Comments on: Why does Windows put 64-bit binaries in System32? http://brandonlive.com/2008/12/22/why-does-windows-put-64-bit-binaries-in-system32/ Seattle Geek with lots to say. Mon, 30 Jan 2012 11:30:43 +0000 hourly 1 http://wordpress.org/?v=3.2.1 By: Kevin http://brandonlive.com/2008/12/22/why-does-windows-put-64-bit-binaries-in-system32/comment-page-1/#comment-129045 Kevin Sun, 11 Jan 2009 01:12:26 +0000 http://brandonlive.com/?p=503#comment-129045 Alexandre, although I doubt you'll see this, the answer for Windows XP is Copernic. I've never used Live Search 4 on XP, but it couldn't possibly be better than Copernic, because that search is super fast. I'm still undecided on whether it's better than Vistas search, because I run Vista and 7 at home and XP at work. Kevin Alexandre, although I doubt you’ll see this, the answer for Windows XP is Copernic. I’ve never used Live Search 4 on XP, but it couldn’t possibly be better than Copernic, because that search is super fast.

I’m still undecided on whether it’s better than Vistas search, because I run Vista and 7 at home and XP at work.

Kevin

]]> By: Brandon http://brandonlive.com/2008/12/22/why-does-windows-put-64-bit-binaries-in-system32/comment-page-1/#comment-128988 Brandon Thu, 25 Dec 2008 20:47:52 +0000 http://brandonlive.com/?p=503#comment-128988 At this time we have no plans to offer new features for Windows XP. We're very focused right now on making sure that Windows 7 offers the best search and browse experience that we can put together. At this time we have no plans to offer new features for Windows XP. We’re very focused right now on making sure that Windows 7 offers the best search and browse experience that we can put together.

]]> By: Alexandre Grigoriev http://brandonlive.com/2008/12/22/why-does-windows-put-64-bit-binaries-in-system32/comment-page-1/#comment-128984 Alexandre Grigoriev Wed, 24 Dec 2008 15:43:08 +0000 http://brandonlive.com/?p=503#comment-128984 Brandon, Thanks for heeding my wishes. Are those enhancements in XP version yet? Brandon,

Thanks for heeding my wishes. Are those enhancements in XP version yet?

]]> By: Brandon http://brandonlive.com/2008/12/22/why-does-windows-put-64-bit-binaries-in-system32/comment-page-1/#comment-128983 Brandon Wed, 24 Dec 2008 08:40:47 +0000 http://brandonlive.com/?p=503#comment-128983 Alex - You've pretty much described how Windows Search already works. It already "backs off" on user activity, and takes great care in the use of I/O, memory, and processor prioritization. On Vista or later, the shell will perform a Grep search in unindexed locations. In Windows 7, we've done a lot of work to improve the scenario of searching locations that are only partially indexed, with items being added to the view as they're crawled, and the location you're viewing being prioritized in the indexing queue. We already have two posts about the Windows Search indexer up on the Engineering Team blog, covering a lot of what you've asked. http://blogs.msdn.com/e7/archive/2008/10/13/windows-desktop-search.aspx and http://blogs.msdn.com/e7/archive/2008/10/23/follow-up-windows-desktop-search.aspx Alex –

You’ve pretty much described how Windows Search already works. It already “backs off” on user activity, and takes great care in the use of I/O, memory, and processor prioritization. On Vista or later, the shell will perform a Grep search in unindexed locations. In Windows 7, we’ve done a lot of work to improve the scenario of searching locations that are only partially indexed, with items being added to the view as they’re crawled, and the location you’re viewing being prioritized in the indexing queue.

