Welcome to Vista Banter. You are currently viewing our boards as a guest which gives you limited access to view most discussions, articles and access our other FREE features. By joining our free community you will have access to ask questions and reply to others posts, upload your own photos and access many other special features. Registration is fast, simple and absolutely free so please, join our community today! If you have any problems with the registration process or your account login, please contact contact support. |
|
Windows Vista File Management Issues or questions in relation to Vista's file management. (microsoft.public.windows.vista.file_management) |
|
LinkBack | Thread Tools | Display Modes |
|
|||
Windows Vista x64 searches 5 times longer than Windows XP!
Microsoftie here
The progress bar was a design decision made by the program management team. It does not show progress, but it does reflect that we're still performing work. It was tweaked significantly during the different Betas and Release Candidates until people were generally ok with it. Searching in indexed locations should be fast. It should be even faster with Window Search 4 (http://support.microsoft.com/kb/940157) installed. The more locations on the disk you have indexed, the faster the searching of these locations should be. Keep in mind that we don't index the entire drive on purpose, as the indexer wasn't designed to handle the load that is associated with indexing directories like Windows or Program Files. Searching all of the Computer is a very costly operation, because a majority of the time is spent crawling the disk trying to find the items that you're looking for. The non-indexed search of Vista is slower than XP and other engines by default, because we end up searching more properties. Also, we perform our searches differently than most engines (word based, rather than character or regular expression based). This isn't an excuse, we should still do a better job of being more efficient. Granted that it may be slower in some situations, there are things you can do to improve performance of your searches. 1. Scope your search location. Only include the locations you think that you may find the file you're looking for. This will obviously speed things up. 2. Scope your search to only search for properties you care about. Use either the Advanced Search Pane or directly use Advanced Query Syntax (such as name:foo, or author:bar). See http://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/library/aa965711.aspx for more details. The syntax isn't perfect and there is a lot of work trying to keep the behavior of non-indexed searches to match the behavior of indexed searches (which isn't perfect), even though it is two completely distinct search providers. 3. Add more locations of the files you care about to the index. When searching non-indexed locations like Computer, we will leverage the indexer to return results for indexed locations on the system. 4. Keep the "Search system folders" checkbox unchecked in the Search Options, unless you're sure that's where you want to look. When this option is set, searching from c:\ will not search within system directories like c:\windows and c:\program files. 5. Don't use the "Include non-indexed, hidden and system files (might be slow)" checkbox in the Advanced search box unless you have to. This option will not use the index at all and will perform a non-indexed search of all locations and also look in system folders. Hope this helps, Justin PS - I'm going to try to do a better job of popping into the newsgroup now and then to see if there is anything that needs answering. |
|
|||
Windows Vista x64 searches 5 times longer than Windows XP!
Justin Martin [MSFT] wrote:
Microsoftie here The progress bar was a design decision made by the program management team. It does not show progress, but it does reflect that we're still performing work. It was tweaked significantly during the different Betas and Release Candidates until people were generally ok with it. Searching in indexed locations should be fast. It should be even faster with Window Search 4 (http://support.microsoft.com/kb/940157) installed. The more locations on the disk you have indexed, the faster the searching of these locations should be. Keep in mind that we don't index the entire drive on purpose, as the indexer wasn't designed to handle the load that is associated with indexing directories like Windows or Program Files. Searching all of the Computer is a very costly operation, because a majority of the time is spent crawling the disk trying to find the items that you're looking for. The non-indexed search of Vista is slower than XP and other engines by default, because we end up searching more properties. Also, we perform our searches differently than most engines (word based, rather than character or regular expression based). This isn't an excuse, we should still do a better job of being more efficient. Granted that it may be slower in some situations, there are things you can do to improve performance of your searches. 1. Scope your search location. Only include the locations you think that you may find the file you're looking for. This will obviously speed things up. 2. Scope your search to only search for properties you care about. Use either the Advanced Search Pane or directly use Advanced Query Syntax (such as name:foo, or author:bar). See http://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/library/aa965711.aspx for more details. The syntax isn't perfect and there is a lot of work trying to keep the behavior of non-indexed searches to match the behavior of indexed searches (which isn't perfect), even though it is two completely distinct search providers. 3. Add more locations of the files you care about to the index. When searching non-indexed locations like Computer, we will leverage the indexer to return results for indexed locations on the system. 4. Keep the "Search system folders" checkbox unchecked in the Search Options, unless you're sure that's where you want to look. When this option is set, searching from c:\ will not search within system directories like c:\windows and c:\program files. 5. Don't use the "Include non-indexed, hidden and system files (might be slow)" checkbox in the Advanced search box unless you have to. This option will not use the index at all and will perform a non-indexed search of all locations and also look in system folders. Hope this helps, Justin PS - I'm going to try to do a better job of popping into the newsgroup now and then to see if there is anything that needs answering. I believe you are trying to say that the Vista search function is a hopeless waste of space. If we follow your suggestions we will know where everything is anyway, In XP *.mp3 found all the mp3s, in Vista it does not. You bet there are things that need answering. |
|
|||
Windows Vista x64 searches 5 times longer than Windows XP!
