Recommended Posts

OMG are you serious, microsoft was one of if not the first company to have an ancestrial form of desktop widgets so why should apple get away with that not to mention they stole the more recent idea from konfabulator. Furthermore MS has had search companion for many years desktop search is just quicker and more exposed with better indexing capabilities.

Err, you don't even know what changes or settings they're talking about.

What do you mean. In group policy you can change who handles your desktop searching but it requires you to provide the dll or something like that .So what other changes would they have to do besides making it easier to change?

What do you mean. In group policy you can change who handles your desktop searching but it requires you to provide the dll or something like that .So what other changes would they have to do besides making it easier to change?

Huh? There is nothing like that.

Wow, this is absolute horse*hit. Thank you DOJ for clobbering a perfectly good product because it was *too good* that Google couldn't "compete". Hobble the superior competitor because they're successful, way to improve the market for consumers.

Microsoft should build a fleet of spaceships, annex the moon to use as a base. And drop huge metal spikes onto stupid people from orbit.

While I agree with what your saying that if one company has to do it so should all, I do strongly disagree with your assertion that both Apple and Linux are monopolies, especially Linux. I mean monopolies of what? Linux in particullar uses the same hardware platform* as Windows so it certainly cannot be considered a monopoly. Even in networking and internet related applications Windows Server still ranks quite high in usage (I've read some claiming above Linux even but that seems to vary). Linux also isnt one company, its many many distros by many companies and all are free to fork the code if they want.

* I know Apple does too more or less.

I certainly wouldnt call Linux a monopoly. Hell I wouldnt even call MS a monopoly in todays landscape although if your going to use raw market percentage and ignore the fact the other 2 do have strong support then I guess you can still call it as such. I'll gratiously disagree and say there 3 main players, but thats my oppinion.

Okay- Apple controls the hardware and the software. I don't care what you think about market share. Microsoft has little moderate, but not absolute, influence on hardware, other than telling manufacturers that if they want Windows to run on their hardware, it has to be x86 or compatible, and they have to write drivers for it... and if you want our approval, then we have to test them. Microsoft allows that flexibility.

Now, you concede three main players- Microsoft, Apple and Linux (collectively)... but these are Operating System producers. Is Apple suing Microsoft for interoperability? Is Linux (as a whole) suing?

Nope.

Apple does things Apple's way.

Linux does things Linux's way.

Google just want's Microsoft to roll over and isn't giving Apple or Linux a second thought... yet.

If you ask me, Google's behavior is anti-competitive- force Windows users to be exposed to Google because "we think we're better".

I bought a laptop which had Google Desktop Search and Google Toolbar pre-installed. I uninstalled them both and was presented with a prompt on a webpage (why did I have to go to a webpage to uninstall software from my computer? Gator did that to another computer I was forced to remove software from.... what if I couldn't get on the 'net...?... I couldn't uninstall it.) When I was finally able to get online and complete the uninstall of the Google Toolbar and Desktop Search, I replied to their 'why did you decide to uninstall our software' box with something to the effect of "I don't like software being shoved down my throat. I have the choice to decide what software I want on my computer and I take offense to your tactic of negotiating with computer vendors to have your software pre-installed. I bought my computer because it has Windows installed and I like everything it does and how it does it. If I wanted your software installed, I would've appreciated the option to chose between Google and Microsoft, and all of the other solutions out there. Maybe, having been given that choice, I would've chose your software, but you have seen fit to negotiate my freedom of choice out of the equation. You're behavior is as anti-competive as Microsoft's, since I wasn't given the choice between Google and their software when I first booted the computer. I will never buy a computer from HP again, until I know that I will be given the choice when I turn it on."

It's one thing to complain about not having a choice and forcing the user to choose, but when the user doesn't get to choose and it goes straight to google, as was my case, that makes the accuser as bad as the accused.

G'night.

This means they should force it on OSX also...why do people always F*** w/ MS?

OSX isn't a monopoly. People F*** with MS because they have a monopoly on operating systems. Isn't it some crazy number like 90%? Because MS can easily crush software companies like a bug if they do something. (for example a blanket ban on anything Google, including the website)

I agree.

For whatever extent you feel Microsoft has a monopoly on the personal computer market, Apple and Linux have a monopoly on their respective portions.

