This discussion is archived
7726 Views 23 Replies Latest reply: Jan 2, 2011 1:28 PM by CSleeper
question: what has a single feature of a single app that you want, but isn't there, to do with the OS being advanced or not? if you don't like OS X, nobody is forcing you, or am I mistaken?
additionally, your post does not contain a question.Macbook and iMac, Mac OS X (10.6.4), 13'' Late 2008 and 27'' i7 Mid-2010
You're not talking to Apple here, just other users like yourself. The place to send your rants is
http://www.apple.com/feedback/macosx.htmliMac Intel/2C2D, eMac G4/700, Mac OS X (10.6), 10.5, 10.4, 10.3, 9.2
Complain to Apple:
We're just your fellow users here, and while we might well agree about Spotlight's limitations, there's nothing any of us can do about it.iMac Core i7 8GB ATI Radeon 4850, Mac OS X (10.6.4), Also: iMac 2.8 Core 2 Duo 24", IPad 16GB WiFi, Dell w/ Windows 7, Win XP via VM
I have a Drobo FS NAS on my home network and have no problems searching it using the Finder (other than it takes up to several minutes to complete the search). Once I enter a search term and hit Return near the top of the window I have "Search: 'This Mac' 'Shared' | 'Contents' 'File Name'", if I selected 'Shared' it automatically goes and searches the Share Points I have mounted on my Mac. So if this doesn't work for you it may be an issue with how your Synology server is set up.
I didn't say I did not like OS X. It's got a lot to like. However, users, in my view should not accept major flaws - as this one is.
A single app? Well, I'm sorry but searching as described is a fundamental requirement of any OS. You are seriously suggesting that it is acceptable?
As far as a question goes - here's one - does anyone have any solutions, other than third party apps?iMac new, Mac OS X (10.6.5), New iMac
Thanks for that.
Yep, I can search my NAS in a similar fashion. This is limited in value, however. For instance, iTunes was hanging whenever it came a across a jpeg in my music share. I would have liked to search the music share for all jpegs and then deleted them - seems impossible to do that.
No matter, the Easy Find app searches the way finder should? Or is it just me?
Thanks for the advice.
MikeiMac new, Mac OS X (10.6.5), New iMac
Try opening a Finder window and navigating to your music folder on your NAS. Type ".jp" in the search window. That should limit the search to just the music folder and sub-folders (you'll notice that your music folder is selected where "Search: 'This Mac' 'Shared' | 'Contents' 'File Name'" is located). Also select 'File Name'. There is also a small '+' sign at the right edge that allows some search refinements but I don't find it very useful. Be patient if you have lots of files, you may get a spinning beach ball in the Finder for a few minutes when working over the network.
Finder/Spotlight normally do their searches after first creating a Spotlight index on the volume to be searched, and then searching the index. This makes searches very fast compared to a program like EasyFind, which has to traverse the actual files on the volume to be searched. If you have a local external disk it presumably belongs to you, and you can decide for yourself if you want Finder/Spotlight to place a Spotlight index onto it. But a network drive might be part of a larger system that is used by many others, and creating an index is a network-intensive process.
Take a look at this 2008 thread:
[Spotlight - index network drives / folders?|http://discussions.apple.com/thread.jspa?threadID=1573997]
A poster there wrote to Apple about this issue, and got the following E-Mail response:
"We intentionally turned this off for Leopard 'cause it was a problem that lots of people would enable indexing on public AFP volumes and swamp the servers.
On Leopard we only allow local indexing of network locations via Network Homes and more recently (SL) PodCast Producer has some special SPI.
Remote indexing via Server Side Search is also a Leopard feature.
The AFP server needs to be running Leopard for indexing to occur. Leopard supports server-side indexing."
There seems no reason why Finder couldn't still do a non-indexed (EasyFind type) search though.Mac Mini, Mac OS X (10.6.5)
Thanks for that.
I think this whole subject is rather bizarre. Apple seem to have crippled the OS X with regards to Network searches. Am I the only one that thinks this a basic fundamental requirement of any OS search facility.
What, on Earth, is the sense of creating an index in the Apple manner? Does it then automatically update the index as new files are add, moved or deleted?
Apple really should gets it's act together. Most users don't appreciate being Nannied like this.
MikeiMac new, Mac OS X (10.6.5), New iMac
What, on Earth, is the sense of creating an index in the Apple manner?
Well, as mentioned, searching an index is a lot faster. And who knows, there might someday be a wider commercial use for searching just an index when you are looking for items in a larger universe. Maybe something like the following could even be successful:
(sorry, couldn't resist! )
Does it then automatically update the index as new files are add, moved or deleted?
Yes, the Spotlight Index on a local drive does work this way.Mac Mini, Mac OS X (10.6.5)
Just to be sure it is clear - it takes time for Spotlight to index a local drive initially, but once created, that index remains on the drive indefinitely and is used for future Finder and Spotlight searches, which is why they are fast. The index for each volume is kept in a top-level folder named ".Spotlight-V100" which is invisible to Finder, and so you don't normally notice it. The Spotlight index is updated dynamically when items on the volume are added or deleted.Mac Mini, Mac OS X (10.6.5)