I believe you are trying to say that the Vista search function is a
hopeless waste of space. If we follow your suggestions we will know where everything is anyway, In XP *.mp3 found all the mp3s, in Vista it does not. You bet there are things that need answering. That's not what I'm trying to say at all. I now understand why many people don't spend their time trying to be helpful in the newsgroups. You'll get people to be much more willing to try and assist and make improvements in the product if you do more than just flame. If you honestly are having a problem and would like help, please be descriptive of the problems you're running into. For example: 1. Where/how are you initiating the search? 2. Where are the files that aren't being found? Are they random or is it a specific set of items that aren't coming back? 3. Have you changed any of the default search or indexer settings? etc. Justin |
|
|||
Windows Vista x64 searches 5 times longer than Windows XP!
Justin Martin [MSFT] wrote:
I believe you are trying to say that the Vista search function is a hopeless waste of space. If we follow your suggestions we will know where everything is anyway, In XP *.mp3 found all the mp3s, in Vista it does not. You bet there are things that need answering. That's not what I'm trying to say at all. I now understand why many people don't spend their time trying to be helpful in the newsgroups. You'll get people to be much more willing to try and assist and make improvements in the product if you do more than just flame. If you honestly are having a problem and would like help, please be descriptive of the problems you're running into. For example: 1. Where/how are you initiating the search? 2. Where are the files that aren't being found? Are they random or is it a specific set of items that aren't coming back? 3. Have you changed any of the default search or indexer settings? etc. Justin Actually your presence here is most welcome, and I was being somewhat sarcastic. I know there are many settings and that indexing can be useful to some, however the situation seems to have been made quite confusing to many users. For example, I rarely "Search" for anything, when I do it probably takes the form of *.dll because I want to locate some file or other to work with. I don't really care if it takes 5 minutes to find, but I do want to be sure if it is there or not. What I do care about is that I have to wait 5 minutes EVERY time as Vista "Indexes" things at boot. Despite this time during which the disk drive is grinding away when I type *.dll it comes back with nothing. Even if the file is in plain sight on the desktop Vista does not find it. W2000 and XP used to just "Find" things, indexed or not. On the other hand if I want to find something on the Internet I use Google or similar. So my experience when first using Vista was with the default settings, and despite 5 minutes every boot and 5 minutes every search I could not be sure the file wasn't there, only that Vista wasn't locating it. Once I went to the drive properties and turned indexing off the boot process went back to a realistic time and Vista still couldn't find anything but waiting time was acceptable. So I guess the question is why change the "Expected" behavior and force the user to make changes he/she is not familiar with when it seems that what "Windows always does" was quite acceptable. I may well have missed the point somewhere, I just want to know where |
|
|||
Windows Vista x64 searches 5 times longer than Windows XP!
