... came from another fellow in the office who shall remain nameless:
In XP, I always shut off all the indexing crap because it's slow and unpredictable. The searches are slower, but at least you know when things are slow. So, we do the same thing on (other colleague)'s computer, but it is running Vista.
Now, first thing, in Vista, by default, there is no "Run Program". In Vista, if you pop open the start menu and start typing, it "searches" for what you typed. You can turn on searching for favorites, programs, and finally, search the index, or search the drive. By default, "seach the drive" is off, and everything else is on. But when you turn off indexing, it flips the option from search the index to search the drive.
So, now, when you search for something in that window, the drive grinds away looking for what you searched for. Now, somewhere along the time, the smart people at Microsoft said, why don't we start searching for what they are typing, _as they are typing it_, so that by the time they press enter, we are closer to the results.
That means, when (colleague) was trying to run Zoomin to debug a rendering issue, he typed Z..o... and the background thread started searching... the entire disc. But now, that's just the first two letters, so now (colleague) types the second "o" and it starts another background search... of the entire disk. BUT IT LETS THE ORIGINAL THREAD continue to run! So, how you have two threads both searching your entire drive (contents, mind you, not just file names). But let's continue with "min.exe". Yup, you now have 8 different threads all scanning your entire fucking drive, and the machine is fucking melting. Thank goodness (colleague) has an 8-way box and Zoomin.exe is only 8 searches, or this might have been a bad decision on Microsoft's part.
And now the drive is crying out for mercy, but it's kind of hard to tell, because drives are so quiet now-a-days, right? So, all (colleague) notices is that the fan in the computer has sped up. So, he presses enter to execute Zoomin. BUT EVEN WHEN YOU RUN THE APP AND EXIT THE MENU, they don't shut down the threads!! They continue running with absolutely no way to show the user the results anyway because the window is closed!
Now, his rendering code is running like shit, because 99% of the machine is now searching for "zo", "zoo", "zoom", "zoomi", "zoomin", "zoomin.", "zoomin.e", "zoomin.ex", and finally"zoomin.exe". And with all of the threads simulataneously hitting the disc, it takes like 5 minutes for them to exit!
I suggested that they probably cap the max threads to the number of CPUs in the machine... Ooooooh no!! If you just keeping hitting letters, it just merrily keeps adding threads. I creamed his machine by typing "zoooooooooooooooooooooooooooooo".
Fucking awesome!
Oh yeah, one other cool thing, if you backspace, it starts a new thread for the shorter string. WHICH IS ALREADY BEING SEARCHED FOR ON ANOTHER THREAD! So, Zoom launchs five threads.
Sweet action!
So where does Microsoft even go to find programmers this stupid? Elbonia? How do you screw up an operating system this badly and still make money with it?
Seriously, why the hell turn off indexing? Anytime you do something interactively on the system indexing pauses itself. Anytime you have some software package doing something indexing slows down to allow the other process to run with however much processor it wants. I mean, we don't want to have near-instant system searches now because we believe that the index will steal the processor from us? Lets try to keep up with the technology please. I mean, yes, it was stupid for MS to screw up their integrated
Maybe I don't want my files indexed;). Maybe I don't want my computer grinding away doing some stupid shit I'm never going to use. Maybe I want a run line, that's actually a run command line. This is beyond noobs messing up a configuration, it's sheer fucking stupidity, something that deviates from every other operating system out there including previous versions of windows. Yes, I am a system administrator, and yes I can make vista run decently well and crash free on a computer. That's because I've had 20
Maybe I don't want my files indexed;). Maybe I don't want my computer grinding away doing some stupid shit I'm never going to use. Maybe I want a run line, that's actually a run command line. This is beyond noobs messing up a configuration, it's sheer fucking stupidity, something that deviates from every other operating system out there including previous versions of windows.
So configure your indexer settings to only index those bits that you do want indexed (for example, it's probably a very good idea to
Old is not necessarily good, new is not necessarily better. MEsta's radical behavioral and organizational paradigm shifts are, by and large, merely changes and NOT improvements. The telling point is that these "features" are implemented so poorly. It will be interesting to see if SP1 is less boneheaded, I don't hold out much hope as it appears MS QA only tests the default install so they can leave promply at 5 (or whatever the end of day is in India). The GP has it much closer to right than the parent.
I got myself an old Model-M for home use, and I did find myself missing the Windows key for common operations.
So I have a bunch of "hotcuts" ; shortcuts to VBScript chunks which perform these operations, like showing the "Run" dialogue and minimizing to the desktop. Put them in the start menu (in their own folder), bind alt-ctrl- hotkeys to them and it's ALMOST as seamless as using the equivalent win- combination.
If you're really a power user, you already know the names of the control panel executables (for example, appwiz.cpl ran the old "Add/Remove Programs" control panel in pre-Vista, and still runs the same panel even though it was renamed to "Programs and Features").
That's a dumb argument.
