Windows Search 4.0

[Vistaboy]

What do you think about this component for XP avaible on MSU?

It would like to replace the smart-search toolbar of Windows Vista/7 but it's very degraded, cause if you don't indicize everything (at the cost of overload of the system background activity) you can't do a search in folder not indicized.

And if you disabled it, you can't do a classic search.

Did you uninstalled it?

 

[Mathwiz]

I never really liked Windows Search 4.0, for the reasons you mentioned. It was one of those Microsoft products that, yeah, was better in some ways; for example, it lets you search the body of emails in Windows Live Mail. But it's worse in other ways, and for me at least, it's harder to use. Why can't Microsoft just add new functionality without taking something away at the same time?

I had it on my old XP system but regretted installing it. When I got a new Win 7 system, I downloaded & installed XP mode, but I hid Windows Search on Microsoft update just so I could keep the classic search.

[dencorso]

Indexing is too much last millenium! On NTFS, no indexing and no Windows Search is ever needed. Try SwiftSearch instead:  

On 10/15/2013 at 11:12 AM, jaclaz said:

Well, searches (at least on NTFS) should be almost instantaneous (of course not with Windows Search).

http://reboot.pro/topic/18855-windows-file-search-utility-that-is-fast/

http://sourceforge.net/projects/swiftsearch/

[404notfound]

I use Everything.
https://www.voidtools.com/

It's pretty damned bitchin'

[NojusK]

Even if i install a fresh copy of XP i never installed the Windows Search 4.0 i had but its was too vista style so i uninstalled it.To be honest i always liked rover the  search xp search dog.Though the search takes a long time its still nice to see a dog searching....

 

[jaclaz]

5 hours ago, 404notfound said:

I use Everything.
https://www.voidtools.com/

It's pretty damned bitchin'

But it fails Occam's Razor test (besides having less information available than SwiftSearch or *any other* $MFT parsing based program).

There is already a good, fast, surely updated in real-time or near real-time, solid database of all files on a volume, with all the information about a file, which is the $MFT.

Creating a new database with the names only is not IMHO that much an advantage, see also old discussion here:

jaclaz

Edited November 5, 2018 by jaclaz

[HarryTri]

I too never liked Windows Search 4.0. I always used the built-in Windows XP search machine which gives you the option to search not only by file name but also by date of creation/modification/last access, not to mention the option to search for text inside files (which I suppose can't be done with an $MFT search program). I too really liked Rover and the other "search agents", the GUI of Windows XP is surely the best that was made by Microsoft for any Windows version, even without "Aero".