I played around with this a little.
Although typing into the folder search field gives you an option labeled "Filename contains…", what you really seem to get is a search for "Filename contains a 'word' that begins with…."
A new "word" in the filename can be the beginning of the filename, anything that comes after a punctuation character, or a case change. The matching criteria itself ignores the case.
So in your example, you had a file named "01 Danse macabre.mp3", and a filename search for "cab" didn't find it. I think that is because "cab" is in the middle of the string, and is not a "word" as defined above. As an exercise, I renamed one of my own files as "01 Danse macabre.mp3", and as expected, searching for the filename "cab" didn't find it. However if I then capitalized the "C" so that the filename was "01 Danse maCabre.mp3" then a search for "cab" did find it:
"Cab" starts a new "word" because of the case change. The search itself is case-insensitive, so that searching for "cab" finds "Cab".
This shows the problem, but doesn't fix it. As a work-around, instead of using the top-right search field to type in "cab", instead hit command-F to bring up the search window. Change the initial "Kind is Any" line to "Name contains". Now you get a true "contains" search instead of a "word begins with" search. When I searched for "cab" this this way, I did find "01 Danse macabre.mp3":
Yeah, thanks, the word vs part-of-a-word part is one of the most messed default settings apple ever had.
And even worse, your solution doesn't even work in many cases if e.g. the localized name doesn't coincide with the actual filename.
You have to go into the cmd-f menu, open the search type filelist, select other to bring up a menu that enables you to actually ALLOW you to search for filenames !!!
I unchecked everything so filename (Dateiname) stays as default search type.
And of course you can't set the default search type to "string" instead of "word".
After doing that the search function is at least halfway usable.
You are completely ****** however if you want to find something on a 500GB external harddrive...
I have been experinceing similar behavior but it has always been eradict. Some directories seem to work fine others do not. I did note that if a directory did not work I coudl hit CMD-F and choose "filename" from the criteria and that would work fine. In addtion if I switched from the current folder to my "MAC" it finds the files. When it works or I choose my "MAC" if finds any pattern in the name that I type.
I played around a little more and made some changes and uiltimately fixed the problem by first making sure that I was owener but do not belive that was the issue and I found some ACLs on the files and remvoed them. Still no luck even after running mduilt -E /. Lastly I found that if I renmaed the dir and renamed it back again it is fixed.
It gets weirder.
In one folder I have the file "Householdbudget".
If I search for "hous" finder finds it both in "This Mac" and the current folder view.
If I search for "budg" finder finds it again.
If I search for "udge" - nothing.
I think the quicksearch only indexes words found in a dictionary instead of whole strings.
I guess that happens if you suck at efficient search algorithms and don't want to ask experts like google.
btw. I'm using OSX 10.8.2 by now. No improvement.
Well I think the logic here is to limit the number of hits in spotlight. Remmber this all has to be indexed and the more hits the more garabage to sort through. By defautl it is indexing and searching name and contents. It would be nice if the name option from the drop down that allows name/everyhting serached for any characters but that is not somehting you would want in a File Contents search. I am guessgn that the implmentation since it starts searchign wihtout you make the choice initally is what is limiting the results. I think Apple is choosign "matches" to apply to known words and "contains" for any Fuxxy wildcard search string
This one is easliy solved by hitting CMD-F and choosing name and contains instead of matches. I think this is reasonable for hwo many times you woudl actually search for "udge" when you mena "budge". Just my 2 cents.