Main Area and Open Discussion > General Software Discussion
What is the currently best Desktop Search software?
CWuestefeld:
As for the problems with the hierarchical file system, have you guys considered "albums" and similar features which are provided by decent picture managers and media players these days? This is basically a way to put files into multiple categories.
-qforce (February 10, 2009, 08:18 AM)
--- End quote ---
That's exactly what I'm getting at. I don't know of any other tool that can search through, e.g., ACDSee's database. However, any photo album app will allow you to save tags into EXIF or IPTC metadata in the images themselves. And since this is a standard, any desktop search app worth its salt can access it.
Having done that, now I can use my search app to find, say, "Mexico 2008" and get all my related photos, emails exchanged with the travel agent, and the AVI of the time-lapse sunset I made. Sure, all of these things are handled through different apps. But the ability to search like this allows me to have all of the materials related to a given project in front of me at once. (Which is why I also think that the Windows way of organizing files under "My Documents" in app-centric folders is idiotic)
I never used that sort of thing, though, because of the potential risk of vendor lock-in (meaning that all that categorization data is lost when I move to another program).
-qforce (February 10, 2009, 08:18 AM)
--- End quote ---
Open source people sometimes amaze me. You refuse to use any such program (even though, as I noted, there's a standard way for them to store their data in most cases), despite how much good it might do you.
aenache36:
Greetings.
What would be the required syntax if one tries to find documents that contain certain strings?
As much as I knew
"word1 word2"
was suppose to that job whereas
word1 word2
is the equivalent of AND, do please correct me if I am wrong.
-aenache36 (February 10, 2009, 02:56 AM)
--- End quote ---
Just give me a second to check the Lucene documentation...
-qforce (February 10, 2009, 08:18 AM)
--- End quote ---
My question was about syntax needed to search for strings... but anyway, I understood that DocFetcer's problem is related to unfinished preview implementation...I checked that against strings and it's OK.
BTW, AutoFocus is also base partially on Lucene so that should make it quite familiar to you...
All the best.
qforce:
That's exactly what I'm getting at. I don't know of any other tool that can search through, e.g., ACDSee's database. However, any photo album app will allow you to save tags into EXIF or IPTC metadata in the images themselves. And since this is a standard, any desktop search app worth its salt can access it.
Having done that, now I can use my search app to find, say, "Mexico 2008" and get all my related photos, emails exchanged with the travel agent, and the AVI of the time-lapse sunset I made. Sure, all of these things are handled through different apps. But the ability to search like this allows me to have all of the materials related to a given project in front of me at once. (Which is why I also think that the Windows way of organizing files under "My Documents" in app-centric folders is idiotic)
-CWuestefeld (February 10, 2009, 08:46 AM)
--- End quote ---
Some people are just too lazy to add half a dozen tags to each and every image they store on their computer. Do you really do that? :o
On a related note I'd like to mention delicious.com, a social bookmarking site. This site allows you to assign multiple tags to a bookmark. which sounds awesome in theory (multiple categorization, yay!), but after a while I stopped bothering with all this tagging. Not sure why, but it felt like "too much work"... It seems there's a subtle, but significant difference between tagging and the capability to put a file in more than one folder.
Open source people sometimes amaze me. You refuse to use any such program (even though, as I noted, there's a standard way for them to store their data in most cases), despite how much good it might do you.
-CWuestefeld (February 10, 2009, 08:46 AM)
--- End quote ---
Maybe I should also mention the second reason why I don't use albums and the likes: I don't have too many pictures on my computer (a few hundred or so, rarely updated), and I stopped collecting music a long time ago (last.fm anyone?), so there's not much to organize here. This is not too amazing an explanation, is it?
superboyac:
but after a while I stopped bothering with all this tagging. Not sure why, but it felt like "too much work"...
--- End quote ---
Which is exactly why I'm obsessed with Powermarks and related bookmark managers like Linkman. I just want to dump everything in a container and find it almost instantly. No tagging or organizing.
qforce:
BTW, AutoFocus is also base partially on Lucene so that should make it quite familiar to you...
All the best.
-aenache36 (February 10, 2009, 09:14 AM)
--- End quote ---
It looked fairly interesting until I read the hardware requirements section...
Navigation
[0] Message Index
[#] Next page
[*] Previous page
Go to full version