If you already know a bunch of obscure commands that your average windows admin or windows power user doesn't know--and you use the run box...why not just go all the way and switch to Linux?
> I don't remember seeing near as many issues from NT4/W2K > XP transition as Vista has presented. Main problems I have with it...
That's probably because the differences between Windows 2000 and Windows XP (Especially at XP's launch) were mostly trivial. Vista's a whole new beast.
>By changing the control panels and network settings,
If your machine ever connects to more than one network, especially simultaneously, the Network Center rocks.
Because you installed Google Desktop Search and it makes no sense to have two programs indexing everything? Personally, I think the Vista indexing works just as well as Google's, and wish I could figure out a way to move the search/command line from the Start menu to the task bar.
If you just keeping hitting letters, it just
merrily keeps adding threads. I creamed his machine by typing
"zoooooooooooooooooooooooooooooo".
So where does Microsoft even go to find programmers this stupid? Elbonia? How do you screw up an operating system this badly and still make money with it?
I just tried to duplicate the above bug (I typed "zooooooooooooooooooooo" into the Start menu search box), and it ran just fine for me. Did you try duplicating the bug yourself? Are you sure your friend wasn't just making stuff up for comedic effect?
Wasn't clear the way the GP was worded, but you need to specifically shut-off indexing for that to happen. Will, of course, be extremely interesting if you did, in fact, shut-off indexing before trying this.
I just tried to duplicate the above bug (I typed "zooooooooooooooooooooo" into the Start menu search box), and it ran just fine for me.
Did you turn off Vista indexing first, as the post describes? Just asking, I can't even attempt to duplicate this bug - my wife demanded that I change our Vista to XP because it was so abysmally slow.
Yes, I did have indexing turned off. And boy am I regretting not mentioning that, since I've gotten the same question (or sometimes in the form of an accusation "You have to turn off indexing to reproduce the bug, dummy") like 10 times.
I just tried this in Vista myself, with Search indexing shut off (as it always is on my machines) and, lo and behold, it went up to 99% CPU usage. Even after I closed the Start Menu, it stayed at 99% for at least 10-15 seconds. Fortunately it did not crash my Dual Core PC, no matter how many times I tried it.
SP1 does not fix this issue either.
I just tried to duplicate the above bug (I typed "zooooooooooooooooooooo" into the Start menu search box), and it ran just fine for me. Did you try duplicating the bug yourself? Are you sure your friend wasn't just making stuff up for comedic effect?
You have to turn indexing off on your hard drive to reproduce the bug. Most sane users since Windows 95 have done this, because Windows search has never worked well. Maybe it's better in Vista, but after using Windows for 13 years and realizing that the stupid
1) There is a run command - you have know where to enable it. Right click on start -> properites -> customize -> check box in "Run command"
2) I tried exactly what you posted and had no problem at all. Taskmanager did not show any additional threads for each letter typed. Computer completely responsive no matter what is typed.
I wonder if Windows Server does this? One of my pet peeves about Windows is that it assumes all your resources (disk, CPU, etc.) are the system's to use for whatever random tasks it thinks need executing, whenever it wants to execute them. But on a server box, you want predictable performance and this is not acceptable. I frequently execute long-running multi-threaded tasks on my Windows desktop machine, and I don't want them interrupted or resource starved either. So I turn off most scheduled actions like
No, in Server the indexer (and the vast majority of services enabled by default in Vista) are disabled by default.
As to the behavior described in the post it's not in Server. Or in Vista for that matter.
How do you screw up an operating system this badly and still make money with it?
You mean besides by shoving it down manufacturers' and customers' throats and making them pay for it? Well, by shoving it down their throat and making them pay for it, really. No matter how crappy their next OS is going to be people are going to buy it because they don't really have a choice. And when I say people I also mean manufacturers, we don't have a choice because they don't have a choice in the first place.
"You mean besides by shoving it down manufacturers' and customers' throats and making them pay for it? Well, by shoving it down their throat and making them pay for it, really. No matter how crappy their next OS is going to be people are going to buy it because they don't really have a choice. And when I say people I also mean manufacturers, we don't have a choice because they don't have a choice in the first place." What do you mean people don't have a choice? Why don't they? Why don't manufacturers have a
So where does Microsoft even go to find programmers this stupid? Elbonia? How do you screw up an operating system this badly and still make money with it?
Your friend is lying. Vista doesn't do that. I just tried it.
So, we do the same thing on (other colleague)'s computer, but it is running Vista.
Bad idea. Vista indexing is not like XP indexing.
Now, first thing, in Vista, by default, there is no "Run Program"
Utterly false. There is run program. Furthermore, if you don't care to use it, you can just type in the search box. You don't need to wait.
So, now, when you search for something in that window, the drive grinds away looking for what you searched for.
By default its only indexing your shortcuts and your Office and.txt documents. Furthermore, it searches an itty-bitty index file (except if you disabled it, in which case, it doesn't search at all). Your drive does not grind away.
