Skip to content
  • Categories
  • Recent
  • Tags
  • Popular
  • World
  • Users
  • Groups
Skins
  • Light
  • Cerulean
  • Cosmo
  • Flatly
  • Journal
  • Litera
  • Lumen
  • Lux
  • Materia
  • Minty
  • Morph
  • Pulse
  • Sandstone
  • Simplex
  • Sketchy
  • Spacelab
  • United
  • Yeti
  • Zephyr
  • Dark
  • Cyborg
  • Darkly
  • Quartz
  • Slate
  • Solar
  • Superhero
  • Vapor

  • Default (No Skin)
  • No Skin
Collapse
Code Project
  1. Home
  2. The Lounge
  3. Windows 7 search - you gotta be kidding me

Windows 7 search - you gotta be kidding me

Scheduled Pinned Locked Moved The Lounge
comregextutorialquestioncareer
52 Posts 28 Posters 0 Views 1 Watching
  • Oldest to Newest
  • Newest to Oldest
  • Most Votes
Reply
  • Reply as topic
Log in to reply
This topic has been deleted. Only users with topic management privileges can see it.
  • C Offline
    C Offline
    Christopher Duncan
    wrote on last edited by
    #1

    I'm a dinosaur. I admit it. I have large green scales and sharp teeth perfect for gnawing on anything that looks tasty. All of which is to say that like many others here, my initial MS experiences were with DOS. And I'm strangely at peace with that. Since olden times, the DOS based search parameters have been honored. Whether I type in a search box from Explorer in Windows or from the command line prompt, * is the wildcard for everything, ? is the wildcard for one character. And thus, *.ascx* will give you *.ascx, *.ascx.cs, *.ascx.designer.cs since the last * means "and everything else after this." Imagine my surprise when I do that search in Windows 7 and it gives me simply *.ascx. If I search for *.ascx.*, I get *.ascx.cs and *.ascx.designer.cs, but no .ascx files since they don't have the . at the end. Exclaiming WTF with some enthusiasm, I went to a command prompt where, sure enough, *.ascx* works just like it always did. Clearly, there's a moron at work here. Either I'm simply too stupid to understand how to use Search in the Explorer, or some rocket scientist at MS thought it would be good to have pattern matching work differently in the GUI than it does on the command line (and all previous versions of Windows). And so, I put it to the masses here (washed and otherwise) who know well my knack for personal stupidity: am I simply not smart enough to properly use search, or is MS as brain dead as I'm thinking to break something so fundamental to an OS as the ability to search for files? After all, given how long it took to do file copies in Vista, it's not like this kind of thing is unprecedented. Grrr. That's it. I'm gonna go find a lesser mammal and gnaw on it...

    Christopher Duncan
    www.PracticalUSA.com
    Author of The Career Programmer and Unite the Tribes
    Copywriting Services

    C J A M M 17 Replies Last reply
    0
    • C Christopher Duncan

      I'm a dinosaur. I admit it. I have large green scales and sharp teeth perfect for gnawing on anything that looks tasty. All of which is to say that like many others here, my initial MS experiences were with DOS. And I'm strangely at peace with that. Since olden times, the DOS based search parameters have been honored. Whether I type in a search box from Explorer in Windows or from the command line prompt, * is the wildcard for everything, ? is the wildcard for one character. And thus, *.ascx* will give you *.ascx, *.ascx.cs, *.ascx.designer.cs since the last * means "and everything else after this." Imagine my surprise when I do that search in Windows 7 and it gives me simply *.ascx. If I search for *.ascx.*, I get *.ascx.cs and *.ascx.designer.cs, but no .ascx files since they don't have the . at the end. Exclaiming WTF with some enthusiasm, I went to a command prompt where, sure enough, *.ascx* works just like it always did. Clearly, there's a moron at work here. Either I'm simply too stupid to understand how to use Search in the Explorer, or some rocket scientist at MS thought it would be good to have pattern matching work differently in the GUI than it does on the command line (and all previous versions of Windows). And so, I put it to the masses here (washed and otherwise) who know well my knack for personal stupidity: am I simply not smart enough to properly use search, or is MS as brain dead as I'm thinking to break something so fundamental to an OS as the ability to search for files? After all, given how long it took to do file copies in Vista, it's not like this kind of thing is unprecedented. Grrr. That's it. I'm gonna go find a lesser mammal and gnaw on it...

