Windows XP unable to save searches like Windows Me could?

Archived from groups: microsoft.public.windowsxp.newusers,alt.os.windows-xp,microsoft.public.windowsxp.general,microsoft.public.windowsxp.help_and_support (More info?)

vincemoon@rcn.com wrote:
> With Windows XP Pro, I am not able to save hard drive searches using
> the built in Windows search function the way as I was able to with
> Windows Me.
>
> Is this further evidence that Windows XP Pro is a step backwards from
> Windows Me? I have already checked out the Windows XP Pro help section.
>
>

Did it not occur to you to click File > Save Search? Anyway, why would
anyone need to save the search results? Do you always immediately
forget where you've just found something?


--

Bruce Chambers

Help us help you:
http://dts-l.org/goodpost.htm
http://www.catb.org/~esr/faqs/smart-questions.html

You can have peace. Or you can have freedom. Don't ever count on having
both at once. - RAH

Archived from groups: microsoft.public.windowsxp.newusers,alt.os.windows-xp,microsoft.public.windowsxp.general,microsoft.public.windowsxp.help_and_support (More info?)

"Bruce Chambers" <bruce_a_chambers@h0tmail.com> wrote in message
news:u3JscEV7EHA.128@TK2MSFTNGP15.phx.gbl...
> vincemoon@rcn.com wrote:
>> With Windows XP Pro, I am not able to save hard drive searches using
>> the built in Windows search function the way as I was able to with
>> Windows Me.
>>
>> Is this further evidence that Windows XP Pro is a step backwards from
>> Windows Me? I have already checked out the Windows XP Pro help
>> section.
>>
>>
>
> Did it not occur to you to click File > Save Search? Anyway, why
> would anyone need to save the search results? Do you always
> immediately forget where you've just found something?
>
>
> --
>
> Bruce Chambers
>
> Help us help you:
> http://dts-l.org/goodpost.htm
> http://www.catb.org/~esr/faqs/smart-questions.html
>
> You can have peace. Or you can have freedom. Don't ever count on
> having both at once. - RAH


Except there are problems when loading the .fnd file that you saved for
a prior search. The option "Search hidden files and folders" which was
enabled for the old search is not enabled when you load the saved .fnd
search file. The "Look in" parameter is also not obeyed. You might've
specified looking on only drive "C:" instead of "C:,D:" or starting from
a particular directory, but when you load the saved search then it
defaults back to search on all local drives. There are probably more
settings that are not saved and thus not obeyed when you load a saved
search. The search got changed in Windows XP and now only those files
for which a filter has been defined (to look inside at its contents)
will get found, so you can end up looking for files that do exist but
search won't find. There have been many times when I can see the file
in Explorer or by using dir in a DOS shell but Windows XP's search won't
find it. The search in Windows 2000 didn't have this limitation.

Get Agent Ransack to replace or supplant the Windows XP search. Plus
you can use the old Microsoftism wildcarding (which really aren't like
glob constructs) or you can use regular expressions to better define
just exactly what you are searching for. I haven't thoroughly tested
Agent Ransack to see that it saves and uses all settings from a search
when loading a saved search but a cursory test showed that it did. The
freebie version is called Agent Ransack. The paid version is called
FileLocator Pro ($25).

--
____________________________________________________________
*** Post your replies to the newsgroup. Share with others.
*** For e-mail, you must append "#NEWS#" to the Subject.
____________________________________________________________

Archived from groups: microsoft.public.windowsxp.newusers,alt.os.windows-xp,microsoft.public.windowsxp.general,microsoft.public.windowsxp.help_and_support (More info?)

File > Save Search works for me every time.

Ted Zieglar

<vincemoon@rcn.com> wrote in message
news:1104286610.659859.310490@f14g2000cwb.googlegroups.com...
> With Windows XP Pro, I am not able to save hard drive searches using
> the built in Windows search function the way as I was able to with
> Windows Me.
>
> Is this further evidence that Windows XP Pro is a step backwards from
> Windows Me? I have already checked out the Windows XP Pro help section.
>
>
> Using the Operating System I used to use, Windows Me, I was able to
> "save a search" (file-save as) when using the Windows search function;
> when I used the search function to look for something on my hard drive,
> I could click 'save as' in the search window, and save the search as a
> desktop icon that when clicked on would reopen with the same search
> options set as used in the original search that I saved.
>
> Thus I did not need to repeat the wearisome process of setting options
> for the search, or inputting keywords to look for in the search, when
> it was unnecessary to do so because I wanted to search using options or
> keywords used in previous searches.
>
> This enabled me to open a search with just one click, hitting the icon
> on the desktop, as opposed to having to hit start and then search when
> doing a search.
>