Even while accepting that other people have different experiences based on
what they customarily have need or desire to do, I have mine. It appears to me that an effort is on-going to improve both the scope (where do you search? How broadly do you set the parameters of the search?) and speed (what methodology/algorithms do you use; do you keep an index of searches to improve speed of later searches? Do you pre-index-if so, what parameters so you set for that?). Please forgive my repetitiveness but I though it worth reviewing. Any time there is a change to the behavior of a tool, users are forced to experience some-to-much re-familiarization time. Hopefully, most will find the newly expanded abilities worth the admitted pain. Also, one hopes that usability improves as development continues. -- Tom MSMVP 1998-2007 "Charlie Tame" wrote in message ... Justin Martin [MSFT] wrote: I believe you are trying to say that the Vista search function is a hopeless waste of space. If we follow your suggestions we will know where everything is anyway, In XP *.mp3 found all the mp3s, in Vista it does not. You bet there are things that need answering. That's not what I'm trying to say at all. I now understand why many people don't spend their time trying to be helpful in the newsgroups. You'll get people to be much more willing to try and assist and make improvements in the product if you do more than just flame. If you honestly are having a problem and would like help, please be descriptive of the problems you're running into. For example: 1. Where/how are you initiating the search? 2. Where are the files that aren't being found? Are they random or is it a specific set of items that aren't coming back? 3. Have you changed any of the default search or indexer settings? etc. Justin Actually your presence here is most welcome, and I was being somewhat sarcastic. I know there are many settings and that indexing can be useful to some, however the situation seems to have been made quite confusing to many users. For example, I rarely "Search" for anything, when I do it probably takes the form of *.dll because I want to locate some file or other to work with. I don't really care if it takes 5 minutes to find, but I do want to be sure if it is there or not. What I do care about is that I have to wait 5 minutes EVERY time as Vista "Indexes" things at boot. Despite this time during which the disk drive is grinding away when I type *.dll it comes back with nothing. Even if the file is in plain sight on the desktop Vista does not find it. W2000 and XP used to just "Find" things, indexed or not. On the other hand if I want to find something on the Internet I use Google or similar. So my experience when first using Vista was with the default settings, and despite 5 minutes every boot and 5 minutes every search I could not be sure the file wasn't there, only that Vista wasn't locating it. Once I went to the drive properties and turned indexing off the boot process went back to a realistic time and Vista still couldn't find anything but waiting time was acceptable. So I guess the question is why change the "Expected" behavior and force the user to make changes he/she is not familiar with when it seems that what "Windows always does" was quite acceptable. I may well have missed the point somewhere, I just want to know where |
|
|||
Windows Vista x64 searches 5 times longer than Windows XP!
On Mon, 19 May 2008 08:06:43 -0500, "R. C. White"
wrote: Hi, Justin. Welcome to the newsgroup! ;) The progress bar was a design decision made by the program management team. It does not show progress, Well, it APPEARS to show progress. Where is there any indication to the user that it is showing anything other than progress? but it does reflect that we're still performing work. But there is NO feedback as to whether it might be finished - or give up - in another 10 seconds or that it might take another 10 hours - or 10 days. :( There is no clue as to whether it is now searching in Drive C: or in Drive X: or even somewhere on the Internet maybe? It was tweaked significantly during the different Betas and Release Candidates until people were generally ok with it. You mean the moronic beta testers that Microsoft uses that typically can't find their rear ends with both hands behind their back? The change from the long ago established practice of ANY Progress Bar in any Windows application including Windows itself that would steadily move from left to right IN ONE SINGLE PASS regardless how long it took to indicate how much longer a task will take has been rendered useless and laughable in Vista as a indicator of anything other than the stupidity of Microsoft for changing what if anything it is now suppose to indicate. Now it is common for Vista's "progress" bar (the butt ugly green bar at top of Explorer Window) to make multiple round trips from full left to right thereby giving absolutely no real indication how much longer some task will take. This is very noticeable in moving large volumes of files and also in extended searching. I participated in the last year or more of the Vista beta; at least a half-dozen builds, both 32-bit and 64-bit. I recall significant improvements in some parts of Search, but NOT in this "progress bar" area. That feeling that it would never get to the Finish Line did not go away during the beta - or since. Confirmation the Boys of Redmond are clueless idiots that don't know how to program intelligently. It seems the changes were made in some feeble attempt to hide their incompetence on how poorly Vista internals now work under the labor of stupid things like DRM, and the biggest red herring of them all "security" which means core features now often must pass through a maze of bloated code just to get from point A to point B thereby greatly slowing down routine tasks like file handling. The non-productive and non-informative pulsing of that green bar gets to be INFURIATING!!! Doesn't anybody on the Microsoft Team understand that? They don't give a damn. Which is the answer you can apply to nearly every known Vista issue. Microsoft has an annoying habit of making changes for change's sake without regard to how it actually impacts performance or usability. |
|
|||
Windows Vista x64 searches 5 times longer than Windows XP!