      Christopher Duncan
      www.PracticalUSA.com
      Author of The Career Programmer and Unite the Tribes
      Copywriting Services

      C Offline
      C Offline
      Christian Graus
      wrote on last edited by
      #2

      Search was fundamentally broken in Vista. I guess they are incrementally fixing it, if it at least does SOMETHING again. In XP, I had some desktop search thing install with instant update. It breaks search, I have to go past it to the old one to search my HDD.

      Christian Graus Driven to the arms of OSX by Vista. Read my blog to find out how I've worked around bugs in Microsoft tools and frameworks.

      C 1 Reply Last reply
      0
      • C Christopher Duncan

        I'm a dinosaur. I admit it. I have large green scales and sharp teeth perfect for gnawing on anything that looks tasty. All of which is to say that like many others here, my initial MS experiences were with DOS. And I'm strangely at peace with that. Since olden times, the DOS based search parameters have been honored. Whether I type in a search box from Explorer in Windows or from the command line prompt, * is the wildcard for everything, ? is the wildcard for one character. And thus, *.ascx* will give you *.ascx, *.ascx.cs, *.ascx.designer.cs since the last * means "and everything else after this." Imagine my surprise when I do that search in Windows 7 and it gives me simply *.ascx. If I search for *.ascx.*, I get *.ascx.cs and *.ascx.designer.cs, but no .ascx files since they don't have the . at the end. Exclaiming WTF with some enthusiasm, I went to a command prompt where, sure enough, *.ascx* works just like it always did. Clearly, there's a moron at work here. Either I'm simply too stupid to understand how to use Search in the Explorer, or some rocket scientist at MS thought it would be good to have pattern matching work differently in the GUI than it does on the command line (and all previous versions of Windows). And so, I put it to the masses here (washed and otherwise) who know well my knack for personal stupidity: am I simply not smart enough to properly use search, or is MS as brain dead as I'm thinking to break something so fundamental to an OS as the ability to search for files? After all, given how long it took to do file copies in Vista, it's not like this kind of thing is unprecedented. Grrr. That's it. I'm gonna go find a lesser mammal and gnaw on it...

        Christopher Duncan
        www.PracticalUSA.com
        Author of The Career Programmer and Unite the Tribes
        Copywriting Services

        J Offline
        J Offline
        Jim Crafton
        wrote on last edited by
        #3

        Dollars to doughnuts that they are aping the way it works in Mac OSX Finder/Search where you just typing characters. Let's not even get into a discussion as to whether or not that's a good thing :) Of course I gave up on search in Explorer a long time ago.

        ¡El diablo está en mis pantalones! ¡Mire, mire! SELECT * FROM User WHERE Clue > 0 0 rows returned Save an Orange - Use the VCF! Personal 3D projects Just Say No to Web 2 Point Blow

