Alternatives to Apple Support Communities

I'm curious to see what the search turns up for you for my user name. Even using "R C-R" with the quotes included, this is what I get in the "People" section:

Without the quotes, it does no better:

Also, in the refined search, if I try to enter my user name in the "People" box, it doesn't find me at all & the search acts as if I had entered nothing in either the communities, etc. box or the People one.

I'm talking about the fundmental ability of the search engine to produce ordered, relevant results without a lot of help. It still needs help to narrow the search results to something useable unless the search term is carefully constructed not to be too broad. It still requires the same archaic search terminology mentioned in the Search Tips page for tightly focused searches, which is not surprising since the same Lucene engine has been used since 2005.

The "Web 2.0" features you mention are great when they work, but they are sometimes very slow to update or annoyingly refuse to use valid criteria (like my user name, apparently because the hypen confuses the sub-search) to narrow the results.

The search feature was, by all reasonable accounts, the absolute worst part of the old Apple Discussions. I don't mean worst in relative terms. I mean flat out bad.

The new search system still returns years worth of information and does so much better than the old system did.

People still get questions answered in seconds. But first, you have to ask one.

I have to agree with the OP - I searched for a thread the other day; I did not remember the subject or the OP - all I remembered was that it was the Discussions Feedback forum and one poster's name and that I had at least one post. If my subcriptions had not gone poof into cyberspace during the change-over, I would have had it in 30 seconds - as it was, I spent 45 minutes, refining the search several times with the correct forum, and his and/or my name, all to no avail. I gave up 45 minutes later. And, on another occasion, it took me almost 2 hours to find and bookmark a few of my old subscriptions - at least I remembered the subject line, so I actually found 4 of 10 I was looking for. So, for me, the search function is non-functional.

etresoft wrote:

The new search system still returns years worth of information and does so much better than the old system did.

AFAIK, both the old & new versions use the open source Apache Lucene search & index engine. The only difference I can see between the old & new implementations is in the old one client searches were somewhat context sensitive, so unlike with the new one you were not searching the entirety of the site's content by default.

For instance, in the old system if you were in a forum's list view, searches by default searched only in that forum. This typically gave more relevant results than the current site-wide search scope if you knew which forum to search.

However, compared to Google's sophisticated search algorithms running on its massive data farms, both the old & new Discussions search systems are crude & pathetically slow. Much better results with far less effort can usually be achieved by using Google to search this site: just append the Google search with "site: discussions.apple.com" to limit it to searching this site.

Sorry. I don't buy it at all. I just did such a search and it took me maybe 4 seconds. I never used the subscriptions so I can't comment on those. The search feature is perhaps the single most improved feature of the new forums.

R C-R wrote:

The only difference I can see between the old & new implementations is in the old one client searches were somewhat context sensitive, so unlike with the new one you were not searching the entirety of the site's content by default.

That's the only difference you can see?

Perhaps I was wrong about the old search system. I must have not known how to use it. I never knew it could:

1) Find communities as you typed them

2) Find usernames as you typed them

3) Sort

4) Show meaningful message context

5) Give me an RSS feed of the search

6) Function for a whole month without breaking

If the old search had all these features too, I guess the new search is no improvement at all.

2) Find usernames as you typed them

You obviously have a better keyboard or touch - I have not found any username unless I go to a second page and input it there.

4) Show meaningful message context

I hope you're not referring to the meaningless "more like this" in the right column? Haven't found any there newer than 2006/2007 or so.

5) Give me an RSS feed of the search

Indulge me: why would I want an RSS feed of my search when I can't find what I'm looking for? What is an RSS feed going to do for me (except inundate me with unnecessary and annoying notifications)?

The user names I have needed to search for are not "power" users or posters; I generally do not search for users (don't see a need to) - the ones I've looked for do not pop up, but need quite a bit weeding out before getting there. I have finally found the ones I needed to find and put them on a "watch" list so I don't lose them; an example is the multi-disabled-challenged poster who appears to respond to me and I try to answer quickly before he gets snide and disparaging remarks from others.

I realize that (and no, it really doesn't); I've found that "regulars" seem to show up usually - but then I'm not sure why I would be looking for a poster; however, looking for someone who is not becomes a lengthy exercise.

babowa wrote:

You obviously have a better keyboard or touch - I have not found any username unless I go to a second page and input it there.

It depends on the username. People whose names are just single letters with spaces are particularly hard. "R C-R" and "K T" are well-hidden. You do have to use page two for them.

I hope you're not referring to the meaningless "more like this" in the right column? Haven't found any there newer than 2006/2007 or so.

No. I mean you get several lines of context insidead of a single, truncated line.

Indulge me: why would I want an RSS feed of my search when I can't find what I'm looking for? What is an RSS feed going to do for me (except inundate me with unnecessary and annoying notifications)?

Obviously you would only use that for a successful search. If you were only interested in specific postings in a large group, you could use an RSS feed to narrow that down. I suppose you could setup an RSS feed to inundate you if you wanted. I would just put a link to that feed in Safari or Mail and you could easily tell when there were new postings that matched your criteria.

I would just put a link to that feed in Safari or Mail and you could easily tell when there were new postings that matched your criteria.

Well, it only took overnight for me to be able to view your post (with the anomalies going on here yesterday).... Appreciate the suggestions, but...

My workflow and preferred methods are obviously totally different; I prefer scrolling through a list of subject lines and I abhor constant notifications about anything; I don't use Safari and I don't use my real email address (Mail) here - I have a web email I use with everything Apple. I turn off anything notification related including RSS feeds immediately - there are enough intrusions in one's life already, I don't need more and the world won't end if I don't read or hear about something immediately. I'll read it/address it when I'm ready. But that is what I prefer - it works for well enough for me, except it makes it harder for me to navigate and/or find anything here. I've given up using the search function unless it is absolutely imperative that I find something and have restricted my "perusals" to three forums (err.... communities) - that makes it semi-manageable.

I suggest looking into RSS feeds a bit more closely. You are making a judgement based on a apparently erroneous assumptions. You can subscribe to RSS feeds in any web browser. You can choose to have them show up in your e-mail or as a toolbar link that gets a little "3" icon next to it when there have been 3 new posts. If you click on it, you get a list of subject lines and maybe some context if you want.

You can use whatever features you want. It just seems silly to rip on some feature and then describe how you want things to work in a way that sounds very much that the feature you just trashed.