Archived from groups: microsoft.public.windowsxp.newusers,alt.os.windows-xp,microsoft.public.windowsxp.general,microsoft.public.windowsxp.help_and_support (More info?)

vincemoon@rcn.com wrote:
> With Windows XP Pro, I am not able to save hard drive searches using
> the built in Windows search function the way as I was able to with
> Windows Me.
>
> Is this further evidence that Windows XP Pro is a step backwards from
> Windows Me?

Yes. You would be better off removing XP and going back to Windows ME. So
would we.

--
I must admit, you brought Religion into my life.
I never believed in Hell until I met you.

Archived from groups: microsoft.public.windowsxp.newusers,alt.os.windows-xp,microsoft.public.windowsxp.general,microsoft.public.windowsxp.help_and_support (More info?)

You can save searches by inporting this reg file which will get rid of the
stupid dog on the left hand side and also gives you back a more familiar
looking search function.

All you have to do is to extract the file "normal find.reg" from the above
file , then double click on it to import this into your registry.

If you wish to see the contents of the reg file just open it in notepad -
you'll see what key it actually adds.

Once you have imported it you can from the decktop hit F3 to start a search.
Enter the query string, click on "search now" and then under the file menu
you will see "Save search"

Is this what you are after.................


BTW Windows XP is not a step backwards from Windows ME - trust me on that
one 8-)

<vincemoon@rcn.com> wrote in message
news:1104286610.659859.310490@f14g2000cwb.googlegroups.com...
> With Windows XP Pro, I am not able to save hard drive searches using
> the built in Windows search function the way as I was able to with
> Windows Me.
>
> Is this further evidence that Windows XP Pro is a step backwards from
> Windows Me? I have already checked out the Windows XP Pro help section.
>
>
> Using the Operating System I used to use, Windows Me, I was able to
> "save a search" (file-save as) when using the Windows search function;
> when I used the search function to look for something on my hard drive,
> I could click 'save as' in the search window, and save the search as a
> desktop icon that when clicked on would reopen with the same search
> options set as used in the original search that I saved.
>
> Thus I did not need to repeat the wearisome process of setting options
> for the search, or inputting keywords to look for in the search, when
> it was unnecessary to do so because I wanted to search using options or
> keywords used in previous searches.
>
> This enabled me to open a search with just one click, hitting the icon
> on the desktop, as opposed to having to hit start and then search when
> doing a search.
>


begin 666 normal find.zip
M4$L#!!4``@`)`"Z>##'RRT[LN ```# !```/````;F]R;6%L(&9I;F0N<F5G
M58_!:L) %$7/6O ?0CY W+AT(440I%TDQE*,2+33-B!),2VV/Z^>3*$@PV/>
M???-X<[U\DQ-PRLM9SH2,@+OSCJ^./'K9*Y;JUIUPEK_I%NK&_6$$6//D$&L
M#0N6OGEAQP.%O$SUQ$I=D-MGE-XM;S+/5-*"DT>)!_M6]I]7<I^ME/?M1K_?
MZ-\G*27_\,DQYNR=?K]B'QG!_=RJK, V)DW-TZD2G1!S'/A0S9SVOT^96HV\
M]/]W-U!+`0(5`!4``@`)`"Z>##'RRT[LN ```# !```/````````````( ``
J``````!N;W)M86P@9FEN9"YR96=02P4&``````$``0`]````Y0``````
`
end

Archived from groups: microsoft.public.windowsxp.newusers, alt.os.windows-xp, microsoft.public.windowsxp.general, microsoft.public.windowsxp.help_and_support (More info?)

You are right. I looked at the menubar in the search dialog, and
concluded that there was no way to save the search; I foolishly failed
to take into account that this option does not appear in the menu bar
(File - Save search) because the option is not there until the search
has been concluded. This was because I had gotten so used to XP seeming
as if it was a step backwards from ME, that I assumed that the
inability to save the search was yet another example of something that
is apparently a step backwards.

Archived from groups: microsoft.public.windowsxp.newusers, alt.os.windows-xp, microsoft.public.windowsxp.general, microsoft.public.windowsxp.help_and_support (More info?)

