Sign In
Register
Help
Just asking because there was no Date visible in that view.
Like I said, it works just like List View in Panther.
Except that it's not intuitive that the search windows are "finder" windows
OK, that's not what I was responding to. This is a different issue, and subjective. I think having it integrated in the Finder makes total sense.
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.
I didn't need a manual to see "Servers" in that location bar.
I didn't need a manual to know that the List View Options in Tiger give me sort options just like the List View Options in Panther.
Huh? Neither seems to find docs within an application (when called from the finder).
You are confused. The Spotlight field in the upper right corner is not the Finder. What I'm saying is CMND SPACE is accessible from within an application without leaving the application. CMND F in the Finder requires I switch to the Finder. Your point about the UI appearance of the Spotlight results window being different than the Finder is addressed below.
And which is supposed to be the simpler/more detailed search?
CMND SPACE only gives you Name search criteria. It's more simple. Most of the time, that's all I need. Like if I'm in Photoshop and I want to open a file called "Scot's logo", I can type it and Spotlight always returns it to me at the top of the list as my "Top Hit" (it would be great if I could drag it out into applications or Dock icons).
CMND F in the Finder gives you well over 100 search criteria. It's more detailed.
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.
The simple approach means I don't have to leave the application I'm in.
"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..."
Good question. I don't know the answer. Maybe there's a technical reason. I would have it so that when you click on "Show All" in the Spotlight results in the top-right corner, it opens them up in a Finder window as if I had done the search from the beginning in the Finder.
My guess is Apple is working on a new Finder (I hope to God they are) and this is what will happen with Leopard.
Given the choice between having Spotlight as it is now versus waiting until they have a new Finder integrated better, I'll choose the current Spotlight. I did, actually. I could have stayed on Panther.
Most of the time, I press a button on my multi-button mouse (CMND SPACE) and I get what I want. If I want to do a detailed search with multiple search criteria, I use CMND F in the Finder. I don't see what the big deal is, except I agree with some of the points like the Spotlight Results Show All window should have the pathname and more sorting options, etc. Then again, I wish Motion 1 had 3D and motion tracking. Maybe it will in version 3.
Spotlight answers from MacWorld and More Gripes an
MultiQuote
#240
minderbinder 
- Veteran
-
- Group: Members
- Posts: 1,094
- Joined: 30-August 04
Posted 29 November 2005 - 12:24 PM
"I didn't need a manual to see "Servers" in that location bar."
I didn't see Servers as an option, since I was using the command space window. Starting from that window, how was I supposed to find Servers?
"I didn't need a manual to know that the List View Options in Tiger give me sort options just like the List View Options in Panther."
Again, the list view is only available in one of the two search windows. And there's nothing visible in that window that shows you that you can switch to list view. Unless you turn on the sidebar thing, which isn't intuitive that you can do that either. In panther, the sort options are ALWAYS visible in a search window, they weren't something that had to be searched out.
"What I'm saying is CMND SPACE is accessible from within an application without leaving the application. CMND F in the Finder requires I switch to the Finder."
Why? That makes no sense. Why not just have one window, and always make it command space, so you can get it anytime? If I want the functionality of the command F one, I still have to switch to the finder.
"CMND SPACE only gives you Name search criteria."
Doesn't look like it. From what I can tell, it also searches text contents of files.
"The simple approach means I don't have to leave the application I'm in."
But why not at least make the display window the same? With the same sortability as the other window?
"Given the choice between having Spotlight as it is now versus waiting until they have a new Finder integrated better, I'll choose the current Spotlight."
I'd have chosen the old way. Apple could have made everyone happy by making the old finder available as an option. Sadly they didn't, and we're stuck with this mess. I have no problem with rolling out new technologies that are half baked - just release them alongside the old ones instead of replacing them.
"I don't see what the big deal is"
Other than the fact that doing a search comparable to the old way is slower and more cumbersome? Can I still get my job done? Sure. But it's way slower and annoying as hell.
I didn't see Servers as an option, since I was using the command space window. Starting from that window, how was I supposed to find Servers?
