|
|
Switcher Question? Spotlight Tiger vs. search function on XP
|
|
|
|
Fresh-Faced Recruit
Join Date: Feb 2005
Status:
Offline
|
|
How do they differ?
I can search for a keyword in every file in xp?
is the only difference the ability to get the keyword from the entire file name or document?
thanks for any info
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Mac Enthusiast
Join Date: Mar 2000
Status:
Offline
|
|
In most cases the search function in XP is something you resort to when you've misplaced or forgotten the location of a document. In this manner it is designed to be a complement to the Windows Explorer, giving you that last option when browsing for the file fails.
This is confirmed by the user interface of XP's search function, which forces you to go through a couple of steps before the actual search begins. If you discover you misspelled the file name, you have to go through another set of clicks and panes to correct it and perform the very same search again.
Spotlight, in its core, is also a search function, but from what I understand more than a complement to the Mac OS Finder:
We spend a lot of time locating files on our computers, and in this context folders are merely a means of organizing files so that we may find them easier. Spotlight might (we don't know yet) provide an alternative to that. A welcome alternative at that - for even if you know the path to a file by heart, you still need a lot of time to locate that file.
I think the philosophy is to keep that Spotlight window accessible at all times, and as soon as you need to locate something (which is often), let the computer do it for you by typing in the Spotlight window. Spotlight will "find as you type", and you will instantaneously know if you have provided enough characters in order for Spotlight to returns a graspable set of (neatly sorted) data.
I see Spotlight as an interaction experiment, in which a possible outcome would be that users entirely abandon Finder to locate files.
What I'm trying to say is that comparing XP search to Spotlight is a bit unfair since they have two different purposes, solving two different problems.
Let's give it another go when Longhorn ships... :>
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Senior User
Join Date: Jan 2002
Location: NYC
Status:
Offline
|
|
You also forgot that spotlight supports arbitrary file types and is _FAST_ very unlike any windows search.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Junior Member
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: Toronto, ON
Status:
Offline
|
|
While I have no proof a general trend I'm picking up on in OSX is databases are used much more. This leads to speed as an index is used rather than brute force.
As an example look at the iTunes library and how you can start typing a search and results show up. I really don't see much in Windows using this technology.
When it is quick it becomes way more useful. I probably sound like a babbling idiot but I am so excited about switching, my new PB is arriving today!
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Professional Poster
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: New York, NY
Status:
Offline
|
|
Spotlight is like an iTunes search - instant, filtered results, that works not just for Finder files, but for many other things as well.
I think the example on Apple's Tiger preview page has a person typing "Yosemite" into Spotlight.
They *instantly* get results including:
-Map .pdfs with the word "Yosemite" in them
-bookmarks (and perhaps history?) with the word Yosemite in them
-emails with the word Yosemite
-iCal appointments/events with the word Yosemite
-Address Book contacts with the word Yosemite
-pictures from iPhoto with the Keyword Yosemite
-Any word, powerpoint, excel, pages, keynote, or text file with the word "Yosemite" in it, etc.
The point is that - not only can it find things FAST; but that it's a potential substitute for having a graphical file system at all; AND that it searches not only files, but within the data contained in particular applications (i.e. iCal events, emails in Mail) - all in once place, and all very quickly.
Moreover, developers can write Spotlight plugins for their applications to make spotlight work either locally (so you could use Spotlight's indexing/searching within, say, and OmniOutliner file) OR MORE IMPRESSIVELY, so that the global Spotlight search will be able to properly index other application document formats (i.e. will search within OmniOutliner files; OmniWeb history/bookmarks, Nisus Writer Express documents, Quicken or iBank transactions, etc.).
In short, Spotlight has the potential (certainly some wont use it much, but still has the potential...) to completely change the way you interact with your computer. No more opening apps to find things, no navigating of folders, just type what you think you're looking for and click to open it - that easy.
|
cpac
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Mac Elite
Join Date: May 2001
Location: Earth
Status:
Offline
|
|
Three main differences :
- Spotlight is fast
- Smart folders allow you to have intelligent folders which are always up-to-date according to your search criterias. For example you can create a smart folder containing Jpeg photos. Then whenever an application creates a jpeg photo on your disk, and no matter where it is actually located, your smart folder will be updated INSTANTLY with any new file.
- Spotlight is also intergrated in a lot of apps with the same concept of smart folders like Mail, Address Book, etc...
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Dedicated MacNNer
Join Date: Jun 2000
Status:
Offline
|
|
will/can/should iTunes use Spotlight technology in a future release?
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Mac Enthusiast
Join Date: Nov 2001
Status:
Offline
|
|
Originally posted by OmniX:
will/can/should iTunes use Spotlight technology in a future release?
Why should it...
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Mac Elite
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: 127.0.0.1
Status:
Offline
|
|
Originally posted by OmniX:
will/can/should iTunes use Spotlight technology in a future release?
The whole idea of Spotlight came from iTunes to begin with. Steve even said it himself at WWDC.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Forum Rules
|
|
|
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts
|
HTML code is Off
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|