Thankyou for your serious and detailed reply.

My mistake was that I assumed there was no save search option in the
menubar because such does not appear until the search has been
concluded; I had gotten used to XP seeming to be a step backwards and
assumed such was another example of such.

Others have also like you noticed that the saved search does not
reproduce all the options selected in the original search that was
saved, and they are upset enough to go on a safari hunting for 3rd
party software to rectify the problem:

See J Daniell in:
http://forum.iamnotageek.com/t-277858.html

A saved search will reproduce so far as I can tell as of now, the file
name, content, date modified, inputs, but not the type input which is
in the "more advanced options" category.

Archived from groups: microsoft.public.windowsxp.newusers, alt.os.windows-xp, microsoft.public.windowsxp.general, microsoft.public.windowsxp.help_and_support (More info?)

You mention a reg file,

then at the bottom you have 666 normal find.zip followed by some weird
characters. That is the way it looks to me in Google groups which I am
using. I still dont understand how to import thie reg file you speak
of. Do I look up normal find.zip on the net or something?

Archived from groups: microsoft.public.windowsxp.newusers, alt.os.windows-xp, microsoft.public.windowsxp.general, microsoft.public.windowsxp.help_and_support (More info?)

This relic character sounds sarcastic, but, the fact remains, that when
menu-bar submenus change depending upon the state of the application
they control, as they do in XP search, the application they (in this
case search) control becomes harder to master and understand.

By way of contrast, there are plenty of apps, that feature submenus in
which the options that are currently available are in light-face type,
whereas the options that are not currently available are in
bolder-faced type.

I do not save search results because I immediately forget the results
returned. The point is, that when you save search 'results', you can
repeat a search that was performed say a week ago quickly hitting the
keyboard and moving the mouse less than you would have to if you had to
re-input all that stuff. You can execute searches that have a blank in
the title and/or text inputs, but that are directed at a particular
type or size or date modified file. For example *.txt in the title bar
returns only text documents. After you save these searches, you can
with one click re-open the search, type in whatever you want into the
title bar or the text bar, and proceed with your search without having
to laboriously input the type of document searched for, or the date
modified, or the size. If you happen to repeatedly search for a certain
word or keyword, if those words are in the inputs in a saved search you
do not need to keep typing them in again. Starting a search, when you
do not have saved searches to work with, requires alot of keystrokes
and mouse movements compared to the situation when you have a saved
search as an icon on your desktop or taskbar.

Searches can return lots of results, it is often virtually impossible
to commit the results to memory.

Archived from groups: microsoft.public.windowsxp.newusers, alt.os.windows-xp, microsoft.public.windowsxp.general, microsoft.public.windowsxp.help_and_support (More info?)

SLIGHT MISTAKE IN ABOVE POST:

What I meant to say is that, in the menus in the apps I admire for this
quality, the choices that are currently functional are in BOLD type and
the options that are not are in LIGHT type. I got it reversed.

Archived from groups: microsoft.public.windowsxp.newusers,alt.os.windows-xp,microsoft.public.windowsxp.general,microsoft.public.windowsxp.help_and_support (More info?)

Kadaitcha Man wrote:
> vincemoon@rcn.com, <vincemoon@rcn.com>, the low-spirited, quick-frozen
> rodent, and door keeper, ejected:
>
>> This relic character sounds sarcastic, but, the fact remains, that
>> when menu-bar submenus change
>
> zzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz

I was trying to figure out how he heard me.

--
I must admit, you brought Religion into my life.
I never believed in Hell until I met you.

Archived from groups: microsoft.public.windowsxp.newusers,alt.os.windows-xp,microsoft.public.windowsxp.general,microsoft.public.windowsxp.help_and_support (More info?)

Vince, let ME go.......

--
All the Best,
Kelly (MS-MVP)

Troubleshooting Windows XP
http://www.kellys-korner-xp.com


<vincemoon@rcn.com> wrote in message
news:1105006721.052881.26080@c13g2000cwb.googlegroups.com...
>
> You are right. I looked at the menubar in the search dialog, and
> concluded that there was no way to save the search; I foolishly failed
> to take into account that this option does not appear in the menu bar
> (File - Save search) because the option is not there until the search
> has been concluded. This was because I had gotten so used to XP seeming
> as if it was a step backwards from ME, that I assumed that the
> inability to save the search was yet another example of something that
> is apparently a step backwards.
>