"I didn't need a manual to know that the List View Options in Tiger give me sort options just like the List View Options in Panther."
Again, the list view is only available in one of the two search windows. And there's nothing visible in that window that shows you that you can switch to list view. Unless you turn on the sidebar thing, which isn't intuitive that you can do that either. In panther, the sort options are ALWAYS visible in a search window, they weren't something that had to be searched out.
"What I'm saying is CMND SPACE is accessible from within an application without leaving the application. CMND F in the Finder requires I switch to the Finder."
Why? That makes no sense. Why not just have one window, and always make it command space, so you can get it anytime? If I want the functionality of the command F one, I still have to switch to the finder.
"CMND SPACE only gives you Name search criteria."
Doesn't look like it. From what I can tell, it also searches text contents of files.
"The simple approach means I don't have to leave the application I'm in."
But why not at least make the display window the same? With the same sortability as the other window?
"Given the choice between having Spotlight as it is now versus waiting until they have a new Finder integrated better, I'll choose the current Spotlight."
I'd have chosen the old way. Apple could have made everyone happy by making the old finder available as an option. Sadly they didn't, and we're stuck with this mess. I have no problem with rolling out new technologies that are half baked - just release them alongside the old ones instead of replacing them.
"I don't see what the big deal is"
Other than the fact that doing a search comparable to the old way is slower and more cumbersome? Can I still get my job done? Sure. But it's way slower and annoying as hell.
#241
tallscot
- Veteran
-
- Group: Members
- Posts: 1,833
- Joined: 31-January 01
Posted 29 November 2005 - 12:47 PM
I didn't see Servers as an option, since I was using the command space window.
And why did you do that when I told you to press CMND F in the Finder?
Again, the list view is only available in one of the two search windows.
Which is why I specified the Finder.
Why not just have one window, and always make it command space, so you can get it anytime?
Because sometimes I want to have it in the Finder and utilize Finder features. Most times I don't. I don't want them to take it out of the Finder, but I also don't want them to switch me to the Finder for a simple search.
Doesn't look like it. From what I can tell, it also searches text contents of files.
Name encompasses everything. Again, read the manual. If you want Filename only, you need to use the Finder. Spotlight doesn't just search for filenames. It searches iCal events, emails, modo project files, photoshop layers, etc. So "Name" covers everything. If you only want Filename, you specify that in the Finder.
But why not at least make the display window the same? With the same sortability as the other window?
I don't know. Did you read my post? Focus in on the part where I say I wish they would just have the Spotlight results show up in a Finder window if I click "Show All" in the simple results list at the top right.
I'd have chosen the old way. Apple could have made everyone happy by making the old finder available as an option.
Apple could give us the option to go back to the Classic UI like Microsoft does with XP. They choose not to. I would have no problem with a System Preference button that says "Simple Find" or something like that, as long as they could implement that feature in the given time and money without harming Spotlight development.
Apple has a habit of leaving the legacy behind.
All they would have to do is have the Finder CMND F remember that the last time I searched, I searched by Filename and bring that up with the entry field active, ready for me to start typing.
Sadly they didn't, and we're stuck with this mess. I have no problem with rolling out new technologies that are half baked - just release them alongside the old ones instead of replacing them.
That's subjective. I don't think Spotlight is "half-baked" at all. I think it's incredibly useful and I use it all the time, much, much more than I ever used Find in previous Mac operating systems.
Other than the fact that doing a search comparable to the old way is slower and more cumbersome?
Not for me, it isn't. It's much faster and easier, and it searches my emails, ical events, project files, etc.
If I want "logo.psd", I click on my mouse button and type that in and it's the Top Hit.
If I want to find my parent's flight arrival time but I don't remember where it's located on my computer, I just type in "mom flight" and it shows up as an email. Panther wouldn't do that. There are many, many more situations like that that I'm in versus Panther searches.
And why did you do that when I told you to press CMND F in the Finder?
Again, the list view is only available in one of the two search windows.
