Windows Search 4.0 Hits Windows Update

It's time to check Windows Update again because just a few moments ago, Microsoft has released Windows Search 4.0 to Windows Update as Recommended update for Windows XP, Windows Vista and Windows Server 2008 based computers. Windows Search 4.0 lets you perform an instant search of your computer. Windows Search 4.0 helps you find and preview documents, e-mail messages, music files, photos, and other items on the computer.

Improvements:

• Support for indexing encrypted documents of local file systems
• Reduced affect on Microsoft Exchange when you index e-mail in online mode, and there is no local cache (.ost)
• Support for indexing online delegate mailboxes
• Support for client-to-client remote query to shared indexed locations
• Improved indexing performance
• Faster previewer updates for Windows XP
• Per-user Group Policy settings
• Windows software updates for Watson errors
• You can view the complete KB article here: http://support.microsoft.com/kb/940157

Download: Vista and Windows Server 2008 (32-bit) | Windows XP (32-bit) | Vista (64-bit) | XP (64-bit)
Link: Redmond Pie

Report a problem with article
Previous Story

Company patents wishlists, sues almost everyone

Next Story

Google In Final Negotiations To Acquire Digg

19 Comments

Commenting is disabled on this article.

FUD aside, I think Google should sue Microsoft for anti competitive practices. Why install Google Desktop when you have Live Search

(Ender2070 said @ #10)
FUD aside, I think Google should sue Microsoft for anti competitive practices. Why install Google Desktop when you have Live Search

Live Search is not an automatic update its a manual update. I noticed a speed increase after installing this. Other than that I would probably never use it.

Huh? Live Search is a web site for searching the internet...

This is an update to Windows Search, the search technology built into Windows. Windows has had file search technology for well over a decade now.

Microsoft really screwed up when they made this app. You can't index all the file names only and it takes forever to index. I don't want or need content indexing/searching but I can't disable that aspect of it.

Worst yet they use this same app for mail indexing in Outlook.

If only someone would redesign it and add these features.

UPDATED:

1. The ability to index filenames only and to do it immediatly not when the machine is idle.
2. Indexing all filenames on the hard drive, dozens of file types are left unchecked and it̢۪s time consuming to try and include them.
3. Seperating Filename search from Content search. I would say 90% of all searches are just users looking for where they put a file.
4. The ability to schedule a index rebuild.
5. Speed: Avafind can index 200 gigs in a few minutes while Vista indexing takes days.
6. Better include and exclude: I̢۪d like to include file types by groups like documents and pictures and also be able to exclude them as well.
7. The one thing I would love but will never happen in a million years is the ability to install a better indexer from another company and still use the front end search fields. I̢۪m sure another company could build a faster more feature rich indexer but Microsoft would never allow them to implement it. This is the true fatal flaw of Windows and Microsoft, using their monopoly power to stop others from actually improving Windows features.

(hardgiant said @ #1)
You can't index all the file names only. I don't want or need content indexing/searching but I can't disable that aspect of it.


Please don't FUD.
File contents indexing is disabled by default :D

File content indexing IS enabled by default on text/documents such as .txt, .doc, .html, etc etc...

At any rate, I think what hardgiant wants is located in "Folder Options" on the "Search" tab.

(hardgiant said @ #9)
Microsoft really screwed up when they made this app. You can't index all the file names only and it takes forever to index. I don't want or need content indexing/searching but I can't disable that aspect of it.

Then don't index any files at all. There's no point to the index if you aren't going to search against file properties or contents. The filesystem already is an index of file names. You can search against file names perfectly easily in Explorer in unindexed locations. Or you can use dir /s, etc.

Worst yet they use this same app for mail indexing in Outlook.

Why is this "worse?" Worse than what? Worse than Outlook having their own indexer? I doubt that very much. Why would you want multiple applications to have to duplicate this functionality and code? Why is it bad that they leverage a well-designed, tested, and proven platform instead of rolling their own copy?

If only someone would redesign it and add these features.

You didn't suggest any features...

(xiphi said @ #9.3)
File content indexing IS enabled by default on text/documents such as .txt, .doc, .html, etc etc...

At any rate, I think what hardgiant wants is located in "Folder Options" on the "Search" tab.

It still indexes the content of documents.

(Brandon Live said @ #9.5)

Then don't index any files at all. There's no point to the index if you aren't going to search against file properties or contents. The filesystem already is an index of file names. You can search against file names perfectly easily in Explorer in unindexed locations. Or you can use dir /s, etc.

Why is this "worse?" Worse than what? Worse than Outlook having their own indexer? I doubt that very much. Why would you want multiple applications to have to duplicate this functionality and code? Why is it bad that they leverage a well-designed, tested, and proven platform instead of rolling their own copy?

You didn't suggest any features...

With Outlook 2003 I used lookout and then Microsoft bought it and it's block in Outlook 2007. I now use Xobni which is pretty good. I'd prefer Outlook have it's own separate indexer.

I updated my original post with a list of features.

(Brandon Live said @ #9.5)

Then don't index any files at all. There's no point to the index if you aren't going to search against file properties or contents. The filesystem already is an index of file names. You can search against file names perfectly easily in Explorer in unindexed locations. Or you can use dir /s, etc.

Why is this "worse?" Worse than what? Worse than Outlook having their own indexer? I doubt that very much. Why would you want multiple applications to have to duplicate this functionality and code? Why is it bad that they leverage a well-designed, tested, and proven platform instead of rolling their own copy?

You didn't suggest any features...

With Outlook 2003 I used lookout and then Microsoft bought it and it's block in Outlook 2007. I now use Xobni which is pretty good. I'd prefer Outlook have it's own separate indexer.

I updated my original post with a list of features.

I never had any issues with the previous version of Windows Search on Vista. The cataloguing/indexing process is slow at first, but after that, I almost forget about it. This new version actually indexed my system so fast that I didn't even know it was done. My searches seem a lot faster now too. It's always nice when updates work better than expected.

Works Greatly with Windows Vista. Love It.

On XP it's oky, sorry same! But i have only one objection (not about Windows Search 4, about XP). XP doesn't have search Box beside address bar

Installing... I really hope this will fix my problem with Outlook never indexing emails. :suspicious: