DonationCoder.com Forum
Other Software => Announce Your Software/Service/Product => Topic started by: Cashper on November 22, 2013, 04:40 AM
-
Hi, all!
I would like to announce my new software: FileSearchy.
Program homepage: http://www.filesearchy.com/
Download URL: http://www.filesearchy.com/download/filesearchy.exe
Key features:
- Instant search by file name.
- Search by file file contents, size and date.
- Supports search inside PDF, Office and other documents (e.g. PDF, RTF, DOC, XLS, PPT, DOCX, XLSX, PPTX etc).
- Highlights found text in file names and contents.
- Clean and intuitive multi-tabbed user interface.
[ You are not allowed to view attachments ]
[ You are not allowed to view attachments ]
Please let me know what do you think of it.
This is a first release and a beta, so might have a lot of bugs. Please let me know of them.
-
Sounds perfect, and doesn't require any runtime crap, but... Why is it triggering a UAC prompt? That strikes me as rather bad form for something that shouldn't need admin rights.
-
It needs an access to MFT and NTFS change journal in order to read and maintain list of all files.
-
It needs an access to MFT and NTFS change journal in order to read and maintain list of all files.
-Cashper
Hm... Well I imagine that could be a dicey hair to split, but the requirement does rather hamper the programs usage in user land on business networks where most people don't have access to an admin account.
-
I hope that most Windows users do have admin rights.
As for non-admin users, technically it is possible to bypass UAC, for example, by installing a service (permissions are needed only on install in this case).
But it will not take into account file permissions and will search through all files.
-
I hope that most Windows users do have admin rights.-Cashper
That unfortunately does not align with industry trends/best practices which have been gaining momentum over the last decade. Even Administrators for the past several years are urged to avoid engaging day-to-day activities with administrative rights because of the massive amount of risk involved in one small slipup taking down a corporate network.
As for non-admin users, technically it is possible to bypass UAC, for example, by installing a service (permissions are needed only on install in this case).
But it will not take into account file permissions and will search through all files.-Cashper
Speaking as an Admin...if one of the users came to me with that as a request ... I would probably set them on fire. :)
Is there a possibility of mode switching the application so that it could be started in a lower performance but still user (level) account accessible state? IIRC this can be don't with an at launch runtime prompt so it wouldn't (/shouldn't) require requiring the user to deal with hotkeys or command line switches. Perhaps a quick rights test and then a dialog prompt appears if/as necessary.
It would go a long way towards making the application business network friendly.
-
Is there a possibility of mode switching the application so that it could be started in a lower performance but still user (level) account accessible state? IIRC this can be don't with an at launch runtime prompt so it wouldn't (/shouldn't) require requiring the user to deal with hotkeys or command line switches. Perhaps a quick rights test and then a dialog prompt appears if/as necessary.
It would go a long way towards making the application business network friendly.
-Stoic Joker
Yes, this is possible. I will probably add this possibility in future versions. Thanks for your input!
-
Thanks for this, writing a brief review.
The In directory browse button doesn't actually browser for a folder but individual files on XP
-
Hmm, I wonder if it's that Everything Search either doesn't use the journal or doesn't search contents that enables it to run without the UAC trigger. I thought I had it set to Run As Administrator but I just checked and it's not.
It definitely uses the MFTs to get the index.
-
Hmm, I wonder if it's that Everything Search either doesn't use the journal or doesn't search contents that enables it to run without the UAC trigger. I thought I had it set to Run As Administrator but I just checked and it's not.
It definitely uses the MFTs to get the index.-MilesAhead
Latest versions, (1.3.1.636b+), install a service, (if necessary), so the interface doesn't need to run with admin privileges.
Wednesday, 20 February 2013: Version 1.3.1.636b
added %APPDATA% option
added Everything service option
added search history option
...
[ You are not allowed to view attachments ]
-
I reverted to ES 1.2.x as the beta kept hanging until the index was rebuilt. I looked in Services applet and didn't see anything. Also they say on W8 forum that if an autostart program needs to be run as admin, it won't do it without UAC prompt. They create a scheduled task to get around it. I have UAC set to show me no notices or whatever the lowest setting is. I thought it would be better than W7 but it seems to be worse. Programs in Program Files folder can't even create files in their own folder without being run as Admin. Really annoying.
Of course running as a service just runs as System to bypass all the bs. :)
-
Programs in Program Files folder can't even create files in their own folder without being run as Admin. Really annoying.-MilesAhead
Even if you reset the permissions on the program's directory? I've had to do that in the past with some legacy applications (in a pinch), and it always resolved the issue. But I haven't tried it on a Win8 machine yet ... So you're saying it still won't work without nagging you? ...That does suck.
-----------------------------------------///-------------------------------------------------------------
But scampering back closer to the assigned topic... :D ...I've been using Xteq's X-Find for years to do this kind of thing, but it hasn't been updated for years. So I've been toying with looking for an alternative application (hence my interest here), but it has to be something I can use in a quick-N-dirty fashion when dealing with client networks that may or may not have access to the fancy hat account for a variety of reasons.
-
You have to do the take ownership thing or whatever. W8 is a lot bitchier than W7. Also it has that secure boot crap. If you want to boot a CD say Partition Wizard, you have to boot into BIOS, turn secure boot off, then boot the CD, then after you do whatever from the CD, you then enable the secure boot again. I leave secure boot on just because I can't make backup images. 3.5" HDs are too heavy to carry around. :) I hope it does prevent rootkits because it is a PITA. :)
-
Nice. Thanks for posting this. I like the relevance bar. However, I miss the ability to rank the search results by relevance (the way it's possible in DocFetcher for instance). I need to search for terms in the contents of 1300 PDF files (ebooks and articles), and going through e.g. 500 results is time-consuming.
-
Not bad Cashper!
Looks nice, finding files is really instant.
I would install it on 10 notebooks but there are only limited user accounts available.
So the only way atm is to create a task that runs with highest privileges but I do not
want it to popup automatically so could you please add an option to just display it's
tray icon instead of the full gui?
-
Not bad Cashper!
Looks nice, finding files is really instant.
I would install it on 10 notebooks but there are only limited user accounts available.
So the only way atm is to create a task that runs with highest privileges but I do not
want it to popup automatically so could you please add an option to just display it's
tray icon instead of the full gui?
-highend01
Thanks for your message! I am currently implementing ability to run without admin permissions and will provide a new version shortly.
I already implemented bypassing UAC prompt on accounts that have admin permissions.
You can run FileSearchy without full gui even in v0.9 using the following command line: "FileSearchy.exe -minimize".
-
Nice. Thanks for posting this. I like the relevance bar. However, I miss the ability to rank the search results by relevance (the way it's possible in DocFetcher for instance). I need to search for terms in the contents of 1300 PDF files (ebooks and articles), and going through e.g. 500 results is time-consuming.
-dr_andus
Thanks, sort by relevance seems very useful.
I've taken a look at DocFetcher, it seems that it gives a higher score based on number of matches and size of the document. Do you find the ranking in DocFetcher really useful?
-
Do you find the ranking in DocFetcher really useful?
-Cashper
I have only just looked at it today. It doesn't seem to be all that accurate, as I get radically different (i.e. more relevant) results when I search my PDF library for the same search term with PDF-Xchange Viewer Pro. So it's not so much about the way DocFetcher does it. It's more about the idea of being able to sort the results by relevance (even Copernic Desktop Search doesn't seem to be able to do that) by clicking on a column. PDF-Xchange Viewer Pro doesn't seem to be able to rank by relevance either.
P.S. Agent Ransack doesn't seem to have a relevance ranking either, though it compensates for it somewhat by only showing the relevant paragraphs, which is kind of clever, and by making it easy to move from one document to the next using the arrows.
-
it has to be something I can use in a quick-N-dirty fashion when dealing with client networks that may or may not have access to the fancy hat account for a variety of reasons.-Stoic Joker
Would Nir Sofer's SearchMyFiles (http://www.nirsoft.net/utils/search_my_files.html) do enough for you?
-
I've published new beta v 0.91.
Important changes:
1) Now it is possible to launch program without admin permissions. The program will work slower in this case - it will not use indexing, and that means that instant search by name will not be available.
2) Application skips UAC by creating a task in task scheduler.
3) Security improvement: When launching a program from FileSearchy, it is launched without elevation (and prompts UAC).
-
I am running this from a USB stick for the purpose of finding files on my 32 Gb stick. It makes a very nice portable app.
-
Hi all,
Released v0.92 beta today with few fixes.
Any more feedback?
Do you think it is stable enough to remove "beta" label?
-
I have found it stable. It would be nice to have an additional option to exclude certain folders (plus subfolders) from indexing.
-
Hi stewcam,
What folders do you want to exclude from indexing and why?
-
I have several directories on my USB stick with a large amount of files (tens of thousands) that are of no relevance for indexing purposes. These include my email client (which stores attachments as numbered files) and some reference apps (which store their data in numbered HTML files).
-
Ok, added this to my TO-DO list.
-
I noticed it on http://alternativeto.net/
guess I'll have to try it out. :)
-
Hi Cashper,
Noticed your FileSearchy app today, and I am curious why you did not put it in NANY 2014 instead ?
FileSearchy is freeware, so sets with "NANY" more than "Announce Your Software/Service/Product", I feel.
Well it is your decision, but I am curious.
Regards,
Anand
-
I haven't put FileSearchy in NANY 2014, because i'm going to create a paid pro version.
-
Hi Cashper, I have found FileSearchy (version 1.0) to be an accurate and speedy contents searcher. FWIW here are some questions and comments...
Do you plan to add some type of filtered results (as you did in MultiFind)? I have to agree with the comments of dr_andus that searching many content results is too time-consuming. A filtered/outline view which displays only the searched-for text would enhance the user experience.
So there is currently no hotkey or other expedited method of navigation? This is a real limitation of FileSearchy as it's very cumbersome to click each highlighted line (in the lower pane) to navigate found text. BTW clicking on a highlighted line marker doesn't shift focus to the bottom pane as one might expect.
I also agree with stewcam that folder exclusion should be implemented. For example, I would like to exclude FileSearchy's log file and various temp files.
Also, the context menu integration remains a bit buggy. I have it disabled in options but "Search with FileSearchy" always shows after a few content searches.
IMO there should be a recognition of matches and there should be a column along with found files which enumerates matches in each found file. It would also be very helpful to see a summary of matches and files found/files searched. For example, the summary "103 matches in 20 files of 35 searched" provides significantly more information than FileSearchy 1.0 provides.
Despite these comments about this early version 1.0, I do like FileSearchy and plan to continue using it in advanced mode as a contents searcher. :Thmbsup:
-
Hi sajman99,
Thanks for your comments!
Do you plan to add some type of filtered results (as you did in MultiFind)? I have to agree with the comments of dr_andus that searching many content results is too time-consuming. A filtered/outline view which displays only the searched-for text would enhance the user experience.
So there is currently no hotkey or other expedited method of navigation? This is a real limitation of FileSearchy as it's very cumbersome to click each highlighted line (in the lower pane) to navigate found text. BTW clicking on a highlighted line marker doesn't shift focus to the bottom pane as one might expect.
I was going to implement a navigation bar under a file contents that will show number of matches and "next", "previous" arrows.
But after your post i see that indeed it also makes sense to have a view that contains only matched lines (like in MultiFind).
I will implement this in near future.
I also agree with stewcam that folder exclusion should be implemented. For example, I would like to exclude FileSearchy's log file and various temp files.
Folder exclusion is in my to-do list. But not a top priority.
IMO there should be a recognition of matches and there should be a column along with found files which enumerates matches in each found file. It would also be very helpful to see a summary of matches and files found/files searched. For example, the summary "103 matches in 20 files of 35 searched" provides significantly more information than FileSearchy 1.0 provides.
Some summary is already available in status bar: "Found X objects in Y s".
I'm not able to show number of matches in all the found files because when FileSearchy finds the first match in a file is stops and moves to next file. Scanning for all matches is too excessive and will slow down the search.
As for number of searched files, this seems useful, i will consider adding it somewhere.
-
Hi Cashper, thanks for responding.
Some type of navigation (if only F3 hotkey) in the content pane would definitely ease the burden of navigating results. I don't have files that are particularly large, but it still quickly gets tedious to click, click, click...just to see the results.
As far as filtered/outline view, my suggestion is that you allow space on both sides of the found text. The only issue I ever had with MultiFind was that the found text was often clipped on the left side (in the Matches tab). So a setting like "allow characters before/after found text" would be very useful.