Which is why I specified the Finder.
Why not just have one window, and always make it command space, so you can get it anytime?
Because sometimes I want to have it in the Finder and utilize Finder features. Most times I don't. I don't want them to take it out of the Finder, but I also don't want them to switch me to the Finder for a simple search.
Doesn't look like it. From what I can tell, it also searches text contents of files.
Name encompasses everything. Again, read the manual. If you want Filename only, you need to use the Finder. Spotlight doesn't just search for filenames. It searches iCal events, emails, modo project files, photoshop layers, etc. So "Name" covers everything. If you only want Filename, you specify that in the Finder.
But why not at least make the display window the same? With the same sortability as the other window?
I don't know. Did you read my post? Focus in on the part where I say I wish they would just have the Spotlight results show up in a Finder window if I click "Show All" in the simple results list at the top right.
I'd have chosen the old way. Apple could have made everyone happy by making the old finder available as an option.
Apple could give us the option to go back to the Classic UI like Microsoft does with XP. They choose not to. I would have no problem with a System Preference button that says "Simple Find" or something like that, as long as they could implement that feature in the given time and money without harming Spotlight development.
Apple has a habit of leaving the legacy behind.
All they would have to do is have the Finder CMND F remember that the last time I searched, I searched by Filename and bring that up with the entry field active, ready for me to start typing.
Sadly they didn't, and we're stuck with this mess. I have no problem with rolling out new technologies that are half baked - just release them alongside the old ones instead of replacing them.
That's subjective. I don't think Spotlight is "half-baked" at all. I think it's incredibly useful and I use it all the time, much, much more than I ever used Find in previous Mac operating systems.
Other than the fact that doing a search comparable to the old way is slower and more cumbersome?
Not for me, it isn't. It's much faster and easier, and it searches my emails, ical events, project files, etc.
If I want "logo.psd", I click on my mouse button and type that in and it's the Top Hit.
If I want to find my parent's flight arrival time but I don't remember where it's located on my computer, I just type in "mom flight" and it shows up as an email. Panther wouldn't do that. There are many, many more situations like that that I'm in versus Panther searches.
#242
tallscot
- Veteran
-
- Group: Members
- Posts: 1,833
- Joined: 31-January 01
Posted 29 November 2005 - 12:58 PM
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.
OK, when you reply to my specific post, I take that as you are replying to something I said. If you want to start a new topic about something else you don't like in Spotlight, it's better to just start a new topic at the top.
Don't ignore the context of the posts you are replying to.
OK, when you reply to my specific post, I take that as you are replying to something I said. If you want to start a new topic about something else you don't like in Spotlight, it's better to just start a new topic at the top.
Don't ignore the context of the posts you are replying to.
#243
griffman
- Advanced Member
-
- Group: Moderators
- Posts: 8,605
- Joined: 09-January 01
Posted 29 November 2005 - 01:11 PM
Scott:
I'm replying to the context of the thread -- a discussion about the merits of Spotlight. I'm also using points in specific posts as starting points for things I'd like to talk about. But overall, it's all about Spotlight, hence, it all belongs in this thread, not a new one...
Unfortunately, unless I'm missing something (entirely possible), you cannot post a reply to an existing topic without choosing a particular user to whom you will "reply" -- the reply button is associated with each post, and there's no generic reply button that I can see (I use the 'flat' view mode). That's why I try to quote the things I'm talking about; not because I'm necessarily responding to the post in total, but rather, I'm commenting about some specific line of a given post.
I wish we had a generic Reply button; it would potentially make things less contentious if not everything was a directed reply to something else.
-rob.
I'm replying to the context of the thread -- a discussion about the merits of Spotlight. I'm also using points in specific posts as starting points for things I'd like to talk about. But overall, it's all about Spotlight, hence, it all belongs in this thread, not a new one...
Unfortunately, unless I'm missing something (entirely possible), you cannot post a reply to an existing topic without choosing a particular user to whom you will "reply" -- the reply button is associated with each post, and there's no generic reply button that I can see (I use the 'flat' view mode). That's why I try to quote the things I'm talking about; not because I'm necessarily responding to the post in total, but rather, I'm commenting about some specific line of a given post.
