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

    • Here is how I fixed Windows 11 not booting after clean installation by Taras Buria Story time. A couple of weeks ago, I experienced a very odd thing with my computers. I was trying to reinstall Windows 11 on my primary device, and everything was going smoothly until the installer performed the first restart. After that, my computer entered the boot disk selection screen instead of continuing the setup process. Huh, that's odd, said I, and selected Windows Boot Manager only to see it fall back into the same screen right away. Then I tried booting from the USB drive with the same result—the PC kept returning to the boot device selection screen, and removing the drive would send my PC to UEFI, again, with no way to launch Windows 11. I fired up my spare laptop, which has been sitting unused for quite a while, to see if I am dealing with a defective USB drive. Nope, Windows 11 installed and started without issues. After trying another drive and checking all the possible settings in UEFI, I decided to try disabling Secure Boot. Lo and behold, Windows 11 started as it should have been in the first place, continued the setup process, and reached the initial setup screen. Victory! After I finished the setup and applied all updates, I re-enabled Secure Boot, and Windows 11 started without issues. Some time later, I tried reinstalling Windows 11 on my laptop only to experience similar issues, with UEFI claiming a Secure Boot violation. I checked whether the drive works on my main PC, and yes, it installed Windows 11 without errors. I scratched my head, went to UEFI, turned off Secure Boot, and installed Windows 11 without issues. After that, I enabled Secure Boot. Note: I used the official Media Creation Tool app for my USB drive. Also, UEFI was properly configured for Windows 11, including no Legacy Mode, a GPT-partitioned drive, and TPM and Secure Boot enabled. From my experience, if you are dealing with similar symptoms, I recommend two things: If you use old Windows 11 install media, create a new one with the latest Windows 11 release, especially if you know your PC already has the latest Secure Boot certificates. If you cannot create a new one, turn off Secure Boot, complete the installation, download all available updates, and then re-enable Secure Boot in UEFI. Note that you need to turn off Secure Boot after installing Windows 11. Otherwise, the installer won't run, claiming a hardware requirements mismatch. I believe the problem hides in Secure Boot certificates that expire this month. Microsoft is currently rolling out new certificates, and maybe a mismatch was causing these issues for both of my systems. I am out of my depth to make a definitive statement; this article is flagged as "Opinion," as I only share my experience and some tips on how to fix the problem. If some of you possess deeper knowledge and understanding of the situation, please share it in the comments. As for everyone else struggling with computers not booting after a clean install, the two steps above should get you out of the pickle.
    • I gave the tool a chance the other day to make a USB. An hour later it was stuck at 0% downloaded. I downloaded the official ISO, downloaded Rufus, and made the USB myself in 15 min.
    • <Moved to software discussion and support> I've got fond memories of Winamp. Changing the skins, the different visualisations etc. But now I just need a simple music player. MSN messenger would be another one, MSN Messenger Plus (I think?) offered so many different plugins. But again, it probably wouldn't work for me these days. And then there is miRC. i think it's still going these days, but lord i had fun with that back in the day. Now it's mostly stuff like Discord, WhatsApp group chats, Signal, Telegram... /me is showing his age...
    • ive always been fascinated by old software this is an old video player for windows from apple
  • Recent Achievements

    • Conversation Starter
      flexorcist earned a badge
      Conversation Starter
    • One Month Later
      AndreaB earned a badge
      One Month Later
    • One Month Later
      agatameier earned a badge
      One Month Later
    • Week One Done
      agatameier earned a badge
      Week One Done
    • Week One Done
      ssd21345 earned a badge
      Week One Done
  • Popular Contributors

    1. 1
      +primortal
      518
    2. 2
      +Edouard
      198
    3. 3
      PsYcHoKiLLa
      147
    4. 4
      ATLien_0
      94
    5. 5
      Steven P.
      77
  • Tell a friend

    Love Neowin? Tell a friend!