Well, your problem is Windows Search in XP and Vista *does* actually suck up more time indexing than it should, because XP has a shitty scheduler (it's impossible to say "hey only hit the disk if absolutely NO other process is using it in XP), and Vista's search team didn't get around to fixing it properly. So your complaint there is valid.
You could however just leave the computer on overnight to index once, and then it wouldn't bother you from then-on-- it would only index new items as they came in.
I have no idea what you mean by "ruins the search UI". It changes it, so if you're one of those knee-jerky people who hates change, I guess that's also a valid complaint. But without change there's no progress, and Windows Search is a metric fuckload better than the shitty search system that shipped with Outlook 2003 and Windows XP.
But, shock and surprise, old stuff sucks compared to new stuff! What bothers me is people who come here to Slashdot and gripe, "oh Windows Search sucks" when they haven't even tried an OS newer than 2001. What they should be saying is either: "oh Windows Search sucked back in 2001" or "oh man my version of Windows is so old, I have the crappy search", or something more intellectually honest. Microsoft is not to blame for your company being cheap.
For what it's worth, I've never seen a laptop dock with dual video outlets. All the laptop users I know who do multiple-monitor use the laptop screen as one of the monitors, and the dock-connected one as the second.
Also, to further point out Notes' ineptness as an e-mail program, its own built-in spell checker doesn't recognize the word "e-mail" by default.
Not to defend Notes in any way, because it's a load of shit, but the word is "email". There's no dash, not according to any style guide I've read in the last decade. Only geezers type the dash. Might as well complaint it doesn't have "potatoe" in the spelling database...
Ok, well here we go: 1) If you don't already have Windows Search (why???), then you are using an ancient OS that's about to leave support. In other words, the best solution to your problem is to upgrade to an OS that is less than a decade old.
2) If you really hate Windows Search (why???), you can offload the work to Google Desktop Search. The UI is worse (it's a web browser pointing to a localhost web site, and you can't search from within the program you want results from), but the results are about as fast and are good quality.
Note that Google Desktop Search used to (not sure if this still applies) upload your search index to Google's. Which is, IMO, 1000 times worse than anything Windows Search will do to you. But, there you go.
But seriously, upgrade your computer. If you're using a 10-year-old OS, you get 10-year-old features. The search in Windows 7 (and Vista, if you care) is leaps and bounds better.
Once you get above a few tens of thousands of messages, Outlook's search slows to a crawl as well.
Depending on your definition of "crawl", I don't find this to be the case-- assuming you're running a modern version of Outlook on a modern version of Windows.
On Vista and Windows 7, Outlook will use the OS's Search Indexer service, which is pretty damned fast and returns pretty damned good results. Of course if you're using a version of Outlook older than 2007, or using it on XP, then you're kind of SOL because Outlook just uses its internal indexer, which sucks.
In any cases, even at its worse, Outlook's search is still an order of magnitude faster than Note's.
Well, Outlook has its "Red Flag" system which turns your email, no matter what folder it's in, into a "to do" item instantly. Same with Gmail's and Thunderbird's "star" feature.
So, depending on the client, using a folder as a "to do" list very well might be a total waste of time.
Then again, as another post says, IBM subjects their users to Lotus Notes-- so what the hell could they possibly know about email?
For me Outlook stinks and is more cumbersome and inadequate in too many ways, especially searching all emails.
What version of Outlook are you using?... you just type your search string, and then click the "Search All Folders" link/button on the resulting list.
Also if you're using a relatively up-to-date version of Windows (Vista or 7), you can just search from your Start menu which not only indexes Outlook emails, but Thunderbird emails.
(Whether or not Vista/7 can search Lotus Notes emails-- I do not know. After suffering 3 years as tech support at a Notes-using company, I'll never take a job at a company that uses Lotus Notes. And yes, I ask at the interview.)
and that it was apple that gained enough leverage to force them to withdraw that policy on iTunes?
Bunk! Amazon did that with only a small fraction of Apple's marketshare.