I wish we had a generic Reply button; it would potentially make things less contentious if not everything was a directed reply to something else.
-rob.
#244
jdb8167
- Veteran
-
- Group: Members
- Posts: 1,583
- Joined: 30-August 04
Posted 29 November 2005 - 01:15 PM
In reply to:
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."
That already works. As you correctly pointed out, the reason this is not implemented automatically is that the user probably doesn't own the server volume in question. 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."
I went to a Tiger developer preview in Boston before the release of 10.4 and a lot of it was about Spotlight. One of the things that came up was how to deal with server volumes. The problem was that if every user created their own spotlight index on the volume there would be a lot of wasted disk. Also, I remember during a discussion pointing out that many system administrators probably would take a dim view of having a .Spotlight-V100 directory in every users home directory. I've met many administrators that hate the .DSStore files that OS X leaves lying around. They call it Mac spoor or worse. Now add a large Spotlight index to every users home directory and those same administrators might actually take action to ban OS X on their networks. I don't know if I personally had anything to do with Spotlight not indexing server volumes automatically but I still think it is a good thing not to do this by default.
Having said that, you can enable Spotlight on your server. There is a command line utility mdutil that will do it. More information is here on Mac OS X Hints
#245
griffman
- Advanced Member
-
- Group: Moderators
- Posts: 8,605
- Joined: 09-January 01
Posted 29 November 2005 - 01:21 PM
Hehe, I think I knew about that hint /forums/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/wink.gif...
Maybe I'm not being clear, or you really can do what I stated and I don't understand how. That hint explains how to create a local Spotlight index for a networked machine. My question was why doesn't Spotlight just check the server itself for an index file, and use that if it's present? My PowerBook definitely has a Spotlight index, but to search it, I have to use the above-referenced hint to create another copy of the PowerBook's index on my G5. That strikes me as inefficient...
-rob.
Maybe I'm not being clear, or you really can do what I stated and I don't understand how. That hint explains how to create a local Spotlight index for a networked machine. My question was why doesn't Spotlight just check the server itself for an index file, and use that if it's present? My PowerBook definitely has a Spotlight index, but to search it, I have to use the above-referenced hint to create another copy of the PowerBook's index on my G5. That strikes me as inefficient...
-rob.
#246
jdb8167
- Veteran
-
- Group: Members
- Posts: 1,583
- Joined: 30-August 04
Posted 29 November 2005 - 01:33 PM
In reply to:
My PowerBook definitely has a Spotlight index, but to search it, I have to use the above-referenced hint to create another copy of the PowerBook's index on my G5. That strikes me as inefficient...
There was at least one report in the comments that if the Spotlight index was available on the volume, Spotlight would use it. There are significant problems with trying to use Spotlight on a server volume. Just because there is an index on the volume, doesn't mean you can write to it. If you don't have read/write access to the volume, there is really no way to get Spotlight to work without indexing locally. My PowerBook definitely has a Spotlight index, but to search it, I have to use the above-referenced hint to create another copy of the PowerBook's index on my G5. That strikes me as inefficient...
If someone on a windows or linux computer changes files on the server, someone has to reindex or the Spotlight index is out of date. There is also the privacy issue and bandwidth required. I suggest setting up indexing only when no one is likely to use the server.
Anyway, it is possible if you don't mind the consequences you can use mdutil to do what you want.
code:
sudo mdutil -i on -p /Volumes/networkshare/
From the mdutil man page:
code:
-p Publishes the local copies of the metadata stores for the volumes
indicated to their real drives.
-i on | off
Sets the indexing status for the provided volumes to on or off. Note
that indexing may be delayed due to low disk space or other condi-
tions.
I don't have a server to try this on but I assume it works as represented.
#247
minderbinder
- Veteran
-
- Group: Members
- Posts: 1,094
- Joined: 30-August 04
Posted 29 November 2005 - 02:00 PM
"And why did you do that when I told you to press CMND F in the Finder?"
