windows 7 search doesnt work
- Thread starter MonKENy
- Start date
Charlie98
Diamond Member
- Nov 6, 2011
- 6,298
- 64
- 91
Bubbaleone
Golden Member
- Nov 20, 2011
- 1,803
- 4
- 76
Have you already fixed your BSOD problem you posted in Computer Help? If that's not resolved, you'll probably encounter random problems with any task you try to run.
http://forums.anandtech.com/showthread.php?t=2252504
Last edited:
WhoBeDaPlaya
Diamond Member
- Sep 15, 2000
- 7,414
- 402
- 126
search is something that microsoft made worse in win7. vista had a nice tickbox to search unindexed locations too - and it actually found shit! OMG
One thing I do not like about windows search is it doesnt show EVERYTHING!! (Some files are hidden)
Im glad i have REGSEEKER because i can search files w/that AND IT SHOWS EVERYTHING!!
If i search with windows search it says right now i have 5148 files....
If i do the same search with REGSEEKER it says i have 5159 files...
However Windows search IS A BIT FASTER (@ least on 98se)
Im glad i have REGSEEKER because i can search files w/that AND IT SHOWS EVERYTHING!!
If i search with windows search it says right now i have 5148 files....
If i do the same search with REGSEEKER it says i have 5159 files...
However Windows search IS A BIT FASTER (@ least on 98se)
Under Indexing Options, click on the Advanced button. The above window will appear. Click on the Rebuild button. My guess is that your index got corrupted, possibly due to the instabilities described earlier.
Windows built-in search is fine. Learning how to use it effectively took me a few days, but once you actually learn how to use it it's really quite simple and straightforward. People who insist on using third party search software should either learn to sort/organize their files better. What's the point of searching for files outside of indexed locations? If you need to search a location regularly, add it to the index.
@Dude111 - My guess is that Regseeker is including system files like NTUSER.DAT in its file count. Really no point since they're exclusively locked by the system and contain your profile information. Why you'd want to search that is beyond anyone's guess.
ninaholic37
Golden Member
- Apr 13, 2012
- 1,883
- 31
- 91
What's the point of indexing when you hardly ever need to search for something? Wouldn't indexing take up unnecessary space? I'd rather use a third-party program, or (preferably) something in Windows that searches everything no matter what. If it takes a bit longer, no big deal, I can do something else while searching or grab a coffee or something.
Red Squirrel
No Lifer
I've noticed that all windows versions after 98se, the search is sporadic. It seems to work when it wants. When it works, it works well and is fast, but sometimes it will just immediately go to "found nothing" without even trying when clearly the file you are looking for does exist.
I used to use a program called launchy when I was on XP but sadly it does not seem to work well in windows 7.
I used to use a program called launchy when I was on XP but sadly it does not seem to work well in windows 7.
Under Indexing Options, click on the Advanced button. The above window will appear. Click on the Rebuild button. My guess is that your index got corrupted, possibly due to the instabilities described earlier.
Windows built-in search is fine. Learning how to use it effectively took me a few days, but once you actually learn how to use it it's really quite simple and straightforward. People who insist on using third party search software should either learn to sort/organize their files better. What's the point of searching for files outside of indexed locations? If you need to search a location regularly, add it to the index.
@Dude111 - My guess is that Regseeker is including system files like NTUSER.DAT in its file count. Really no point since they're exclusively locked by the system and contain your profile information. Why you'd want to search that is beyond anyone's guess.
so if i plug in a drive that's not indexed and search can't find anything i'm meant to wait until the thing gets indexed before searching? no.
i hardly ever use windows search and when i do it's on newly downloaded files, or looking through another drive (not mine) that's not been indexed. as it is, windows search is worse than useless as it wastes time. better to go to dos and search there. it actually finds stuff.
Boy, people get all hot and bothered about these things. I was trying to give a suggestion to the OP's situation, not to your particular usage pattern.
I've rarely had to search external drives for a particular file. The way that I use external drives is for temporary storage while migrating internal storage, or for transferring files from one system to another. By storing the files in a logical folder system, they're easy to find as is without the need for searching or indexing. If you find yourself constantly searching external drives, I'd suggest better organizing the files. It'll likely be less time to click a few folders down than to launch a third party tool, point it at the correct drive/directory, and then tell it your search string.
As for your downloads, add the folder to your index! It'll show up within a few seconds of it finishing downloading. If you need to search for something the instant it's finished downloading, go through whatever download software to "Open in Folder" or whatever similar option there is. File instantly found.
