinks.

The only wrong thing he's doing, is NOT using the Search box!
Windows 7 search works perfectly OK and well here....

Not really. Firstly, it indexes contents as well as file names. That
makes it a security risk.

How, pray tell, is indexing contents a security risk?

(And even if it were, you can turn that part off.)

 

[Stan Brown]

No, the problem is the database which is created. I can't remember the
webpage link now, as it was about 18 months ago I looked at it, but it
referred to the availability of programs to extract information from the
database file produced by indexing. The problem is that anyone with
access to an open computer could simply copy the database to a memory
stick, and extract the info at their leisure.

Don't be sillier than you can help. Anyone with access to the hard
drive can copy the entire hard drive. Whether it's indexed is
irrelevant.

 

[Retroman]

Firstly, it indexes contents as well as file names. That
makes it a security risk.

It appears that you favor protecting the user from him or herself by not
letting them search the content of their own files. If you really want to
do that to yourself, simply disable content indexing.

Secondly, even if you turn off the indexing (and just use it like XP's
search), it is pretty slow. I just asked it to search for *.doc in C:\.
It took 45 seconds before anything appeared on the screen, and then
about a dozen files appeared (why? Why not list files as it finds them).
It stopped after 145 seconds, having found 90 files.
[snip]
So why the difference? The W7 search found dozens of files called
HPAdvisor.MainFrame.Windows.DockViewWindow.User.Marketing.dock.
In other words, it found *.dock files as well as *.doc files. But it
failed to include any *.doc files in the recycle bin. Those are, of
course, still available for use if they are restored.

Unfortunately, this comparison is worthless because you (and the other
respondents in this thread) have not learned the basics of using Windows
Search 4. The query syntax has changed. The correct query to find files
with a given extension is to use the ext property, like this:

ext:doc

That searches *only* file extensions, not file names or contents. It is
fast, accurate, and does indeed include items in the recycle bin. The
query that you used searches all strings, including content and file
names, which of course is much slower and returns many unwanted results.

Using a property query on a file extension, my Vista PC took only 45
seconds to complete a search of all locations on C drive, including system
files. Excluding system files shortened the time to 20 seconds.

Wild card searches are rarely needed now and I almost never use them. You
can learn about the new query syntax here:

http://www.microsoft.com/windows/products/winfamily/desktopsearch/technicalresources/advquery.mspx

Doug M. in NJ

Is Search 4.0 part of Windows 7? AFAIK, previous Windows versions could
only get it by downloading from Windows Update.

Yes, it's built-in to Windows 7 and Vista. The download was for XP.

Doug M. in NJ

 

[Sunny Bard]

Unfortunately, this comparison is worthless because you (and the other
respondents in this thread) have not learned the basics of using Windows
Search 4. The query syntax has changed.

As someone who has given up on Windows 7's inbuilt search, I'm willing
to accept that is true, it does however indicate a failure on
Microsoft's part to make search easy to use, or failing that, easy to
discover how to use ...

 

[Jeff Layman]

How, pray tell, is indexing contents a security risk?

http://www.edbsearch.com/
(In particular, have a look at the final paragraph at:
http://www.edbsearch.com/forensics.html
(NB for "Forensic Investigator" substitute "Identity Thief", or any
other person who wants your data for nefarious purposes.)

And that is only one aspect. The search index is a effectively a
summary of everything on your hard disk which you have allowed to be
indexed. If someone can obtain a copy of your search index file
(windows.edb), and has the right software, they could have access to
your bank account details, passwords, usernames, and other material in
your personal folders which should remain private to you. That
windows.edb file is _always_ found in the same location on every Win7
computer by default. Even if you choose to change its location (through
the Control Panel), a quick search for "windows.edb" will find it. It
basically means someone doesn't need to copy everything in your

(And even if it were, you can turn that part off.)

The indexing service runs by default on every Win7 computer. The
average computer user will not be remotely aware what is going on in the
background, and is very unlikely to be able to know how to turn it off,
or even limit what files it indexes.

 

[Retroman]

As someone who has given up on Windows 7's inbuilt search, I'm willing
to accept that is true, it does however indicate a failure on
Microsoft's part to make search easy to use, or failing that, easy to
discover how to use ...

Sunny, here's my take on this:

XP was current for so long that people developed habits and expectations
for Windows based on that version. Along comes Vista and Win 7, with a
learning curve that was more drastic than we expected. People (including
myself) thought that they could just plunge in and be up to speed in a few
days. Who needs to read Windows help files, right? Wrong, we did need to
read them, and it took me weeks, rather than days, to feel comfortable
with the new OS. The information on Windows Search was there but old
habits die hard. Hence the unfortunate "Windows Search stinks" impression
that many still retain.

I find Windows Search 4 easy to use and one of the best features of Vista
and Win 7. However, I certainly did have to do my homework and to unlearn
my old habits. Along the way, I learned how to customize search as well,
which can make a huge difference. For me, the extra effort was well worth
it.

Could Microsoft have been clearer that there had been drastic changes to
how search works? Sure, but they may have assumed that many users had
some familiarity with Windows Search 3, which was available as a download
for XP SP2 and which used the same query syntax as version 4.

Doug M. in NJ

 

[Gene E. Bloch]

Sunny, here's my take on this:

XP was current for so long that people developed habits and expectations
for Windows based on that version. Along comes Vista and Win 7, with a
learning curve that was more drastic than we expected. People (including
myself) thought that they could just plunge in and be up to speed in a few
days. Who needs to read Windows help files, right? Wrong, we did need to
read them, and it took me weeks, rather than days, to feel comfortable
with the new OS. The information on Windows Search was there but old
habits die hard. Hence the unfortunate "Windows Search stinks" impression
that many still retain.

I find Windows Search 4 easy to use and one of the best features of Vista
and Win 7. However, I certainly did have to do my homework and to unlearn
my old habits. Along the way, I learned how to customize search as well,
which can make a huge difference. For me, the extra effort was well worth
it.

Could Microsoft have been clearer that there had been drastic changes to
how search works? Sure, but they may have assumed that many users had
some familiarity with Windows Search 3, which was available as a download
for XP SP2 and which used the same query syntax as version 4.

Doug M. in NJ

Well - and calmly - said.

 

[Retroman]

Well - and calmly - said.

Thank you, Gene, I do appreciate the feedback.

Doug M. in NJ

 

[Stan Brown]

[quoted text muted]

Not really. Firstly, it indexes contents as well as file names. That
makes it a security risk.

How, pray tell, is indexing contents a security risk?

And that is only one aspect. The search index is a effectively a
summary of everything on your hard disk which you have allowed to be
indexed.

Which -- again -- chops off your rant at the knees. The index isn't
a security risk because the whole content is already there.