My point is that I didn't know to do that without reading a manual or have it explained to me. There's no excuse for a feature this basic being this hidden and counterintuitive.
"Which is why I specified the Finder."
See above.
"Because sometimes I want to have it in the Finder and utilize Finder features. Most times I don't. I don't want them to take it out of the Finder, but I also don't want them to switch me to the Finder for a simple search."
I'm not saying they should always switch you to the finder, I'm just saying they should pop up that window. There's no reason they can't pop up a "unified" window over your current app.
That brings me to another point - the modality of Spotlight is very confusing. Is it an app? Is it part of the finder? It seems to be neither. Why can't I command-tab to it? How do I make the spotlight windows go away if they're over another app? And as a result, there's no Spotlight Help, you have to search the index of mac help.
"Name encompasses everything. Again, read the manual."
Name encompasses the contents of a file? That makes no sense. A name search should find things NAMED a certain thing. A search of contents is a search of contents.
I just checked the manual, I didn't see any mention of command space being Name searching only, it seems to do much more than that.
"Spotlight doesn't just search for filenames. It searches iCal events, emails, modo project files, photoshop layers, etc. So "Name" covers everything."
Again, sounds like it's not really a name search.
"Apple could give us the option to go back to the Classic UI like Microsoft does with XP. They choose not to."
Sure. But it would be a huge amount of coding on their part since it's a completely different OS. The code for the old search already exists, it would take little if any extra coding to leave it in as an option. Not to mention that one is decoration, the other is functionality.
"I would have no problem with a System Preference button that says "Simple Find" or something like that, as long as they could implement that feature in the given time and money without harming Spotlight development."
How much time and money could it take? They don't have to "implement" the feature, it already exists! The feature is already done, just don't take it out.
Apple has done this before, do you remember when they briefly made Sherlock the default search from command F? They also left in the old search as command F plus a modifier.
"Apple has a habit of leaving the legacy behind."
Not in the case of searching tools. With sherlock they made both available. And I don't really care what their "habit" may be, replacing a feature with an inferior one is inexcusable.
"All they would have to do is have the Finder CMND F remember that the last time I searched, I searched by Filename and bring that up with the entry field active, ready for me to start typing."
That would be a great first step, although I don't agree it's "all they would have to do".
"That's subjective. I don't think Spotlight is "half-baked" at all. I think it's incredibly useful and I use it all the time, much, much more than I ever used Find in previous Mac operating systems."
Just because you like it better doesn't mean it doesn't have things missing from previous versions. Doing some things requires more steps on the user's part than previous versions. That's a fact, nothing subjective about it. And I'm still not convinced that Spotlight finds all the files that the old search did.
"Not for me, it isn't. It's much faster and easier, and it searches my emails, ical events, project files, etc."
But there are some searches that require more steps on the part of the user. That's a fact, there's no debating it.
"If I want "logo.psd", I click on my mouse button and type that in and it's the Top Hit."
And if you want all files that have logo in the name, you have to go through more steps (or else have your wanted results mixed in with all documents that aren't named that but contain that word.
My point is that I didn't know to do that without reading a manual or have it explained to me. There's no excuse for a feature this basic being this hidden and counterintuitive.
"Which is why I specified the Finder."
See above.
"Because sometimes I want to have it in the Finder and utilize Finder features. Most times I don't. I don't want them to take it out of the Finder, but I also don't want them to switch me to the Finder for a simple search."
I'm not saying they should always switch you to the finder, I'm just saying they should pop up that window. There's no reason they can't pop up a "unified" window over your current app.
That brings me to another point - the modality of Spotlight is very confusing. Is it an app? Is it part of the finder? It seems to be neither. Why can't I command-tab to it? How do I make the spotlight windows go away if they're over another app? And as a result, there's no Spotlight Help, you have to search the index of mac help.
"Name encompasses everything. Again, read the manual."
