Discussion on:
View:
Show:
Have you installed Windows Desktop Search on a Windows XP system? How well do you think it stacks up against XP's built-in search engine... and against Vista's Instant Search?
Here's my problem: I have a lot of old e-mail archived in different ...PST files. Each file holds 3 months' worth of e-mail. I separate them out to keep Outlook search (and especially the compact function) more efficient.
I'd like to have these archives indexed by WDS. I checked the .pst file type to be ON in the Advanced Options, but it defaults to using a plain text filter. I suspect the Microsoft Office Filter would probably do the trick, but the UI doesn't let me choose a filter. I even went so far as to find out how the filter is assigned to other Office apps (.doc, .xls) and added some .pst Registry entries to mimic them, but it still shows as using a plain text filter for .pst.
I was on Google and had the same problem -- it never found stuff I was looking for in these archived e-mail files.
I'd like to have these archives indexed by WDS. I checked the .pst file type to be ON in the Advanced Options, but it defaults to using a plain text filter. I suspect the Microsoft Office Filter would probably do the trick, but the UI doesn't let me choose a filter. I even went so far as to find out how the filter is assigned to other Office apps (.doc, .xls) and added some .pst Registry entries to mimic them, but it still shows as using a plain text filter for .pst.
I was on Google and had the same problem -- it never found stuff I was looking for in these archived e-mail files.
I have a 3.8 Ghz processor and 4Gb of Ram, but found WDS caused unacceptable slowing down of my machine. In the end I uninstalled it and tried Google Toolbar that includes a searchh function (looks very like Vista). Hey Presto - instant searching and no noticeable change in my system performance.
From my experience, I cannot recommend WDS.
From my experience, I cannot recommend WDS.
I fully agree with my friend, Mr. Granlund, that Google search is pretty lite on system. It does not slow down my PC. But since last few days I am facing problem in getting the results in Google search. It does not give results even when document has exact strings in them. When I manually open them and search them they are found exactly same as I typed for searching.
I've found Copernic to be even better than WDS and GDS. Copernic is very light and I almost can't tell Copernic is even running in the background. It is also very effective with its results. I found that with WDS, it didn't find a lot of my queries while I haven't encountered any problems with Copernic.
google is fine if you don't mind your file index being stored on googles server.
I guess the answer for me is - it depends. I had Google Search on an old machine (400Mhz) and it brought it to its knees - froze it up. Similar results with WDS. I think older machines will have a resource problem with any search method.
On my newer machine (3.4Ghz) I am running WDS and find it quite useful and effective. It slowed things down only in the initial indexing. Once the main body of indexing was done the incremental indexes of only the changed items have almost no effect on day to day speed. I don't even notice it's there except when I need to find something - It's frightfully good at finding what I want and the filter settings allow me to target emails/files, etc. - which makes it personally very useful.
Short answer - if you get past the startup index and your machine is "modern" enough it's great.
On my newer machine (3.4Ghz) I am running WDS and find it quite useful and effective. It slowed things down only in the initial indexing. Once the main body of indexing was done the incremental indexes of only the changed items have almost no effect on day to day speed. I don't even notice it's there except when I need to find something - It's frightfully good at finding what I want and the filter settings allow me to target emails/files, etc. - which makes it personally very useful.
Short answer - if you get past the startup index and your machine is "modern" enough it's great.
One of the problems I had with WDS is that if a particular folder isn't indexed and you try to perform a search on it, it essentially fails. I have to start the search companion (the older search method) in order to proceed with the search. I didn't like the redundant effort I had to place sometimes on folders I didn't index.
In addition, I found that WDS sometimes didn't find the items I would be looking for, even after a day (after the file would have presumably been indexed).
I switched to Copernic and I am very happy with it.
In addition, I found that WDS sometimes didn't find the items I would be looking for, even after a day (after the file would have presumably been indexed).
I switched to Copernic and I am very happy with it.
By default, WDS only includes the "Documents and Settings" folder, excluding Application Data and Default User subfolders. You can change this to index the entire drive, if you wish.
how do you remove it? This program is just constantly disk crunching my machine and using all its resources! It does NOT snooze and as soon as you stop it in the processes dialogue box it starts again. This little program has been a real deal breaker for me and I am switching to a Mac.
If you have a modest computer such program will be a waste of everything.
Check the ammount of RAM and the megabytes in your hard disk after the installetion. It is a very angry program.
Check the ammount of RAM and the megabytes in your hard disk after the installetion. It is a very angry program.
Only just come across your stuff Ms Shinder and it's all very good. One question and this might sound a little obtuse but I read against desktop and Google like search tools when one has an older laptop and hard disk like mine (a superb 4 year old Tecra M3). Any comment?
Finally a great article about putting Vista (and Windows 7 also) search tool on XP here, thanks. Just FYI here, to get more, or some free Vista and Windows 7 like search and preview tools for Windows XP Explorer (also Windows Server 2003 & maybe Home Server OSes) please also check this link out, here: http://www.winmatrix.com/forums/index.php?/topic/19634-get-windows-vista-like-explorer-and-search-preview-pane-for-xp/
Oh btw i personally loved Copernic desktop search for its own functionalities (best one), while it's even better than Google/GDS, but i think Windows Desktop Search/WDS for XP (now only called "Windows Search" on XP (V4.0), Vista (V4.0), Windows 7 (V4.5)) is still the only one that is integrated with Windows shell since it's been developed by Micro$oft anyway...
Oh btw i personally loved Copernic desktop search for its own functionalities (best one), while it's even better than Google/GDS, but i think Windows Desktop Search/WDS for XP (now only called "Windows Search" on XP (V4.0), Vista (V4.0), Windows 7 (V4.5)) is still the only one that is integrated with Windows shell since it's been developed by Micro$oft anyway...
Finally a great article about putting Vista (and Windows 7 also) search tool on XP here, thanks. Just FYI here, to get more, or some free Vista and Windows 7 like search and preview tools for Windows XP Explorer (also Windows Server 2003 & maybe Home Server OSes) please also check this link out, here: http://www.winmatrix.com/forums/index.php?/topic/19634-get-windows-vista-like-explorer-and-search-preview-pane-for-xp/
Oh btw i personally loved Copernic desktop search for its own functionalities (best one), while it's even better than Google/GDS, but i think Windows Desktop Search/WDS for XP (now only called "Windows Search" on XP (V4.0), Vista (V4.0), Windows 7 (V4.5)) is still the only one that is integrated with Windows shell since it's been developed by Micro$oft anyway...
Oh btw i personally loved Copernic desktop search for its own functionalities (best one), while it's even better than Google/GDS, but i think Windows Desktop Search/WDS for XP (now only called "Windows Search" on XP (V4.0), Vista (V4.0), Windows 7 (V4.5)) is still the only one that is integrated with Windows shell since it's been developed by Micro$oft anyway...
- Keyboard Shortcuts:
- Prev
- Next
- Toggle