"Tom Ferguson" wrote in message
... Any time there is a change to the behavior of a tool, users are forced to experience some-to-much re-familiarization time. Hopefully, most will find the newly expanded abilities worth the admitted pain. Also, one hopes that usability improves as development continues. Vista search simple DOES NOT WORK when searching for strings on my Vista Ultimate machine. I've seen it work on another Vista machine, but search does not work on my machine. I have given Microsoft an example of searching for six identical files with six different extensions. Vista can find three but is blind to the other three. Even "Advanced Search" and its checkbox "Include non-indexed, hidden, and system files (might be slow)" cannot find three of these six identical files. In the last year, I have literally spend DAYS indexing and re-indexing and re-indexing, trying to get Vista search to work. It does not work on my machine in my hands. I have demostrated to Microsoft I can get search to work correctly for Windows 95, 98, 2000 and XP. Why is prior Windows knowledge NOT enough to get search to work in Vista? I have begged and pleaded with Microsoft to find out why search doesn't work on my Ultimate machine, OR give me the right to go back to XP. Microsoft REFUSES to fix the problem, and REFUSES to let me go back to XP without paying them more money because they made a flawed product. I just want the search functionality that was in Windows Explorer in Windows 2000 (or XP with the registry hack). Why is that too much to ask? Why is wanting a product that works correctly too high of an expectation? When "there is a change to the behavior of a tool" that breaks the functionality, and when this is in a new product, I would have thought Microsoft would care enough to listen and investigate. The bottom line is MICROSOFT DOES RESPECT CUSTOMERS. Microsoft simply does not care about the problems they create in their own software. I normally want to do very targeted searches. I usually know what directory to start in and usually need to search for a string in a few hundred or a few thousand files. The free Agent Ransack (http://www.mythicsoft.com/agentransack/) lets me do searches that ALWAYS work in Vista (it can find all six files in the search failure example I gave Microsoft). But why should I need a 3rd party tool for such basic search functionality when I paid for the "ultimate" version of Vista? Here are the Microsoft guys that REFUSE to discuss the search failure of Vista any more. They have blocked E-mails from me, since it's easier to ignore me than fix the search problem in Vista: Delivery has failed to these recipients or distribution lists: An error occurred while trying to deliver this message to the recipient's e-mail address. Microsoft Exchange will not try to redeliver this message for you. Please try resending this message, or provide the following diagnostic text to your system administrator. An error occurred while trying to deliver this message to the recipient's e-mail address. Microsoft Exchange will not try to redeliver this message for you. Please try resending this message, or provide the following diagnostic text to your system administrator. The following organization rejected your message: mailb.microsoft.com. |
|
|||
Windows Vista x64 searches 5 times longer than Windows XP!