        R 1 Reply Last reply
        0
        • C Christopher Duncan

          I'm a dinosaur. I admit it. I have large green scales and sharp teeth perfect for gnawing on anything that looks tasty. All of which is to say that like many others here, my initial MS experiences were with DOS. And I'm strangely at peace with that. Since olden times, the DOS based search parameters have been honored. Whether I type in a search box from Explorer in Windows or from the command line prompt, * is the wildcard for everything, ? is the wildcard for one character. And thus, *.ascx* will give you *.ascx, *.ascx.cs, *.ascx.designer.cs since the last * means "and everything else after this." Imagine my surprise when I do that search in Windows 7 and it gives me simply *.ascx. If I search for *.ascx.*, I get *.ascx.cs and *.ascx.designer.cs, but no .ascx files since they don't have the . at the end. Exclaiming WTF with some enthusiasm, I went to a command prompt where, sure enough, *.ascx* works just like it always did. Clearly, there's a moron at work here. Either I'm simply too stupid to understand how to use Search in the Explorer, or some rocket scientist at MS thought it would be good to have pattern matching work differently in the GUI than it does on the command line (and all previous versions of Windows). And so, I put it to the masses here (washed and otherwise) who know well my knack for personal stupidity: am I simply not smart enough to properly use search, or is MS as brain dead as I'm thinking to break something so fundamental to an OS as the ability to search for files? After all, given how long it took to do file copies in Vista, it's not like this kind of thing is unprecedented. Grrr. That's it. I'm gonna go find a lesser mammal and gnaw on it...

          Christopher Duncan
          www.PracticalUSA.com
          Author of The Career Programmer and Unite the Tribes
          Copywriting Services

          A Offline
          A Offline
          AspDotNetDev
          wrote on last edited by
          #4

          I have never much liked Windows search. In fact, I created my own regex search utility so I could avoid using it. The thing that really annoys me is that it ignores some file types. You can fix that in a round about way, but it's way too dumbed down for my taste. I guess they just assume users would get overwhelmed with all those fancy looking settings.

          [Forum Guidelines]

          E 1 Reply Last reply
          0
          • J Jim Crafton

            Dollars to doughnuts that they are aping the way it works in Mac OSX Finder/Search where you just typing characters. Let's not even get into a discussion as to whether or not that's a good thing :) Of course I gave up on search in Explorer a long time ago.

            ¡El diablo está en mis pantalones! ¡Mire, mire! SELECT * FROM User WHERE Clue > 0 0 rows returned Save an Orange - Use the VCF! Personal 3D projects Just Say No to Web 2 Point Blow

            R Offline
            R Offline
            ragnaroknrol
            wrote on last edited by
            #5

            If they are aping it, they failed. The OSX search automatically assumes wildcards on both ends and tries to find strings containing the search term in the name and meta-data. The Seven approach is no where near as good and is worse than XP in a lot of ways. Which is sad. If it ain't broke, break it should not be a motto.

            If I have accidentally said something witty, smart, or correct, it is purely by mistake and I apologize for it.

            1 Reply Last reply
            0
            • C Christopher Duncan

              I'm a dinosaur. I admit it. I have large green scales and sharp teeth perfect for gnawing on anything that looks tasty. All of which is to say that like many others here, my initial MS experiences were with DOS. And I'm strangely at peace with that. Since olden times, the DOS based search parameters have been honored. Whether I type in a search box from Explorer in Windows or from the command line prompt, * is the wildcard for everything, ? is the wildcard for one character. And thus, *.ascx* will give you *.ascx, *.ascx.cs, *.ascx.designer.cs since the last * means "and everything else after this." Imagine my surprise when I do that search in Windows 7 and it gives me simply *.ascx. If I search for *.ascx.*, I get *.ascx.cs and *.ascx.designer.cs, but no .ascx files since they don't have the . at the end. Exclaiming WTF with some enthusiasm, I went to a command prompt where, sure enough, *.ascx* works just like it always did. Clearly, there's a moron at work here. Either I'm simply too stupid to understand how to use Search in the Explorer, or some rocket scientist at MS thought it would be good to have pattern matching work differently in the GUI than it does on the command line (and all previous versions of Windows). And so, I put it to the masses here (washed and otherwise) who know well my knack for personal stupidity: am I simply not smart enough to properly use search, or is MS as brain dead as I'm thinking to break something so fundamental to an OS as the ability to search for files? After all, given how long it took to do file copies in Vista, it's not like this kind of thing is unprecedented. Grrr. That's it. I'm gonna go find a lesser mammal and gnaw on it...