We already have two posts about the Windows Search indexer up on the Engineering Team blog, covering a lot of what you’ve asked.

http://blogs.msdn.com/e7/archive/2008/10/13/windows-desktop-search.aspx
and
http://blogs.msdn.com/e7/archive/2008/10/23/follow-up-windows-desktop-search.aspx

]]> By: Alexandre Grigoriev http://brandonlive.com/2008/12/22/why-does-windows-put-64-bit-binaries-in-system32/comment-page-1/#comment-128981 Alexandre Grigoriev Wed, 24 Dec 2008 04:48:24 +0000 http://brandonlive.com/?p=503#comment-128981 Mio, Do an experiment. Install, for example new DDK or SDK, just a bunch of files. With Windows Search 4, try to find some word _in_ _that_ _directory_ that you know should be there, some function name. If you do it too soon, you'll be greeted with ever friendly "Folder not indexed yet". Is is truly impossible to do what's requested: just run through the files and find the requested files/words, etc? It takes finite time, you know, not as fast as for an indexed directory, but still faster than getting a cup of coffee. Why Windows search should be completely orthogonal to the built-in traditional search? I want one function: Find, not "Find with index" and "Find without index". It should just do a best effort. And don't get me started on those non-indexable files. If I want search in non-indexable files, *please* just do traditional search, not ignore them altogether. Mio,

Do an experiment. Install, for example new DDK or SDK, just a bunch of files. With Windows Search 4, try to find some word _in_ _that_ _directory_ that you know should be there, some function name. If you do it too soon, you’ll be greeted with ever friendly “Folder not indexed yet”. Is is truly impossible to do what’s requested: just run through the files and find the requested files/words, etc? It takes finite time, you know, not as fast as for an indexed directory, but still faster than getting a cup of coffee. Why Windows search should be completely orthogonal to the built-in traditional search? I want one function: Find, not “Find with index” and “Find without index”. It should just do a best effort.

And don’t get me started on those non-indexable files. If I want search in non-indexable files, *please* just do traditional search, not ignore them altogether.

]]> By: Mio http://brandonlive.com/2008/12/22/why-does-windows-put-64-bit-binaries-in-system32/comment-page-1/#comment-128980 Mio Wed, 24 Dec 2008 04:07:29 +0000 http://brandonlive.com/?p=503#comment-128980 “I want to find a file, it’s here, not somewhere on internet.”

But the content on the internet is indexed, and thus easier and faster to find.

Do you have any idea how long it takes to find a file on your hard drive by brute force? It’s a limitation of hardware. Your hard drive can only be read so fast. Indexing it is the only way to be able to find what you want fast.

You uninstalled it? So you went back to the slow-no-matter-what grep method of searching through files? Doesn’t that defeat your entire purpose?

Also, Windows Search does run with reduced priority.

]]> By: Alexandre Grigoriev http://brandonlive.com/2008/12/22/why-does-windows-put-64-bit-binaries-in-system32/comment-page-1/#comment-128979 Alexandre Grigoriev Wed, 24 Dec 2008 00:29:34 +0000 http://brandonlive.com/?p=503#comment-128979 Oh, that was my comment; nice to hear from you. So how about making Windows search that runs on reduced priority (doesn't slow the rest of the system responsiveness), doesn't take >50% of 2.4GHz processor, and opens files in non-buffered mode, to avoid that ugly file cache bloat that makes the whole system stand still while madly inpaging. I mean, runs on an XP-capable machine, reasonably. And which doesn't make that lame "the folder is not indexed yet" excuse. If a folder is not indexed, just read the damn files. Who cares? I want to find a file, it's here, not somewhere on internet. What would BillG say for that "not indexed" message? He would rant even longer than me. I just uninstalled it very promptly. Oh, that was my comment; nice to hear from you. So how about making Windows search that runs on reduced priority (doesn’t slow the rest of the system responsiveness), doesn’t take >50% of 2.4GHz processor, and opens files in non-buffered mode, to avoid that ugly file cache bloat that makes the whole system stand still while madly inpaging. I mean, runs on an XP-capable machine, reasonably. And which doesn’t make that lame “the folder is not indexed yet” excuse. If a folder is not indexed, just read the damn files. Who cares? I want to find a file, it’s here, not somewhere on internet. What would BillG say for that “not indexed” message? He would rant even longer than me. I just uninstalled it very promptly.

]]>