"Celegans" wrote in message ... "Tom Ferguson" wrote in message ... Any time there is a change to the behavior of a tool, users are forced to experience some-to-much re-familiarization time. Hopefully, most will find the newly expanded abilities worth the admitted pain. Also, one hopes that usability improves as development continues. Vista search simple DOES NOT WORK when searching for strings on my Vista Ultimate machine. I've seen it work on another Vista machine, but search does not work on my machine. That is a telling point. Why is it not working on your machine but is on another? Is it a search with the same parameters on both machines? I have given Microsoft an example of searching for six identical files with six different extensions. Vista can find three but is blind to the other three. Even "Advanced Search" and its checkbox "Include non-indexed, hidden, and system files (might be slow)" cannot find three of these six identical files. I wonder if this is not a question of where the search is being done rather than what is being searched for. In the last year, I have literally spend DAYS indexing and re-indexing and re-indexing, trying to get Vista search to work. It does not work on my machine in my hands. I have demostrated to Microsoft I can get search to work correctly for Windows 95, 98, 2000 and XP. Why is prior Windows knowledge NOT enough to get search to work in Vista? If it is a different tool, then different technoques might be required and the same techniques might get different resumts. I have begged and pleaded with Microsoft to find out why search doesn't work on my Ultimate machine, OR give me the right to go back to XP. Did you inquire about "downgrade" rights? Microsoft REFUSES to fix the problem, and REFUSES to let me go back to XP without paying them more money because they made a flawed product. I just want the search functionality that was in Windows Explorer in Windows 2000 (or XP with the registry hack). Why is that too much to ask? Why is wanting a product that works correctly too high of an expectation? {Snip} I normally want to do very targeted searches. I usually know what directory to start in and usually need to search for a string in a few hundred or a few thousand files. The free Agent Ransack (http://www.mythicsoft.com/agentransack/) lets me do searches that ALWAYS work in Vista (it can find all six files in the search failure example I gave Microsoft). But why should I need a 3rd party tool for such basic search functionality when I paid for the "ultimate" version of Vista? OK. You have a solution. Use it and worry not. g That's what we all do if we find a tool or feature or two we don't like. Use a work-around or another tool. It's difficult for one system to be all things to all people, in my view. Here are the Microsoft guys that REFUSE to discuss the search failure of Vista any more. Well, I can't speak for them but my thought is they might believe they have said as much as they think is helpful about the case you submitted. {Snip} In any case, this topic has brought a light to bear on a high degree of frustration in some users. Hopefully, that will not be without effect. -- Tom MSMVP 1998-2007 |
|
|||
Windows Vista x64 searches 5 times longer than Windows XP!
"Tom Ferguson" wrote in message
... OK. You have a solution. Use it and worry not. g That's what we all do if we find a tool or feature or two we don't like. Use a work-around or another tool. It's difficult for one system to be all things to all people, in my view. Luckily, our IT guys won't touch Vista, so search is not a problem at work. I am penalized for trying to be on the leading edge of adopting Vista for personal use. [I wanted to be a proponent of using Vista's search of file tags on a special project at work -- a great solution to a particular problem -- but there's no way I'm pushing for that pilot project using Vista given how I've been treated by Microsoft on their failed Vista search. Our IT manager won't let me call on behalf of the company about the search problem because he doesn't want to talk to Microsoft AT ALL about Vista -- it's my fault I bought a personal copy, and Microsoft has treated me like dirt as an individual on the flawed search on my Vista Ultimate.] I worry about the futu I am also involved in aspects of technical support at work and may need to search for certain kinds of files, which means with Vista I will now need to take my own tools to every PC for troubleshooting -- or talk users on the phone or E-mail into installing a new tool before we can even look at certain problems. Some troubleshooting using Vista will be a problem when files cannot be found because of Vista's flawed search. I have explained this to Microsoft about how some scientific files don't "obey" their rules, but Microsoft doesn't care. Microsoft should have added a new feature, not removed an old reliable one. In any case, this topic has brought a light to bear on a high degree of frustration in some users. Hopefully, that will not be without effect. But what good does bringing light do when Microsoft's arrogance and condescension prevents them from caring enough to help customers get work done? The flaws in Vista and the needless user interface changes in Office 2007 easily cost me a week of work last year (likely more). Why would anyone want Vista/Office 2007 when Microsoft is hindering productivity and provides NO SUPPORT when they screw things up? Microsoft's attitude strongly says "we don't want customers" -- a bit like IBM when I tried to buy OS/2 from them many years ago. I have not considered Macs for a long time, but the arbitrary and unnecessary differences Microsoft is imposing on customers with Vista and Office 2007 make me really wonder if switching might be better. I truly enjoy the PC Guy - Mac guy commercials, especially the recent one about PC customers leaving and not coming back. Why should we tolerate the terrible arrogance of Microsoft and all the wasted time they have caused with Vista? The flawed Vista search has been the "deal breaker" for me. FRUSTRATION levels are quite high when I cannot find old files, or even new ones, with Vista's search, and Microsoft doesn't listen, doesn't care and doesn't fix the problem. |