Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Skepticism after Windows 10 search failure

forbes.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

131–140 of 189 posts

Re: Skepticism after Windows 10 search failure

#131

Post by stinos »

kemotep wrote: post #128
stinos wrote: post #88

Earlier quoted context omitted.

But for some people it just does work. Without the need for any hacks, just some tweaking of settings. So when I see people saying they roll there eyes when they they see those claims, I say: think a bit further, consider other factors. Like, it depends on what you do with it perhaps, on the hardware?

I agree that for some people, they stick with Windows because their hardware and software does just work. Compatibility with the things you do is important. However we are in a thread about how Windows 10 search just up an broke and whose only permanent fix is to disable part of it in the registry. The search function barely works compared to alternatives too. People can absolutely stick with Windows but I was referr…

people who argue that they cannot try alternatives because they don't "just work"

Fair enough, but your argumentation still sounds like 'works for me so it's all fine' which is the main point I was addressing. I.e. it's not because you have less problems on linux that others do as well, and hence they could make a rather valid argument that they gave up trying. Which doesn't mean all people complaining like that are right of course. It's never so black/white.

Re: Skepticism after Windows 10 search failure

#132

Post by mrec »

SturgeonsLaw wrote: post #48
makecheck wrote: post #33

The search behaves “as if” it’s using randomly-ordered keys in a random source dictionary, and it’s maddening. If I type what seems to be the same 3 letters a few times in a row, the result is always different: one time it acts like the app isn’t even installed, another time it finds the app (first choice), another time it finds some other random sub-component instead of the app with a weird file extension. Oh, and m…

If anyone from Microsoft happens to be reading this thread, please read the above comment, then re-read it. It's a spot-on description of the problems and solutions for Windows search. Edit: and just to expand on a point the commenter made, the results would be more valuable if it prioritised in an order like this: 1) Something the user has pinned 2) Something the user has launched a bunch of times 3) The shortcut le…

Basically agree but would quibble with your 1. If I've pinned an application (as I do for anything I use regularly) surely it's because I want to launch it quickly via the taskbar rather than having to go via search. If I'm in search it's because I'm looking for something else.

Re: Skepticism after Windows 10 search failure

#133

Post by iad »

Semaphor wrote: post #126
brianpgordon wrote: post #113

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Same. And "torrent" returns no results at all. :/

Funny. "bitt" -> nothing. "bitto" -> works. "bitt" -> now works as well.

I have qBittorrent installed. For me searching "bitt" displays only "Battle.net", which is not even a valid match. hilarious.

Re: Skepticism after Windows 10 search failure

#134

Post by worble »

awiesenhofer wrote: post #116

I gave up on windows builtin search a long time ago because its so frustrating - Wox launcher and especially Everything Search is my substitute of choice. Its also incredibly fast! Edit, Links: http://www.wox.one https://www.voidtools.com

Just a note - looking at Wox, the official repo seems to be unmaintained, there's appears to be an active fork here however: https://github.com/jjw24/Wox/

Re: Skepticism after Windows 10 search failure

#135

Post by thegeekpirate »

Semaphor wrote: post #126
brianpgordon wrote: post #113

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Same. And "torrent" returns no results at all. :/

Funny. "bitt" -> nothing. "bitto" -> works. "bitt" -> now works as well.

Good catch, so if you type "bitto" then hit backspace to "bitt", it works, but hit backspace again ("bit") and it'll disappear (it even shows me "Notepad", because why not)!

Re: Skepticism after Windows 10 search failure

#136

Post by jiggawatts »

jodrellblank wrote: post #64
desc wrote: post #47

Can't say I ran into this particular bug, but I tend not to trust the search on Windows much anyway. I myself have implemented better text/prefix matching and ranking using a very simple SQLite database schema, on a far larger dataset than 'the local machine', yet Microsoft repeatedly fail at a task which should succumb easily even to brute-force approaches. They don't get to claim that it's a harder problem than ind…

Jeffrey Snover[1] likes to say that "Microsoft is incapable of sustained error", yet they've been incapable of building a good search for at least 15-20 years that I've experienced. Bing search is no competitor to Google, Explorer filesystem search is slow and untrustworthy, the search which integrates desktops to Windows server indexing of fileshares is slow and untrustworthy, on-premises SharePoint search has never…

Here's the thing: I've built, back in 2005, a full-text search for 60 GB of small-text data that would typically return results in under 15ms. This was using 100% Microsoft-native technology, like C# and SQL.

How much data does the Start Menu search have to index, total? A few 100KB? Something like that. This is assuming a fresh install, no documents, no third party apps.

A modern CPU can simply brute force through that amount of data and perform nearly arbitrary subtext matching, without any fancy indexing techniques, in something like a handful of microseconds. Even in an absolute worst-case of cross-process pointer chasing out into uncached main memory, you're talking a few tens of milliseconds, max.

Yet, a fresh install of any version of Windows, including Server editions, simply flat out fails to find control panel items or shortcuts even if their names are typed exactly. Many hours later it'll find some of them, not necessarily all. Days later, perhaps it'll reach a 100% match, but that's certainly not guaranteed.

For me, often having to use freshly installed Windows VMs, I see a nearly 100% failure rate for this component.

It's just absurd that this passed QA.

Re: Skepticism after Windows 10 search failure

#137

Post by nocturnial »

Shank wrote: post #73
nocturnial wrote: post #52

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I also use O&O shutup. It's portable and needs to be run only once and perhaps after a windows update. Lately, the windows updates doesn't seem to alter the changes I made using shutup. It's a convenience tool. If you look up everything you can do it all manually.

Everything is a search engine, not at all related to O&O shutup.

I never mentioned everything, I never said shutup was a search engine.. Not everything in this thread is related to "everything", some things are related to windows dailing home to ms hq.

dang: I'm done with this bullshit, it's ok to delete my account.

Re: Skepticism after Windows 10 search failure

#138

Post by joshuaissac »

thebruce87m wrote: post #74
SturgeonsLaw wrote: post #48

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If anyone from Microsoft happens to be reading this thread, please read the above comment, then re-read it. It's a spot-on description of the problems and solutions for Windows search. Edit: and just to expand on a point the commenter made, the results would be more valuable if it prioritised in an order like this: 1) Something the user has pinned 2) Something the user has launched a bunch of times 3) The shortcut le…

5. Never anything on the web

It would be useful for the user to be linked to a vetted and official store app if the name matches and the user does not have it installed already. Although there are privacy considerations about sending search terms to the Internet, so a list of store apps could be cached on the local machine instead.

Re: Skepticism after Windows 10 search failure

#140

Post by pdimitar »

aj7 wrote: post #42

About a year ago, I switched from a Windows 10 quad-core Xeon system to an iMac Pro. The single greatest performance enhancement, among many, is the speed and accuracy of the macOS search.

Seconded. Not to mention how amazingly fast the iMac Pro is in general.

Still thinking of buying Alfred but I'm undecided. Have you tried it?

Post reply on HN