Now, somewhere along the time, the smart people at Microsoft said, why don't we start searching for what they are typing, _as they are typing it_, so that by the time they press enter, we are closer to the results.
Admittedly, I don't run Vista myself, so I can only relay what others have said. Another poster above gave some pretty clear instructions, though (quoting):
1) Turn off indexing.
2) Right-click on the task bar, choose Properties, switch to the "Start Menu" tab, click on "Customize" to the right of the Start Menu radio button at the top of the dialog box, scroll down and make sure "Search Files" is checked, and "Search this user's Files" is checked.
3) Launch ProcExp from System Internals. Double-click on the
Everything about that rant is inaccurate. I'm a developer on Windows Search, it works in no such way. Searching via the Start menu never uses the index to search the start menu itself, but always uses the index to search elsewhere. If you disable indexing, you simply won't be able to search elsewhere.
The option in the start menu configuration dialog lets you toggle between two options, "Search the user's profile" and "Search the entire index." This only changes the scope of the search *when querying the i
Today is a good day for information-gathering. Read someone else's mail file.
My favorite Vista rant... (Score:5, Funny)
So where does Microsoft even go to find programmers this stupid? Elbonia? How do you screw up an operating system this badly and still make money with it?
Re: (Score:2)
Note; Kids, don't try any of what you see here at home - We have years of experience that keeps us safe!
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:1)
I mean, yes, it was stupid for MS to screw up their integrated
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
Yes, I am a system administrator, and yes I can make vista run decently well and crash free on a computer. That's because I've had 20
Re: (Score:1)
So configure your indexer settings to only index those bits that you do want indexed (for example, it's probably a very good idea to
Re: (Score:1)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
So I have a bunch of "hotcuts" ; shortcuts to VBScript chunks which perform these operations, like showing the "Run" dialogue and minimizing to the desktop. Put them in the start menu (in their own folder), bind alt-ctrl- hotkeys to them and it's ALMOST as seamless as using the equivalent win- combination.
Re: (Score:1)
That's a dumb argument.
If you already know a bunch of obscure commands that your average windows admin or windows power user doesn't know--and you use the run box...why not just go all the way and switch to Linux?
Obscure commands, no pointy-cl
Re: (Score:1)
That's probably because the differences between Windows 2000 and Windows XP (Especially at XP's launch) were mostly trivial. Vista's a whole new beast.
>By changing the control panels and network settings,
If your machine ever connects to more than one network, especially simultaneously, the Network Center rocks.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:1)
Re:My favorite Vista rant... (Score:5, Informative)
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
(Windows 2003 Server user)
Re:My favorite Vista rant... (Score:4, Informative)
Re: (Score:2)
Did you turn off Vista indexing first, as the post describes? Just asking, I can't even attempt to duplicate this bug - my wife demanded that I change our Vista to XP because it was so abysmally slow.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2, Informative)
Re: (Score:1)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
You have to turn indexing off on your hard drive to reproduce the bug. Most sane users since Windows 95 have done this, because Windows search has never worked well. Maybe it's better in Vista, but after using Windows for 13 years and realizing that the stupid
Re: (Score:1)
Re: (Score:1)
Re: (Score:1)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:1)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
How do you screw up an operating system this badly and still make money with it?
You mean besides by shoving it down manufacturers' and customers' throats and making them pay for it? Well, by shoving it down their throat and making them pay for it, really. No matter how crappy their next OS is going to be people are going to buy it because they don't really have a choice. And when I say people I also mean manufacturers, we don't have a choice because they don't have a choice in the first place.
Re: (Score:1)
What do you mean people don't have a choice? Why don't they? Why don't manufacturers have a
Re: (Score:1)
Re: (Score:2)
Your friend is lying. Vista doesn't do that. I just tried it.
Re: (Score:1)
Re: (Score:1)
Re: (Score:2)
So, we do the same thing on (other colleague)'s computer, but it is running Vista.
Bad idea. Vista indexing is not like XP indexing.
Now, first thing, in Vista, by default, there is no "Run Program"
Utterly false. There is run program. Furthermore, if you don't care to use it, you can just type in the search box. You don't need to wait.
So, now, when you search for something in that window, the drive grinds away looking for what you searched for.
By default its only indexing your shortcuts and your Office and .txt documents. Furthermore, it searches an itty-bitty index file (except if you disabled it, in which case, it doesn't search at all). Your drive does not grind away.
Now, somewhere along the time, the smart people at Microsoft said, why don't we start searching for what they are typing, _as they are typing it_, so that by the time they press enter, we are closer to the results.
And a good idea it is. That's why the other m
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:1)
Searching via the Start menu never uses the index to search the start menu itself, but always uses the index to search elsewhere. If you disable indexing, you simply won't be able to search elsewhere.
The option in the start menu configuration dialog lets you toggle between two options, "Search the user's profile" and "Search the entire index." This only changes the scope of the search *when querying the i