              Christopher Duncan
              www.PracticalUSA.com
              Author of The Career Programmer and Unite the Tribes
              Copywriting Services

              M Offline
              M Offline
              Michel Godfroid
              wrote on last edited by
              #6

              try name:"*.ascx*"

              C K 2 Replies Last reply
              0
              • C Christopher Duncan

                I'm a dinosaur. I admit it. I have large green scales and sharp teeth perfect for gnawing on anything that looks tasty. All of which is to say that like many others here, my initial MS experiences were with DOS. And I'm strangely at peace with that. Since olden times, the DOS based search parameters have been honored. Whether I type in a search box from Explorer in Windows or from the command line prompt, * is the wildcard for everything, ? is the wildcard for one character. And thus, *.ascx* will give you *.ascx, *.ascx.cs, *.ascx.designer.cs since the last * means "and everything else after this." Imagine my surprise when I do that search in Windows 7 and it gives me simply *.ascx. If I search for *.ascx.*, I get *.ascx.cs and *.ascx.designer.cs, but no .ascx files since they don't have the . at the end. Exclaiming WTF with some enthusiasm, I went to a command prompt where, sure enough, *.ascx* works just like it always did. Clearly, there's a moron at work here. Either I'm simply too stupid to understand how to use Search in the Explorer, or some rocket scientist at MS thought it would be good to have pattern matching work differently in the GUI than it does on the command line (and all previous versions of Windows). And so, I put it to the masses here (washed and otherwise) who know well my knack for personal stupidity: am I simply not smart enough to properly use search, or is MS as brain dead as I'm thinking to break something so fundamental to an OS as the ability to search for files? After all, given how long it took to do file copies in Vista, it's not like this kind of thing is unprecedented. Grrr. That's it. I'm gonna go find a lesser mammal and gnaw on it...

                Christopher Duncan
                www.PracticalUSA.com
                Author of The Career Programmer and Unite the Tribes
                Copywriting Services

                M Offline
                M Offline
                martin_hughes
                wrote on last edited by
                #7

                Does it work if you surround the search criteria in quotes: "*.ascx*" ?

                Books written by CP members

                M C 2 Replies Last reply
                0
                • M martin_hughes

                  Does it work if you surround the search criteria in quotes: "*.ascx*" ?

                  Books written by CP members

                  M Offline
                  M Offline
                  Michel Godfroid
                  wrote on last edited by
                  #8

                  It does, but you'd better prefix it with name:, otherwise it will also search content.

                  M 1 Reply Last reply
                  0
                  • C Christopher Duncan

                    I'm a dinosaur. I admit it. I have large green scales and sharp teeth perfect for gnawing on anything that looks tasty. All of which is to say that like many others here, my initial MS experiences were with DOS. And I'm strangely at peace with that. Since olden times, the DOS based search parameters have been honored. Whether I type in a search box from Explorer in Windows or from the command line prompt, * is the wildcard for everything, ? is the wildcard for one character. And thus, *.ascx* will give you *.ascx, *.ascx.cs, *.ascx.designer.cs since the last * means "and everything else after this." Imagine my surprise when I do that search in Windows 7 and it gives me simply *.ascx. If I search for *.ascx.*, I get *.ascx.cs and *.ascx.designer.cs, but no .ascx files since they don't have the . at the end. Exclaiming WTF with some enthusiasm, I went to a command prompt where, sure enough, *.ascx* works just like it always did. Clearly, there's a moron at work here. Either I'm simply too stupid to understand how to use Search in the Explorer, or some rocket scientist at MS thought it would be good to have pattern matching work differently in the GUI than it does on the command line (and all previous versions of Windows). And so, I put it to the masses here (washed and otherwise) who know well my knack for personal stupidity: am I simply not smart enough to properly use search, or is MS as brain dead as I'm thinking to break something so fundamental to an OS as the ability to search for files? After all, given how long it took to do file copies in Vista, it's not like this kind of thing is unprecedented. Grrr. That's it. I'm gonna go find a lesser mammal and gnaw on it...