As to a contents summary, I see the "X objects in X seconds" but was hoping for information about matches. I hadn't realized FileSearchy moves on after the first match because all matches are line-marked and highlighted correctly in the contents pane. BUT if that is the tradeoff (ie. no enumeration of matches) for maintaining the speedy search, then I will gladly choose the speed.
Looking forward to FileSearchy's future!
-
Hi sajman99,
I think i've implemented what you asked - filtered results for content searches.
[ You are not allowed to view attachments ]
-
Hi Cashper, very nice work.
IMO FileSearchy version 1.1 is much improved with a Matches tab displaying filtered results. Concise information at a glance. :up:
BTW is there any quick navigation between the two tabs? IIRC MultiFind could jump from Matches to an exact location in the File tab. Just wondering as that was quite a nice feature.
-
Is there a way to rank search results by relevance (e.g. the number of times a search term occurs within a file)?
-
@Cashper
Does a german translation already exist?
-
BTW is there any quick navigation between the two tabs? IIRC MultiFind could jump from Matches to an exact location in the File tab. Just wondering as that was quite a nice feature.
-sajman99
I will add this very soon.
Is there a way to rank search results by relevance (e.g. the number of times a search term occurs within a file)?
-dr_andus
Not yet.
I think search by relevance and search by number of matches are different things.
Search by a number of matches is not hard to implement, but i don't see a use case that shows when it is needed.
Search by relevance is hard to implement, because i don't have trustworthy criteria to determine relevance.
@Cashper
Does a german translation already exist?
-highend01
No, at the moment.
-
Search by a number of matches is not hard to implement, but i don't see a use case that shows when it is needed.
-Cashper
To me that is an important basic measure of relevance. The more a search term occurs in a document (especially with some Boolean operator), the more likely that it is relevant. In some applications search results are automatically ranked in such a way, and in most cases the top-ranked search results do turn out to be more relevant ones. Obviously one needs to pick the search terms strategically (I mostly know what the search terms are that are likely to return the results I'm looking for in my collection of documents).
-
I'm not able to show number of matches in all the found files because when FileSearchy finds the first match in a file is stops and moves to next file. Scanning for all matches is too excessive and will slow down the search.
-Cashper
Cashper, sorry if this is a stupid question, but apparently I'm not understanding what you are saying here. If FileSearchy moves on after the first match, how then does it list every match in each file? I mean, it appears that it is listing everything correctly in both the File tab and the Matches tab (even including line number).
Also, even if you cannot count matches, couldn't you count the lines in the Matches tab? or is it the same problem? For example, there is a well-known program named BareGrep that finds "matching lines". So apparently there can be more than one instance/match in any given line, but the counting is done on a per-line basis.
Anyway, I ask because I agree with dr_andus that counting matches is important. Counting objectively quantifies the findings of the content search. IMO any type of search should attempt to find, display, and quantify findings.
-
To me that is an important basic measure of relevance. The more a search term occurs in a document (especially with some Boolean operator), the more likely that it is relevant. In some applications search results are automatically ranked in such a way, and in most cases the top-ranked search results do turn out to be more relevant ones. Obviously one needs to pick the search terms strategically (I mostly know what the search terms are that are likely to return the results I'm looking for in my collection of documents).
-dr_andus
I will probably add a column with name Matches (or Hits) that will show number of matches in each file. Then you will be able to sort by clicking the column.
Cashper, sorry if this is a stupid question, but apparently I'm not understanding what you are saying here. If FileSearchy moves on after the first match, how then does it list every match in each file? I mean, it appears that it is listing everything correctly in both the File tab and the Matches tab (even including line number).
-sajman99
FileSearchy moves on after the first match, but when you select a file it retrieves all matches for this one file.
Anyway, I ask because I agree with dr_andus that counting matches is important. Counting objectively quantifies the findings of the content search. IMO any type of search should attempt to find, display, and quantify findings.
-sajman99
I hope that adding a new column "fixes" the issue.
-
Also, the context menu integration remains a bit buggy. I have it disabled in options but "Search with FileSearchy" always shows after a few content searches.
-sajman99
I've tracked down this problem. The next release will have a fix.
-
Great news to hear of these fixes and improvements planned for upcoming FileSearchy releases. :up: Cashper, a couple more questions...