@ninaholic37 - Yes, adding another location to the index increases its size slightly. That all being said, the index is pretty small in the grand scheme of things. The local index on my system, which covers everything in my scratch drive (700GB in ~20,000 files) is about 175MB. On my server, the index for my ~2.5TB in 90,000 files of storage (the entire storage array, basically everything I do at home) takes up about 1GB. To put that into dollars and cents, that's ~$1.50 of space on my SSDs. That's about three cups of coffee that you've gone off to get while I have my search results.
I also don't understand how people say that Windows refuses to search in non-indexed locations. This is true of the start menu, but not for Windows. Go to the folder or drive in question and type your search string in the search box at the top right.
Screenshot - Search for 'Outlook' in C: (with a search modifier!)
Screenshot - Search for 'Hawaii' on an external drive
If you guys have a specific usage scenario that flat out doesn't work (i.e. fails to find a file completely - not just fails-to-work-the-way-you-were-used-to-in-Vista-or-XP), please do tell. I've always managed to find the built-in search sufficient. Other times, manually finding the file by browsing has been faster than any non-indexed search method I've used.
Fardringle
Diamond Member
- Oct 23, 2000
- 9,200
- 765
- 126
Zxian, in Windows XP, if I need to find a file (i.e. I don't know where it is) I just tell Windows to search the entire drive including hidden and system folders. It finds the file, and usually within a few seconds, even in non-indexed locations.
In Windows 7, if I need to find a file and don't know where it is, I tell Windows to search the entire drive (as much as it will allow) and IF the file is in an indexed location, Windows might find the file. I've seen situations where it returns no results even for a file that is in a known indexed location. If the file is in a non-indexed folder, Windows will never find it no matter how you perform the search. Yes, typing in the Search box at the top of Windows Explorer will find that specific file inside the current folder you are looking at, but if you already know the folder where the file is located, then you don't need to search for it, do you?
In Windows 7, if I need to find a file and don't know where it is, I tell Windows to search the entire drive (as much as it will allow) and IF the file is in an indexed location, Windows might find the file. I've seen situations where it returns no results even for a file that is in a known indexed location. If the file is in a non-indexed folder, Windows will never find it no matter how you perform the search. Yes, typing in the Search box at the top of Windows Explorer will find that specific file inside the current folder you are looking at, but if you already know the folder where the file is located, then you don't need to search for it, do you?
Last edited:
Look at my examples again. Searching for "Outlook" in the root of my C: drive gave me every file or folder that contained "Outlook" in the name. I can assure you that my Games and Program Files folders are not indexed. The external drive is also a non-indexed location. Yes, the folder structure on my external is not that complicated at the moment, but it does work several folders down as well.
fardringle is right, the search was better in older versions of windows. vistas was fine too (IMO). win7 search sucks donkey nuts.
ninaholic37
Golden Member
- Apr 13, 2012
- 1,883
- 31
- 91
mine took ages too and it still sucks. it added "exclusions" on its own and even after indexing for a few days it still asks me to "add d: \ to..." when i search. wtf is that!?
they need to get the teams doing this to have people test it in front of them and everyime something doesn't work they get kicked in the nuts. they'll soon learn
they need to get the teams doing this to have people test it in front of them and everyime something doesn't work they get kicked in the nuts. they'll soon learn
VirtualLarry
No Lifer
- Aug 25, 2001
- 56,570
- 10,204
- 126
I remember Win2K's search, it would search even binary files for text strings. Sure, it might have taken longer to scan the drive, but it worked. It didn't try to be "smart" like Win7, and in the process, miss half of the files.
There's my result.
Just so we are comparing apples to apples here, you do have Outlook/Office installed on your computer, right? A system with only Thunderbird and Foobar obviously won't show the same results that mine does.
I just tested again with my workstation at work, and I managed to get similar results. Search took about 10 seconds on a 500GB 7200RPM drive.
I also haven't done much tweaking at all on my system aside from reducing the TCP ACK frequency and pagefile size. The more you mess with, the more you're likely to muck something up. I have a reg file somewhere at home specifically for undoing the damage that BlackViper's "guides" do to your service settings.
Also, if you had/have hardware issues there's any number of possible results that could happen. If you had hard disk or memory issues it's very possible that the system files responsible for Windows search were corrupted during Windows' installation. Sadly, the only way of reliably guaranteeing that things are the way they should be is to fix the underlying hardware issue and then reinstall Windows from scratch.
TRENDING THREADS
-
Discussion Zen 5 Speculation (EPYC Turin and Strix Point/Granite Ridge - Ryzen 9000)- Started by DisEnchantment
- Replies: 24K
-
Discussion Intel Meteor, Arrow, Lunar & Panther Lakes Discussion Threads
- Started by Tigerick
- Replies: 20K
-
-
-
Facebook
Twitter