                    Christopher Duncan
                    www.PracticalUSA.com
                    Author of The Career Programmer and Unite the Tribes
                    Copywriting Services

                    H Offline
                    H Offline
                    Hans Dietrich
                    wrote on last edited by
                    #9

                    http://www.voidtools.com/[^]

                    Best wishes, Hans


                    [Hans Dietrich Software]

                    C 1 Reply Last reply
                    0
                    • M Michel Godfroid

                      It does, but you'd better prefix it with name:, otherwise it will also search content.

                      M Offline
                      M Offline
                      martin_hughes
                      wrote on last edited by
                      #10

                      Sound advice for a happier search experience!

                      Books written by CP members

                      1 Reply Last reply
                      0
                      • C Christopher Duncan

                        I'm a dinosaur. I admit it. I have large green scales and sharp teeth perfect for gnawing on anything that looks tasty. All of which is to say that like many others here, my initial MS experiences were with DOS. And I'm strangely at peace with that. Since olden times, the DOS based search parameters have been honored. Whether I type in a search box from Explorer in Windows or from the command line prompt, * is the wildcard for everything, ? is the wildcard for one character. And thus, *.ascx* will give you *.ascx, *.ascx.cs, *.ascx.designer.cs since the last * means "and everything else after this." Imagine my surprise when I do that search in Windows 7 and it gives me simply *.ascx. If I search for *.ascx.*, I get *.ascx.cs and *.ascx.designer.cs, but no .ascx files since they don't have the . at the end. Exclaiming WTF with some enthusiasm, I went to a command prompt where, sure enough, *.ascx* works just like it always did. Clearly, there's a moron at work here. Either I'm simply too stupid to understand how to use Search in the Explorer, or some rocket scientist at MS thought it would be good to have pattern matching work differently in the GUI than it does on the command line (and all previous versions of Windows). And so, I put it to the masses here (washed and otherwise) who know well my knack for personal stupidity: am I simply not smart enough to properly use search, or is MS as brain dead as I'm thinking to break something so fundamental to an OS as the ability to search for files? After all, given how long it took to do file copies in Vista, it's not like this kind of thing is unprecedented. Grrr. That's it. I'm gonna go find a lesser mammal and gnaw on it...

                        Christopher Duncan
                        www.PracticalUSA.com
                        Author of The Career Programmer and Unite the Tribes
                        Copywriting Services

                        M Offline
                        M Offline
                        Michel Godfroid
                        wrote on last edited by
                        #11

                        All right folks, let's not leave you all in the dark: RTFM![^] :laugh:

                        C 1 Reply Last reply
                        0
                        • M Michel Godfroid

                          try name:"*.ascx*"

                          C Offline
                          C Offline
                          Christopher Duncan
                          wrote on last edited by
                          #12

                          No results at all with this approach, but thanks.

                          Christopher Duncan
                          www.PracticalUSA.com
                          Author of The Career Programmer and Unite the Tribes
                          Copywriting Services

                          M D 2 Replies Last reply
                          0
                          • M martin_hughes

                            Does it work if you surround the search criteria in quotes: "*.ascx*" ?

                            Books written by CP members

                            C Offline
                            C Offline
                            Christopher Duncan
                            wrote on last edited by
                            #13

                            Nope. No results at all with the quotes.

                            Christopher Duncan
                            www.PracticalUSA.com
                            Author of The Career Programmer and Unite the Tribes
                            Copywriting Services

                            M 1 Reply Last reply
                            0
                            • M Michel Godfroid

                              All right folks, let's not leave you all in the dark: RTFM![^] :laugh:

                              C Offline
                              C Offline
                              Christopher Duncan
                              wrote on last edited by
                              #14

                              Not to appear dense (though that may be unavoidable), but I'm not seeing a solution in the FM.

                              Christopher Duncan
                              www.PracticalUSA.com
                              Author of The Career Programmer and Unite the Tribes
                              Copywriting Services

                              M D L 3 Replies Last reply
                              0
                              • C Christopher Duncan

                                No results at all with this approach, but thanks.

