Paaaaaaoooo​ooolllloooo​ooM ... ​Whyyyyyyyy??​?

Why is it when my Desktop Search UI goes to never never land, and I kill it, it restarts explorer.exe?

2nd question. Why is there no uninstall for this thing either

Harlequin wrote:

2nd question. Why is there no uninstall for this thing either

Didn't I hear somewhere that you can turn it off? Or is that only after SP1?

Uninstalling bits of explorer sounds like a recipe for disaster.

Minh wrote:

Why is it when my Desktop Search UI goes to never never land, and I kill it, it restarts explorer.exe?

I think because it's integrated with explorer (to support item activation and verbs like drag/drop). In XP, this stuff runs in process with explorer.exe, so killing one means a sudden death for the other...

Harlequin wrote:

2nd question. Why is there no uninstall for this thing either

I am pretty sure you can go to XP's Add/Remove control panel and remove it...

evildictaitor wrote:



Harlequin wrote: 2nd question. Why is there no uninstall for this thing either

Didn't I hear somewhere that you can turn it off? Or is that only after SP1?

Uninstalling bits of explorer sounds like a recipe for disaster.

Shipping a search component w/ the shell? That's monopo-licious!

Minh wrote:



evildictaitor wrote:  Harlequin wrote: 2nd question. Why is there no uninstall for this thing either Didn't I hear somewhere that you can turn it off? Or is that only after SP1? Uninstalling bits of explorer sounds like a recipe for disaster.

Shipping a search component w/ the shell? That's monopo-licious!

That's what Google said. And IIRC why they now allow you to turn it off.

Minh wrote:



evildictaitor wrote:  Harlequin wrote: 2nd question. Why is there no uninstall for this thing either Didn't I hear somewhere that you can turn it off? Or is that only after SP1? Uninstalling bits of explorer sounds like a recipe for disaster.

Shipping a search component w/ the shell? That's monopo-licious!

But on the other hand improves performance greatly. [A]

And why, oh why does it index all my emails every single time I restart my computer ??

Dodo wrote:

But on the other hand improves performance greatly.

Citation Needed.

Zeus wrote:

And why, oh why does it index all my emails every single time I restart my computer ??

Does Windows Search do that, or is it just Outlook?

evildictaitor wrote:



Dodo wrote: But on the other hand improves performance greatly.

Citation Needed.

Are you kidding? I can simply spare off all calls to anything API-like and this way reduce processing time... at least on SLOW not so fast machines, you notice.

Dodo wrote:

Are you kidding? I can simply spare off all calls to anything API-like and this way reduce processing time... at least on SLOW not so fast machines, you notice.

The first API call might be slightly expensive (you need to load the library), but subsequently it's just the cost of a virtual call, since you get  a function pointer back from GetProcAddress().

evildictaitor wrote:



Dodo wrote: Are you kidding? I can simply spare off all calls to anything API-like and this way reduce processing time... at least on SLOW not so fast machines, you notice.

The first API call might be slightly expensive (you need to load the library), but subsequently it's just the cost of a virtual call, since you get  a function pointer back from GetProcAddress().

Yeah... but I like to violently use up all I got.
And I like those 'Visual C++ Runtime errors Pure virtual function call'...
Ir really do...  but it's nice though.

Dodo wrote:

But on the other hand improves performance greatly.

I don't know if it's smart to tie a data intensive app to the user's portal to the system together.

Dodo wrote:



evildictaitor wrote:  Dodo wrote: Are you kidding? I can simply spare off all calls to anything API-like and this way reduce processing time... at least on SLOW not so fast machines, you notice. The first API call might be slightly expensive (you need to load the library), but subsequently it's just the cost of a virtual call, since you get  a function pointer back from GetProcAddress().

Yeah... but I like to violently use up all I got.
And I like those 'Visual C++ Runtime errors Pure virtual function call'...
Ir really do...  but it's nice though.

The cost of a virtual function call is six CPU cycles compared to four. Your app won't be slowing down because of them.

Ion Todirel wrote:

hey Paolo how about when I'm trying to search in a directory not indexed by WDS, still WDS search window is opened instead of the default explorer search window, and i need to click again on "Search using companion" or something like that, stupid IMO

I know its pretty stupid, I honestly can't be bothered to run the thing on all my drives(i'm sure i'll end up having to do a fuller indexing with Vista if i ever bother to get around to trying it) Unfortunatly I still have to have the damn WDS installed on Xp for Outlook and have it running in the background just to use Outlook searches.

Anyway you can get a registry fix to make the explorer folder search use the old default xp search panel instead of that WDS bloated junk( not that the Google one is anyway beter.. thats also pretty (I need to watch my language) too).. you'll have to traul the internet for that little registry key.. I guess it must have been waaaay too hard for WDS team to actually add any useful options like that I guess.