[tallscot]

So, I agree, Spotlight will not find text within all documents.
Apple makes it quite clear that it won't. Nothing will.
For example, I can't search for text inside an After Effects project file. That's why there are Spotlight plug-ins.
Apple lists the files that are searched by Spotlight on their site. Nowhere do they claim Spotlight will search the content of every single file format out.

[tallscot]

Hey tallscot, if Spotlight can do so much more, then why does it find so much less and take so much longer?
It finds less? Panther found emails? No. It found iCal events? No. Panther found textures inside my modo project files? No. Panther found Photoshop layers inside .PSD files? No.
Seems to me, Spotlight finds a whole lot more than Panther.
Not including the pathname at the bottom of the Spotlight search results window is just ridiculous.
I agree. Use CMND F in the Finder, just like you did in Panther.
You can sort the Spotlight search results window by "Date," but it actually means Date Opened, not Date Modified, which is usually the far more relevant information and has never before been used on the Mac as a means by which to sort
And just like you did in Panther, do a CMND F in the Finder and view your results in List mode and sort by Date Modified or Date Created.

[griffman]

CMND F
Click on "Servers" in location bar
You can search a networked drive for filenames only. Spotlight does not index networked volumes, nor can Spotlight access an index that exists on a networked Mac. For instance, my PowerBook is fully Spotlighted, but if I connect to it from the G5, the only thing I can find are filenames. This is easy to prove with a simple test; run two searches on a connected computer, one for a word within a document (search will find zero matches) and another for a filename (search will find file).
I also think the original question was regarding Spotlight searches, not Finder searches. In the Spotlight interface, you cannot search networked drives at all -- they are not listed in the Where section.
Click on List view button in toolbar.
Click on Size column title to sort by size.
Works great in the Finder. But again, in Spotlight itself, you can't do this -- your only choices are name, date, kind, and people. This is despite the fact that Spotlight clearly knows the size of the found items.
Overall, I really think the Spotlight interface just isn't fully thought out. That doesn't mean it's bad tech, it just means that it's much harder to do things than it should be!

[tallscot]

You can search a networked drive for filenames only.
Which is all Panther could do too, right? Hasn't he said all he wants is to search by filename anyway?
I also think the original question was regarding Spotlight searches, not Finder searches.
Rob, stop arguing semantics. It's a weak argument and makes you look like you are just grasping for anything to criticize.
He likes Panther. In Panther, CMND F searches a filename on a network drive, right? He can do that in Tiger and he didn't know how.
Works great in the Finder. But again, in Spotlight itself, you can't do this
Which is one reason I use the Finder. CMND F in Panther -- CMND F in Tiger.

[minderbinder]

"Click on List view button in toolbar."
I assume that's the icon of lines and not squares?
"Click on Size column title to sort by size."
That's the whole problem, there is no size column. Wait, just found it. Damn, they hide things like that in the sidebar deal (which I NEVER use since it's so useless). How's that for new heights in counterintuiveness? So why aren't files sortable in the group view? And hell, why are there two different windows for command space and command F? Neither of which provides all the options I need.
"It finds less?"
It fails to find things that Panther found. On certain searches, yes, it finds less than Panther did.

[tallscot]

I assume that's the icon of lines and not squares?
That hasn't changed since OS X came out. You've used OS X before?
That's the whole problem, there is no size column. Wait, just found it. Damn, they hide things like that in the sidebar deal
No, we are in the Finder. It's the same as it has always been -- in the View Options you set up what columns are displayed in List view.
So why aren't files sortable in the group view?
They are - Name, Date, Kind. More sorting options would be great in the next release.
All of this goes back to my original point that some people are having problems because they haven't bothered to read the manual (Help).
And hell, why are there two different windows for command space and command F?
Because sometimes you just want to do a simple search for a document within an application, sometimes you want a more detailed search. Seems pretty clear to me.
Neither of which provides all the options I need.
More options than Panther.
It fails to find things that Panther found. On certain searches, yes, it finds less than Panther did.
Which is very different than the blanket statement I responded to.

[griffman]

Which is all Panther could do too, right? Hasn't he said all he wants is to search by filename anyway?
Now who's arguing semantics? Spotlight is what I was talking about, and not Panther and not filename searches. Spotlight has indexes. Spotlight can search inside files. Unless, of course, that file isn't on your Mac. Now, from a security perspective, I can see why they haven't perhaps allowed this. But technically, it should be as simple as: "If this networked drive has a Spotlight index, use it."
Rob, stop arguing semantics. It's a weak argument and makes you look like you are just grasping for anything to criticize.
I'm not arguing semantics, nor am I grasping at straws. Remember, I like the Spotlight technology. Really. But I am using the questions posed to ask real questions about real differences in functionality. If the Finder and Command-Space both use Spotlight, why are they so amazingly different?? There's no need for it, and as you've seen, it just confuses the users (both new and experienced, it seems).
Why throw an entirely new interface into play, and then not give it the ability to do what you can do with the same technology in a different location? That makes absolutely no sense to me at all...
Which is one reason I use the Finder. CMND F in Panther -- CMND F in Tiger.
But Apple tells us that, really, Command-Space is the way to get to Spotlight, not Command-F. The introductory paragraph on the Spotlight page says it all:
Stop looking. Start finding. With Spotlight, you can find anything on your computer as quickly as you type. Search your entire system from one place: Files, emails, contacts, images, calendars and applications appear instantly.
Well, there's only "one place" where you can search emails and contacts along with the other stuff -- in the Command-Space Spotlight interface.
And remember again, I do not hate Spotlight. I just want the UI to get much better, and for them to add a couple key features. If they can do this, I will more than likely turn into a huge Spotlight proponent. But as it stands now, when I find 75 matches for a simple search, when I can't find a phrase, when I can't find only the words I've typed ... I find it more frustrating than useful.
-rob.