Name encompasses the contents of a file? That makes no sense. A name search should find things NAMED a certain thing. A search of contents is a search of contents.
I just checked the manual, I didn't see any mention of command space being Name searching only, it seems to do much more than that.
"Spotlight doesn't just search for filenames. It searches iCal events, emails, modo project files, photoshop layers, etc. So "Name" covers everything."
Again, sounds like it's not really a name search.
"Apple could give us the option to go back to the Classic UI like Microsoft does with XP. They choose not to."
Sure. But it would be a huge amount of coding on their part since it's a completely different OS. The code for the old search already exists, it would take little if any extra coding to leave it in as an option. Not to mention that one is decoration, the other is functionality.
"I would have no problem with a System Preference button that says "Simple Find" or something like that, as long as they could implement that feature in the given time and money without harming Spotlight development."
How much time and money could it take? They don't have to "implement" the feature, it already exists! The feature is already done, just don't take it out.
Apple has done this before, do you remember when they briefly made Sherlock the default search from command F? They also left in the old search as command F plus a modifier.
"Apple has a habit of leaving the legacy behind."
Not in the case of searching tools. With sherlock they made both available. And I don't really care what their "habit" may be, replacing a feature with an inferior one is inexcusable.
"All they would have to do is have the Finder CMND F remember that the last time I searched, I searched by Filename and bring that up with the entry field active, ready for me to start typing."
That would be a great first step, although I don't agree it's "all they would have to do".
"That's subjective. I don't think Spotlight is "half-baked" at all. I think it's incredibly useful and I use it all the time, much, much more than I ever used Find in previous Mac operating systems."
Just because you like it better doesn't mean it doesn't have things missing from previous versions. Doing some things requires more steps on the user's part than previous versions. That's a fact, nothing subjective about it. And I'm still not convinced that Spotlight finds all the files that the old search did.
"Not for me, it isn't. It's much faster and easier, and it searches my emails, ical events, project files, etc."
But there are some searches that require more steps on the part of the user. That's a fact, there's no debating it.
"If I want "logo.psd", I click on my mouse button and type that in and it's the Top Hit."
And if you want all files that have logo in the name, you have to go through more steps (or else have your wanted results mixed in with all documents that aren't named that but contain that word.
#248
jmincey
- Veteran
-
- Group: Members
- Posts: 4,228
- Joined: 27-August 04
Posted 29 November 2005 - 02:24 PM
"...the modality of Spotlight is very confusing. Is it an app? Is it part of the finder? It seems to be neither. Why can't I command-tab to it?"
I think Apple wants Spotlight to be everywhere and nowhere. The idea is that it becomes a seamless part of the computing experience. The user invokes it with scarcely a thought. One shouldn't have to access it in the same way one accesses an application. The irony here is that you are concerned with "finding" the location of the search tool.
I do agree with Apple about this one aspect of Spotlight -- it should indeed be an API and integrate into the computing experience and appear to be a part of every app or piece of software in which the concept of "search" makes sense.
It's a nice goal at least. For my part, I don't want to be bothered with command-tabbing to something just to perform a search. I like the idea of an ever ready keystroke or searchbar -- whether in an existing window or a floating window -- which I can use on the spot without leaving my current working environment.
I think Apple wants Spotlight to be everywhere and nowhere. The idea is that it becomes a seamless part of the computing experience. The user invokes it with scarcely a thought. One shouldn't have to access it in the same way one accesses an application. The irony here is that you are concerned with "finding" the location of the search tool.
I do agree with Apple about this one aspect of Spotlight -- it should indeed be an API and integrate into the computing experience and appear to be a part of every app or piece of software in which the concept of "search" makes sense.
It's a nice goal at least. For my part, I don't want to be bothered with command-tabbing to something just to perform a search. I like the idea of an ever ready keystroke or searchbar -- whether in an existing window or a floating window -- which I can use on the spot without leaving my current working environment.