                                Christopher Duncan
                                www.PracticalUSA.com
                                Author of The Career Programmer and Unite the Tribes
                                Copywriting Services

                                M Offline
                                M Offline
                                Michel Godfroid
                                wrote on last edited by
                                #15

                                Is your location indexed?

                                C 1 Reply Last reply
                                0
                                • H Hans Dietrich

                                  http://www.voidtools.com/[^]

                                  Best wishes, Hans


                                  [Hans Dietrich Software]

                                  C Offline
                                  C Offline
                                  Christopher Duncan
                                  wrote on last edited by
                                  #16

                                  That looks handy, though I'm philosophically opposed to installing a utility just so I can search the file system. I may get over that objection, but geez! And they wonder why everyone hated Vista, or anything that smelled like it!

                                  Christopher Duncan
                                  www.PracticalUSA.com
                                  Author of The Career Programmer and Unite the Tribes
                                  Copywriting Services

                                  H D 2 Replies Last reply
                                  0
                                  • C Christopher Duncan

                                    Nope. No results at all with the quotes.

                                    Christopher Duncan
                                    www.PracticalUSA.com
                                    Author of The Career Programmer and Unite the Tribes
                                    Copywriting Services

                                    M Offline
                                    M Offline
                                    martin_hughes
                                    wrote on last edited by
                                    #17

                                    Weird. Worked for me. Actually, it doesn't bloody work for me at all. That's having interpreted what you wrote and what you actually meant, of course.

                                    Books written by CP members

                                    C 1 Reply Last reply
                                    0
                                    • M Michel Godfroid

                                      Is your location indexed?

                                      C Offline
                                      C Offline
                                      Christopher Duncan
                                      wrote on last edited by
                                      #18

                                      Nope. Haven't cared for the overhead of the indexers in the past so I tend to avoid them. Of course, there's always the old standby: cmd. :)

                                      Christopher Duncan
                                      www.PracticalUSA.com
                                      Author of The Career Programmer and Unite the Tribes
                                      Copywriting Services

                                      D 1 Reply Last reply
                                      0
                                      • M martin_hughes

                                        Weird. Worked for me. Actually, it doesn't bloody work for me at all. That's having interpreted what you wrote and what you actually meant, of course.

                                        Books written by CP members

                                        C Offline
                                        C Offline
                                        Christopher Duncan
                                        wrote on last edited by
                                        #19

                                        Apparently it needs to be indexed. Leave it to MS to require jumping through a hoop that's been set on fire in order to do something as common as searching for files.

                                        Christopher Duncan
                                        www.PracticalUSA.com
                                        Author of The Career Programmer and Unite the Tribes
                                        Copywriting Services

                                        1 Reply Last reply
                                        0
                                        • C Christian Graus

                                          Search was fundamentally broken in Vista. I guess they are incrementally fixing it, if it at least does SOMETHING again. In XP, I had some desktop search thing install with instant update. It breaks search, I have to go past it to the old one to search my HDD.

                                          Christian Graus Driven to the arms of OSX by Vista. Read my blog to find out how I've worked around bugs in Microsoft tools and frameworks.

                                          C Offline
                                          C Offline
                                          Christopher Duncan
                                          wrote on last edited by
                                          #20

                                          Morons. Must... resist... trip... to... Mac... store... :)

                                          Christopher Duncan
                                          www.PracticalUSA.com
                                          Author of The Career Programmer and Unite the Tribes
                                          Copywriting Services

                                          C 1 Reply Last reply
                                          0
                                          Reply
                                          • Reply as topic
                                          Log in to reply
                                          • Oldest to Newest
                                          • Newest to Oldest
                                          • Most Votes


                                          • Login

                                          • Don't have an account? Register

                                          • Login or register to search.
                                          • First post
                                            Last post
                                          0
                                          • Categories
                                          • Recent
                                          • Tags
                                          • Popular
                                          • World
                                          • Users
                                          • Groups