In the event of more than 100 matches in a file, I have noticed that FileSearchy indicates (in The Matches tab) "Only the first 100 matches are shown". Huh...why that limitation? What if there were 500 matches in a file? Then FileSearchy wouldn't show 400 matches in the Matches tab?
I would also like to ask about a "File/Save Parameters" and "File/Open Parameters" feature. This would function to preserve active fields for future searches. Also, it would help to avoid repetitive data entry (of multiple file type/delimiter configs) each time history is cleared. Settings and tabs are saved, so maybe parameters could be also? :tellme:
-
In the event of more than 100 matches in a file, I have noticed that FileSearchy indicates (in The Matches tab) "Only the first 100 matches are shown". Huh...why that limitation? What if there were 500 matches in a file? Then FileSearchy wouldn't show 400 matches in the Matches tab?
-sajman99
This limitation is because of slow matches highlighting. In future this will be resolved by either fast highlighting or by additional button to show all matches.
I would also like to ask about a "File/Save Parameters" and "File/Open Parameters" feature. This would function to preserve active fields for future searches. Also, it would help to avoid repetitive data entry (of multiple file type/delimiter configs) each time history is cleared. Settings and tabs are saved, so maybe parameters could be also?
-sajman99
Sound useful and easy to implement. I will add this soon.
-
Thanks again, Cashper. 8)
I have experimented a bit and see that any content changes are recognized by FileSearchy very quickly. Dare I say instantaneously!
Since I haven't had any desktop search software installed in a long time, I am curious as to what kind of CPU hit would be expected. Here I am seeing regular 50% CPU usage as FileSearchy reads the USN Journal.
Are other FileSearchy users observing the same or similar CPU usage? Would regular 50% CPU usage be normal and expected?
-
High CPU usage is a bug, that is fixed in the latest version 1.11.
-
High CPU usage is a bug, that is fixed in the latest version 1.11.
-Cashper
Hi Cashper. More good news. :up:
CPU seemed high to me, but I figured I would ask. I was going to post in the FileSearchy forum rather than here, but it appears the forum is no more. It seems you fixed the issue before I could post about it. :P
-
OK, I can confirm CPU usage and context menu integration have been fixed. :up:
I like that Advanced mode retains search terms and the last used fields. However, Instant mode takes a different approach -- it remembers nothing. Even if the user moves from Instant to Advanced and then back, search terms are not remembered. :huh:
To counter this imbalance, Instant mode needs some options. So how about an option to remember last used search terms? Or remember last X search terms? Or maybe even "Remember last search" (ie. search + results)? These are just ideas -- something to consider.
Also, a Bookmarks function would permit frequently used searches to be performed quickly.
-
I like that Advanced mode retains search terms and the last used fields. However, Instant mode takes a different approach -- it remembers nothing. Even if the user moves from Instant to Advanced and then back, search terms are not remembered.
-sajman99
Instant mode makes a search with each letter you enter. I don't think it's reasonable to remember instant searches - they are easy to retype.
But i recognize that moving from instant to expanded and back with loosing results is counter intuitive. I will try to come up with a better solution in future.
The latest today's release 1.2 allows to jump from a match to correct position with double click.
Another important change is that content search speed is improved due to using multiple threads.
Pro version now has an ability to search contents of e-books (EPUB, FB2, MOBI).
-
Hi Cashper, I have FileSearchy 1.2 and the tab jumping works well. Thanks for adding that function. 8)
Have you considered support for literal operators (AND, OR, NOT) in Instant mode? I had that in mind when asking about history lists, bookmarks, etc. because sometimes the search terms can get rather lengthy when using multiple literal operators.
-
FileSearchy 1.22 has released.
It includes a function that some of you have asked for: sort by "relevance" (number of matches).
Change list:
- Columns of search results table are now configurable. It is possible to select which columns to show, to change width and position.
- New columns of search results table are available: number of matches, created time, last access time.
-
Thanks, FileSearchy works great with the new match column and interrelated tabs. :Thmbsup:
I now find myself using this daily as a contents searcher. Very fast and accurate --and definitely recommended.
-
FileSearchy 1.22 has released.
It includes a function that some of you have asked for: sort by "relevance" (number of matches).
-Cashper
Great!! Much appreciated!