They also lowered the average price of tracks. (Although admittedly they didn't have flat-rate pricing like Apple, so whether you prefer that or not depends on how mainstream your tastes are... anyway.)
Apple "followed the leader" years after Amazon had dispensed with their DRM, and finally removed it from their store.
I kind of agree with his message (although he throws the word "evil" around like it's going out of style, which I definitely do not agree with... let's save that word for things that are truly evil, yes?), but I certainly don't agree with the amount of sheer asshole in that post.
He could have posted something tasteful and which still reinforced his message instead of pissing all over a corpse. He chose not to do that.
But... but that would require Stallman to actually produce functioning software, and we all know he hasn't been able to do that in decades, if he ever was.
The funny thing is that when Windows 95 came, they announced that the PC wouldn't boot into a command line. The original DOS command line would become a virtual machine like DOS box.
Are you implying that isn't what happened? Windows 95 only used DOS as a bootloader-- as soon as Windows was loaded, it ran DOS in a virtual machine from then on. Here's the process as described by Raymond Chen: http://blogs.msdn.com/b/oldnewthing/archive/2007/12/24/6849530.aspx
Now you might argue that using DOS as a bootloader means your computer "boots into DOS" first before Windows, but that's just being pedantic.
Well, I'm talking about actual genuine software bugs with the software running on this site. (I'm not exactly sure what the distinction between "Slashcode" and "the software that runs Slashdot.org" is, or if there even is one. Some of the bugs related to the themeing...)
Either way, it's completely ignored. I put in 13 bugs, I think 2 were responded two, and only one was resolved. That was actually before they introduced the latest JavaScript-powered homepage and, lo and behold, it turns out most of my bugs still apply-- if they had bothered to look at the bug tracker during the rewrite of the UI code, they might have ended up with a higher-quality project. But nope.
If they're looking for feedback on "softer" things, like what types of articles to feature and what-not, then I guess that advice doesn't apply.
But nothing cheese me off more than a project that asks for input, then ignores the input. Either ask and respond to it, or don't ask!
It's just stupid. Why are they running a survey when they have a WHOLE DATABASE of things to fix that, as far as I can tell, no Slashdot staff member has ever bothered to read?
First thing's first: respond to the years and years worth of feedback you have in your bug tracker, then, when you're finished with that, ask for more.
Because every time you add a choice you double the QA time? Because sometimes the new method is so much more better than the old, that leaving the old in feels like a disservice to your customers?
Hah. A year ago I tried it, after all these re-assurances that it doesn't require Java. What's the absolute first thing it pops up after being installed?
If it actually doesn't require Java, like you and so many others claim, it's doing a piss-poor job of working without it. Me? I'll believe my own eyeballs: OpenOffice requires Java.
No, I mean spatial memory. That is why I typed "spatial memory." Sure, motor memory is a good thing, but it's also a completely different thing. What the hell is wrong with Slashdot readers?
If you don't know what a term means, please look it up before trying to talk about it.
It might be more accurate to say, "geeks don't consciously use spatial memory," or perhaps, "geeks don't know they could benefit from using spatial memory when creating software UIs."
And even then, GNOME at least seems to understand the concept pretty well, so maybe it's not as bad as I think. I'm still bitter than Apple threw their beautiful spatial UI in the bin, though... what a waste of 20 years of brilliant engineering.
Another post covered this material, but you should realize that geeks hate spatial memory and systems that use spatial memory. This is the community that embraces vi and hated Classic Mac OS... do the math.
Slashdot Mirror
Well, your problem is Windows Search in XP and Vista *does* actually suck up more time indexing than it should, because XP has a shitty scheduler (it's impossible to say "hey only hit the disk if absolutely NO other process is using it in XP), and Vista's search team didn't get around to fixing it properly. So your complaint there is valid.
You could however just leave the computer on overnight to index once, and then it wouldn't bother you from then-on-- it would only index new items as they came in.