So, if one has to do it, all have to do it. Otherwise it's not fair. It's affirmative action in cyberspace.

Apple and Linux don't have a monopoly since they're not installed on the vast majority of computers world wide. I don't think you could ever actually accuse Linux itself of being a monopoly, since its up to distributors to decide what packages to include. But it wouldn't surprise me if Linux allows you to change search already.

As for Apple.. well.. they don't need to, but I think they should to show that they're interested in being a good guy.

It's one thing to complain about not having a choice and forcing the user to choose, but when the user doesn't get to choose and it goes straight to google, as was my case, that makes the accuser as bad as the accused.

I agree, I hate vendors forcing a solution. But it's very likely any solution implemented will be a choice one. Hell I dont even see MS shipping a google engine as part of vista, but they will likely open it up so that Google can tap in and replace the Vista engine if downloaded seperatly.

I have a HP laptop and the first night I spent a few hours uninstalling their cr&%

Actually, since the built-in Vista version of the Windows Search gives one even less control over it than the free XP counterpart, I'd be more than happy to replace it with something better. For example, Vista's Window Search ALWAYS runs, even when you are trying to play games. Now, if you've ever tried to maintain a steady FPS for competitive play while something is accessing your hard drive, you know what I mean when I say, "WINDOWS SEARCH IS F**KING P*SSING ME OFF!!!"

And while creating batch files to stop and restart this service is somewhat helpful, understand that unless you DISABLE it permanently, Windows Search will automatically start itself up again a few minutes later...usually, right in the middle of a game.

So, if Microsoft would be kind enough to tell the service to actually PAUSE (the XP behavior) instead of just SLOWING DOWN (the current Vista behavior) when someone is say, playing a game, or running any full screen high CPU application, then I'd gladly keep it running on my Vista machine. But until Microsoft sees fit to return the functionality they REMOVED from the XP version, and/or decide to make their product more end user friendly, I'm one of the people who is looking forward to replacing Windows Never Stops Searching with ANYTHING ELSE.

/rant

Assuming that nothing really changes for those who don't want it to, I dont see the harm in letting other providors hook their own desktop search mechanisms "in between" the FS and all the places it's used in the UI.

That said, it'd also allow malicious software to do the same thing. =/

Actually, since the built-in Vista version of the Windows Search gives one even less control over it than the free XP counterpart, I'd be more than happy to replace it with something better. For example, Vista's Window Search ALWAYS runs, even when you are trying to play games. Now, if you've ever tried to maintain a steady FPS for competitive play while something is accessing your hard drive, you know what I mean when I say, "WINDOWS SEARCH IS F**KING P*SSING ME OFF!!!"

And while creating batch files to stop and restart this service is somewhat helpful, understand that unless you DISABLE it permanently, Windows Search will automatically start itself up again a few minutes later...usually, right in the middle of a game.

So, if Microsoft would be kind enough to tell the service to actually PAUSE (the XP behavior) instead of just SLOWING DOWN (the current Vista behavior) when someone is say, playing a game, or running any full screen high CPU application, then I'd gladly keep it running on my Vista machine. But until Microsoft sees fit to return the functionality they REMOVED from the XP version, and/or decide to make their product more end user friendly, I'm one of the people who is looking forward to replacing Windows Never Stops Searching with ANYTHING ELSE.

/rant

And this is the main reason why searching in XP was a waste of time and an utter joke. You couldn't find anything, Vista's search actually works.

*sigh* You already can change the search engine, so this can't be a good thing.

No, you can already change the WEB BROWSER'S preferred search engine. You can't change the DESKTOP SEARCH engine...yet. Which is what this post/article is actually about.

The *sigh* is returned to your side of the court. 8P

this is good news. i hope this means that 3rd party search tools will have the same level of integration as microsoft's offerings.

this is good for everybody who doesn't want to be stuck with microsoft's sloppy implementation of desktop search. sure google isn't the best but it will inspire others to make something much more usable.