[tallscot]

Now who's arguing semantics?
Definitely not me. I'm arguing with context in mind.
Remember, I like the Spotlight technology. Really. But I am using the questions posed to ask real questions about real differences in functionality. If the Finder and Command-Space both use Spotlight, why are they so amazingly different??
Which doesn't at all affect his question of how you search a network drive and how you sort the results.
Here we go again -- I answer the question that is posed and the argument changes to "it's not as easy as it could be..."
He asked if Spotlight can search a network drive and if you can sort it by date. I said you can and you do it through the Finder. You are arguing semantics when you nitpick and say that searching that way isn't Spotlight. OK. It's not technically Spotlight. So? Does that mean you can't search a networked drive and sort the results by date in Tiger? No.
Why throw an entirely new interface into play, and then not give it the ability to do what you can do with the same technology in a different location? That makes absolutely no sense to me at all...
It doesn't make sense to me either, but it doesn't really relate to his question or my response.
I'm guessing that Leopard will have a new Finder with the same new platinum appearance that the Spotlight results and Mail have.
But Apple tells us that, really, Command-Space is the way to get to Spotlight, not Command-F. The introductory paragraph on the Spotlight page says it all
So now your argument is with Apple's marketing copy. OK. Whatever, Rob. Get those straws.

[jmincey]

In reply to:

---

Why throw an entirely new interface into play, and then not give it the ability to do what you can do with the same technology in a different location? That makes absolutely no sense to me at all...
It doesn't make sense to me either, but it doesn't really relate to his question or my response.

---

Maybe not, but it DOES most certainly relate to Rob's article, his main thesis, and this thread overall.
Let me ask you -- don't you agree with the general proposition that Spotlight, while promising, has an inconsistent UI and implementation and that its search results are hit and miss? Yes, it's a 1.0 release, and this is probably why Rob wasn't harsh with Apple over it; but even a 1.0 release should be able to perform reliable searches. Spotlight does not perform reliably in my opinion. Re-read Rob's article for examples of the inconsistent and anomalous results of Spotlight -- not all of these can be explained away as a user misunderstanding.

[griffman]

Thank you, Jeff -- that's about what I was just going to post. I'll state it a bit more black and white, as I think I understand the cause of Scott's distrust of my answers...
I am not necessarily responding directly to anyone's points in this thread. You are doing a fine job of that, really. What I am doing is trying to point out ways in which I think Spotlight fails to deliver. So someone mentions that they can't use Spotlight to search a network drive, you respond that they can, and then I chip in that it's not really a Spotlight search. That's all. No straws being grasped at, no context being changed. I'm just providing additional data points to be considered.
And if Apple themselves is telling everyone to use Comamnd-Space, don't you feel that it should be the more powerful, not the less powerful, of the two interfaces to Spotlight?
-rob.

[tallscot]

Maybe not, but it DOES most certainly relate to Rob's article, his main thesis, and this thread overall.
So? I wasn't responding to that. I was responding to the question of whether or not is searches network drives and how you sort it by date.

[hargreae]

In reply to:

---

It finds less? Panther found emails? No. It found iCal events? No. Panther found textures inside my modo project files? No. Panther found Photoshop layers inside .PSD files? No.

---

I'm talking about files, period. Did you read the example I gave? I ran a search in 10.3 for a certain subset of files on a drive and it returned 18 results that in Tiger returned 0 results. You stated that the difference in results between Panther's and Tiger's results is attributable to Spotlight being able to find more things, so OF COURSE the results would be different. Yet by any mathematical definition, zero is less than 18, not more.

[tallscot]

I'm talking about files, period. Did you read the example I gave?
Yeah, I read it. You couldn't find an invisible QT cache file with Spotlight.
You said:

In reply to:

---

Hey tallscot, if Spotlight can do so much more, then why does it find so much less and take so much longer?

---

I don't know why. Because it's a bug? Because Apple doesn't want you to search for invisible system files?
Since we are asking rhetorical questions -- why can't Panther search inside my modo project files for models or textures?

[minderbinder]

"That hasn't changed since OS X came out. You've used OS X before?"
Just asking because there was no Date visible in that view. Actually, going back I can't even figure out how I got the window with that as an option...
"No, we are in the Finder. It's the same as it has always been -- in the View Options you set up what columns are displayed in List view."
Except that it's not intuitive that the search windows are "finder" windows, they never were before. Looking at them I never guessed they were switchable between list/icon...and group, which is brand new.
The more I look at this thing, the more I'm amazed what a disaster it is.
"All of this goes back to my original point that some people are having problems because they haven't bothered to read the manual (Help)."
You're kidding, right? If it's necessary to read the manual to find a damn file, somebody screwed up. I don't need the manual in 10.3 and I don't need it in XP.
"Because sometimes you just want to do a simple search for a document within an application, sometimes you want a more detailed search."
Huh? Neither seems to find docs within an application (when called from the finder). And which is supposed to be the simpler/more detailed search? I can't tell from looking at the two windows. I still don't get why there couldn't just be one search window, and make it simple or detaled by making the extras able to be turned on or turned off.
This statement sums up how I feel: "Why throw an entirely new interface into play, and then not give it the ability to do what you can do with the same technology in a different location? That makes absolutely no sense to me at all..."
"More options than Panther."
Not if those options don't find the files I want. I thought we already agreed that there are files that can be found in Panther but not Tiger?