-
All replies
-
Helpful answers
-
-
Jul 4, 2016 5:27 AM in response to polarrrbearby Luis Sequeira1,polarrrbear wrote:
A contents search for apple, just as you said. Not actually nothing. Sorry, I was unclear.
The problem is that "apple" as a search text can be matched by "Apple", but it can be matched by other words, such as "Applet", "applets" and more.
You may restrict that search by surrounding the search word in quotes - i.e. by actually typing "apple" WITH the quotes in the search box.
-
Jul 5, 2016 1:59 AM in response to polarrrbearby Barney-15E,★HelpfulI tried searching for iTunes in 10.5 and I got the iTunes app, Desktop & Screen Saver (presumably the iTunes screensaver?), iTunes folder, iTunes Library.itl, iTunes Music, Automatically Add to iTunes, CDs & DVDs...
...And in 10.11 even after having iTunes running and open, I had to relaunch iTunes to get it to appear "last opened", second after iTunes Library.itl. There's only 4 iTunes relevant results before music, and then header files and other stuff I don't recall opening.
Ok, I think I may have finally gathered what you want. You want some sort of relevance sorting.
I'm not sure how that is going to work on a desktop computer. If you have 100 files, each with only one reference to "Apple," which one is most relevant? If only there was a way to tell it what types of files were most relevant to your search…
Spotlight does some grouping for you which makes it much easier to find what is relevant to you, but you can actually tell the Finder what is specifically relevant using search tokens, the added criteria, or just sorting the results as you'd like.
The last thing I want is a computer programmer guessing what I'm looking for, like "iTunes kind:application"
However, the only reason I would search for an app would be to launch it, and Spotlight is much better suited for that, as has already been mentioned.
The only reason I use a Finder search is if I actually need to manage the file, not specifically open and edit it. Even spotlight can fulfill that need if you hold down the command key and hit return. The item will open in Finder, selected and ready for whatever manipulation you need.
It obviously doesn't work the way you want, and I don't think anyone here can provide any solution acceptable to you. Send feedback to Apple suggesting they change it so that it works for you.
EDIT:
Ok, perhaps this will help as you've mentioned "last opened" being more relevant.
Open a finder window, enter a search term, and select the scope (This Mac or <current folder>). Set the sort, arrangement, and whatever how you'd like. Delete the search term and click the Save button. Add it to your Sidebar for quick access. Then, when you want to search, select that Search Folder from your sidebar and enter a search term.
-
Jul 5, 2016 1:58 AM in response to Barney-15Eby polarrrbear,I don't know how you don't think relevancy sorting wouldn't work on a computer, when you've been directing me to Spotlight throughout this whole thread. There are countless open source developments for computer search engines, and there are definitely ways computers can determine relevancy. But that's beside my point, which was actually asking for relevant results, not a relevancy search option (which would be nice however, and could replace the dead setting of arrange by "none" in a Finder search).
The last thing I want is a computer programmer guessing what I'm looking for, like "iTunes kind:application"
Finder takes way more steps than it ever has in this way – all of Mac OS X does, and frankly I hate a lot of it. I'm actually on your side for that.
Quite often, I'll be in a folder with a lot of very, very similar items, or I'll be placing system configuration files into folders with very unintelligible names, sometimes several folders deep and it'd be good to know that searching won't pull me out of what I'm doing, cause confusion, or require extra set-up – it never needed it in the past. No automatic file location between views, no randomly, incoherently changing "sort by" and "arrange by"; no cascading cover-flows of last opened. Really, if they stripped it back to less "guessing" and the bloated "user friendliness", which usually gets worse upon searching, I'd be much happier. I don't want to place something or take something from the wrong folder because I'm bedazzled by flowing "last opened" developer files and photos from '06, stripped from grid order; or because I haven't switched 20 switches to ensure my view settings haven't automagically changed since I last set parameters.
Lastly, I NEVER search for applications, I think I've said this over and over. It was an example.
Anyway, thanks everyone. I'll just remember to keep changing stubborn view settings when I search, and I'll make a smart-folder on the side to keep "last opened" for searching purposes.
-
Jul 5, 2016 2:17 AM in response to polarrrbearby polarrrbear,I do have one last question… When contents searching, will "contents: apple" actually only give me file contents search? Because when I do it, there's no option to transform it into anything but "Name matches: contents: apple" Or do I have to click the plus drop down and do a search that way?
-
Jul 5, 2016 4:07 AM in response to polarrrbearby Luis Sequeira1,Search for
content:apple
(the keyword is "content" without the trailing "s")