This topic is now closed to further replies.
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
  • Posts

    • What they really need to do is automatically spell "loses" and "lose" correctly since nobody seems to know how to anymore. Then they blame spellcheck/autocomplete and don't realize autocomplete is just filling in the word for them automatically so it was misspelled in the first place.
    • If someone chooses to continue using SB and therefore goes through the manual intervention in the thread, afterwards the BSOD problem is gone. Whether they then re-enable the task doesn't matter, they're done, though on such machines it might pay to keep it disabled in case the next update (if there is a next) causes the same problem. OTOH, if someone disables SB in the BIOS, the problem is also gone. Incidentally, I noticed that this task exists even on machines that don't support SB. It's just installed across the board...and runs. Doing what on such machines is a little hazy.
    • qBittorrent 5.2.2 by Razvan Serea The qBittorrent project aims to provide a Free Software alternative to µtorrent. qBittorrent is an advanced and multi-platform BitTorrent client with a nice user interface as well as a Web UI for remote control and an integrated search engine. qBittorrent aims to meet the needs of most users while using as little CPU and memory as possible. qBittorrent is a truly Open Source project, and as such, anyone can and should contribute to it. qBittorrent features: Polished µTorrent-like User Interface Well-integrated and extensible Search Engine Simultaneous search in most famous BitTorrent search sites Per-category-specific search requests (e.g. Books, Music, Movies) All Bittorrent extensions DHT, Peer Exchange, Full encryption, Magnet/BitComet URIs, ... Remote control through a Web user interface Nearly identical to the regular UI, all in Ajax Advanced control over trackers, peers and torrents Torrents queueing and prioritizing Torrent content selection and prioritizing UPnP / NAT-PMP port forwarding support Available in ~25 languages (Unicode support) Torrent creation tool Advanced RSS support with download filters (inc. regex) Bandwidth scheduler IP Filtering (eMule and PeerGuardian compatible) IPv6 compliant Available on most platforms: Linux, Mac OS X, Windows, OS/2, FreeBSD qBittorrent 5.2.2 changelog: FEATURE: Use D-Bus to show file in file managers (Chocobo1) #24340 BUGFIX: Fix friendlyUnitCompact precision calculation (vafada) #24323 BUGFIX: Remove all top-level folders (glassez) #24333 BUGFIX: Use proper API for checking exit status (Chocobo1) #24349 BUGFIX: Delete stale lockfile when hostname mismatch (TurboTheTurtle, glassez) #24363 BUGFIX: Fix wrong removal procedure of watched folder paths (Chocobo1) #24413 BUGFIX: Don't reannounce before interface changes are applied (glassez) #24447 BUGFIX: Use Latin script for Bosnian locale name (Andy Ye) #24342 WEBUI: Fix performance of global checkbox toggling (tehcneko) #24316 WEBUI: Fix Safari transfer list header misalignment (Piccirello) #24377 WEBUI: Fix error when submitting magnet before metadata loads (Piccirello) #24378 WEBUI: Use correct row id when updating Rss Downloader feed selection (Chocobo1) #24402 WEBUI: Use SameSite=Lax for session cookie to fix cross-site login (Piccirello) #24422 WEBUI: Bring back properties panel expand/collapse button (vafada) #24430 WEBAPI: Only use X-Forwarded-Host header when reverse proxy support is enabled (Chocobo1) #24457 RSSS: Fix "RSS Smart Episode Filter" RegEx (nathanon-akk, glassez) #24398 RSS: Fix previously matched episode format (glassez) #24452 WINDOWS: Fix Python fallback search path (TurboTheTurtle) #24325 WINDOWS: NSIS: Allow to install x64 binary on ARM64 (Chocobo1) #24358 Download: qBittorrent 5.2.2 | 41.1 MB (Open Source) Download: qBittorrent 64-bit installer (qt6) | 43.6 MB Links: qBittorrent Home page | Screenshot Get alerted to all of our Software updates on Twitter at @NeowinSoftware
    • Weechat. https://weechat.org/
  • Recent Achievements

    • Veteran
      branfont went up a rank
      Veteran
    • Reacting Well
      Almohandis earned a badge
      Reacting Well
    • First Post
      Cosminus earned a badge
      First Post
    • One Year In
      ThatGuyOnline earned a badge
      One Year In
    • Week One Done
      Jeroen Wilms earned a badge
      Week One Done
  • Popular Contributors

    1. 1
      +primortal
      485
    2. 2
      +Edouard
      184
    3. 3
      PsYcHoKiLLa
      126
    4. 4
      Steven P.
      87
    5. 5
      neufuse
      72
  • Tell a friend

    Love Neowin? Tell a friend!