I have no idea what you mean by "ruins the search UI". It changes it, so if you're one of those knee-jerky people who hates change, I guess that's also a valid complaint. But without change there's no progress, and Windows Search is a metric fuckload better than the shitty search system that shipped with Outlook 2003 and Windows XP.
But, shock and surprise, old stuff sucks compared to new stuff! What bothers me is people who come here to Slashdot and gripe, "oh Windows Search sucks" when they haven't even tried an OS newer than 2001. What they should be saying is either: "oh Windows Search sucked back in 2001" or "oh man my version of Windows is so old, I have the crappy search", or something more intellectually honest. Microsoft is not to blame for your company being cheap.
For what it's worth, I've never seen a laptop dock with dual video outlets. All the laptop users I know who do multiple-monitor use the laptop screen as one of the monitors, and the dock-connected one as the second.
Also, to further point out Notes' ineptness as an e-mail program, its own built-in spell checker doesn't recognize the word "e-mail" by default.
Not to defend Notes in any way, because it's a load of shit, but the word is "email". There's no dash, not according to any style guide I've read in the last decade. Only geezers type the dash. Might as well complaint it doesn't have "potatoe" in the spelling database...
Why?
Ok, well here we go:
1) If you don't already have Windows Search (why???), then you are using an ancient OS that's about to leave support. In other words, the best solution to your problem is to upgrade to an OS that is less than a decade old.
2) If you really hate Windows Search (why???), you can offload the work to Google Desktop Search. The UI is worse (it's a web browser pointing to a localhost web site, and you can't search from within the program you want results from), but the results are about as fast and are good quality.
Note that Google Desktop Search used to (not sure if this still applies) upload your search index to Google's. Which is, IMO, 1000 times worse than anything Windows Search will do to you. But, there you go.
But seriously, upgrade your computer. If you're using a 10-year-old OS, you get 10-year-old features. The search in Windows 7 (and Vista, if you care) is leaps and bounds better.
Once you get above a few tens of thousands of messages, Outlook's search slows to a crawl as well.
Depending on your definition of "crawl", I don't find this to be the case-- assuming you're running a modern version of Outlook on a modern version of Windows.
On Vista and Windows 7, Outlook will use the OS's Search Indexer service, which is pretty damned fast and returns pretty damned good results. Of course if you're using a version of Outlook older than 2007, or using it on XP, then you're kind of SOL because Outlook just uses its internal indexer, which sucks.
In any cases, even at its worse, Outlook's search is still an order of magnitude faster than Note's.
Besides, isn't there a 2GB limitation for Outlook?
If you have one, tell your admins to UPGRADE, post-haste. The "default" limit in Outlook 2003 and up is 20 GB, but it can be set even higher.
Well, Outlook has its "Red Flag" system which turns your email, no matter what folder it's in, into a "to do" item instantly. Same with Gmail's and Thunderbird's "star" feature.
So, depending on the client, using a folder as a "to do" list very well might be a total waste of time.
Then again, as another post says, IBM subjects their users to Lotus Notes-- so what the hell could they possibly know about email?
For me Outlook stinks and is more cumbersome and inadequate in too many ways, especially searching all emails.
What version of Outlook are you using? ... you just type your search string, and then click the "Search All Folders" link/button on the resulting list.
Also if you're using a relatively up-to-date version of Windows (Vista or 7), you can just search from your Start menu which not only indexes Outlook emails, but Thunderbird emails.
(Whether or not Vista/7 can search Lotus Notes emails-- I do not know. After suffering 3 years as tech support at a Notes-using company, I'll never take a job at a company that uses Lotus Notes. And yes, I ask at the interview.)
and that it was apple that gained enough leverage to force them to withdraw that policy on iTunes?
Bunk! Amazon did that with only a small fraction of Apple's marketshare.
They also lowered the average price of tracks. (Although admittedly they didn't have flat-rate pricing like Apple, so whether you prefer that or not depends on how mainstream your tastes are... anyway.)
Apple "followed the leader" years after Amazon had dispensed with their DRM, and finally removed it from their store.
Don't rewrite history.