#249
minderbinder
- Veteran
-
- Group: Members
- Posts: 1,094
- Joined: 30-August 04
Posted 29 November 2005 - 02:38 PM
"The idea is that it becomes a seamless part of the computing experience. The user invokes it with scarcely a thought. One shouldn't have to access it in the same way one accesses an application. The irony here is that you are concerned with "finding" the location of the search tool."
Ironic is exactly the word. I don't want to think about it, but Spotlight is implemented in such a kludgy and obtrusive way, I end up doing exactly that.
I want to switch back to my app after looking at a spotlight search - does command tab take me there? Nope, it takes me to the next app, I have to command tab twice to get back to my original app. If I have a search tab in the background, I can't command tab to it at all! I have to start hiding apps or mousing around. Might be the only window on my box I can't get to using the keyboard. And confusingly enough, the command F search windows seem to be included in the finder.
Ironic is exactly the word. I don't want to think about it, but Spotlight is implemented in such a kludgy and obtrusive way, I end up doing exactly that.
I want to switch back to my app after looking at a spotlight search - does command tab take me there? Nope, it takes me to the next app, I have to command tab twice to get back to my original app. If I have a search tab in the background, I can't command tab to it at all! I have to start hiding apps or mousing around. Might be the only window on my box I can't get to using the keyboard. And confusingly enough, the command F search windows seem to be included in the finder.
#250
baltwo
- Newbie
-
- Group: Members
- Posts: 14
- Joined: 15-November 05
Posted 05 December 2005 - 09:20 PM
sandbag1 wrote:
tallscot responded:
Really? Then, I guess this at Spotlight's Features is not Apple's position:
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.
Yeah! I know it's marketing hype, but it's been there since Tiger debuted in May. Enough BS. It doesn't work as advertised, it has severe limitations, shows surprising promise (if the engineering wizards would only listen to the muggles, and definitely could be better.
In reply to:
So, I agree, Spotlight will not find text within all documents.
So, I agree, Spotlight will not find text within all documents.
tallscot responded:
In reply to:
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.
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.
Really? Then, I guess this at Spotlight's Features is not Apple's position:
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.
Yeah! I know it's marketing hype, but it's been there since Tiger debuted in May. Enough BS. It doesn't work as advertised, it has severe limitations, shows surprising promise (if the engineering wizards would only listen to the muggles, and definitely could be better.
#251
tallscot
- Veteran
-
- Group: Members
- Posts: 1,833
- Joined: 31-January 01
Posted 06 December 2005 - 08:39 AM
In reply to:
Yeah! I know it's marketing hype, but it's been there since Tiger debuted in May.
Yeah! I know it's marketing hype, but it's been there since Tiger debuted in May.
Along with a detailed list of the file formats it supports and a few pages detailing how Spotlight can be extended to support more file formats that it doesn't support out of the box in the form of plug-ins.
Seriously, your argument now is that Apple's marketing copy isn't 100% accurate in every situation applied to it? LOL
#252
jmincey
- Veteran
-
- Group: Members
- Posts: 4,228
- Joined: 27-August 04
Posted 06 December 2005 - 09:07 AM
"Seriously, your argument now is that Apple's marketing copy isn't 100% accurate in every situation applied to it?"
The point is that Apple makes claims about a product which mislead users (who don't habitually post in technical forums) into thinking Spotlight can, well, search an entire system and find anything.
Now I grant I had implicitly assumed binary files in particular are exempt from this claim, and no ordinary user would seek to parse binaries anyway. We can leave that to hex editors or egrep and fgrep in UNIX shells. But Spotlight does not -- under certain conditions -- perform trustworthy searches even for files which one could rightly expect some hits. You don't deny this, do you?
The point is that Apple makes claims about a product which mislead users (who don't habitually post in technical forums) into thinking Spotlight can, well, search an entire system and find anything.
Now I grant I had implicitly assumed binary files in particular are exempt from this claim, and no ordinary user would seek to parse binaries anyway. We can leave that to hex editors or egrep and fgrep in UNIX shells. But Spotlight does not -- under certain conditions -- perform trustworthy searches even for files which one could rightly expect some hits. You don't deny this, do you?