I kind of agree with his message (although he throws the word "evil" around like it's going out of style, which I definitely do not agree with... let's save that word for things that are truly evil, yes?), but I certainly don't agree with the amount of sheer asshole in that post.
He could have posted something tasteful and which still reinforced his message instead of pissing all over a corpse. He chose not to do that.
But... but that would require Stallman to actually produce functioning software, and we all know he hasn't been able to do that in decades, if he ever was.
Now Microsoft want to make Windows an application again, so it can be run on any device as an option.
Unless you're reading a different article than the one I just read, one of us is confused...
The funny thing is that when Windows 95 came, they announced that the PC wouldn't boot into a command line. The original DOS command line would become a virtual machine like DOS box.
Are you implying that isn't what happened? Windows 95 only used DOS as a bootloader-- as soon as Windows was loaded, it ran DOS in a virtual machine from then on. Here's the process as described by Raymond Chen: http://blogs.msdn.com/b/oldnewthing/archive/2007/12/24/6849530.aspx
Now you might argue that using DOS as a bootloader means your computer "boots into DOS" first before Windows, but that's just being pedantic.
Well, I'm talking about actual genuine software bugs with the software running on this site. (I'm not exactly sure what the distinction between "Slashcode" and "the software that runs Slashdot.org" is, or if there even is one. Some of the bugs related to the themeing...)
Either way, it's completely ignored. I put in 13 bugs, I think 2 were responded two, and only one was resolved. That was actually before they introduced the latest JavaScript-powered homepage and, lo and behold, it turns out most of my bugs still apply-- if they had bothered to look at the bug tracker during the rewrite of the UI code, they might have ended up with a higher-quality project. But nope.
If they're looking for feedback on "softer" things, like what types of articles to feature and what-not, then I guess that advice doesn't apply.
But nothing cheese me off more than a project that asks for input, then ignores the input. Either ask and respond to it, or don't ask!
It's just stupid. Why are they running a survey when they have a WHOLE DATABASE of things to fix that, as far as I can tell, no Slashdot staff member has ever bothered to read?
First thing's first: respond to the years and years worth of feedback you have in your bug tracker, then, when you're finished with that, ask for more.
How about you read your own bug tracker and actually fix, or at least respond in some way, to the bugs in it?
Because every time you add a choice you double the QA time? Because sometimes the new method is so much more better than the old, that leaving the old in feels like a disservice to your customers?
Hah. A year ago I tried it, after all these re-assurances that it doesn't require Java. What's the absolute first thing it pops up after being installed?
"OpenOffice requires a Java Runtime to perform this task"
If it actually doesn't require Java, like you and so many others claim, it's doing a piss-poor job of working without it. Me? I'll believe my own eyeballs: OpenOffice requires Java.
I agree with the Heavy and the Java bit - But no, I do not want a ribbon!
Do you have a reason, or are you just terrified of change?
Hey, usually Slashdot is about 2-3 days behind the news curve, this is lightning speed for this site.
It also allows an opportunity for stupid people to bash Microsoft.
I hear they're also going to apply lipstick to all the game's pig models.
No, I mean spatial memory. That is why I typed "spatial memory." Sure, motor memory is a good thing, but it's also a completely different thing. What the hell is wrong with Slashdot readers?
If you don't know what a term means, please look it up before trying to talk about it.
This is true.
It might be more accurate to say, "geeks don't consciously use spatial memory," or perhaps, "geeks don't know they could benefit from using spatial memory when creating software UIs."
And even then, GNOME at least seems to understand the concept pretty well, so maybe it's not as bad as I think. I'm still bitter than Apple threw their beautiful spatial UI in the bin, though... what a waste of 20 years of brilliant engineering.
That's not spatial memory, that's rote memory. You have to first know what something is before you can talk about it, ok?
Another post covered this material, but you should realize that geeks hate spatial memory and systems that use spatial memory. This is the community that embraces vi and hated Classic Mac OS... do the math.
I think that description might have been CleverBot making an attempt on the Turing Test. What the hell?