orange
Fri Mar 28 09:13:24 PDT 2008
I installed it on XP and to my terror, all the processes (4 of them!!!!)
together use up more than 70 of ram!!!.. lol
Row row row your bloat, dreadly down the stream.....
see screenshot
http://img87.imageshack.us/img87/508/ramofwindowssearchuh5.jpg
This is crap or this is crap?
Im insisting on force-trying it (as I do with vista), to see if it can do a
particular complex task I have in mind.. if it doesnt, bye bye
crapo-indexer....
By force-trying it I mean continuing to evaluate a product even though it is
very apparent that it is crap.
I will have to get some feedback to the windows search team after I get a
more rounded up picture of all the bad design this thing has..
You can bet on it that the feedback with contain good tips to the developers
(as always) but also the word CRAP will be repeated several times.
"Frank" <fab@notspam.com> wrote in message
news:%23d0J4vOkIHA.1208@TK2MSFTNGP03.phx.gbl...
> orange wrote:
>
>>
http://windowsvistablog.com/blogs/windowsvista/archive/2008/03/27/announcing-the-windows-search-4-0-preview.aspx
>>
>> Notice that they acknowledge the bugs, that the vista fanboys claim
>> didn't exist? LOL idiots...
>>
>> lets hope this one will be better than the extremely bad designed and
>> implemented CRAP search of vista
>>
>> (this installs on non vista OS too, like XP)
>
> hehehe...what's wrong capin' crunch...does it piss you off that MS
> continues to improve Vista...oh and XP?...LOL!
> Get life you fukkin loser!
> Frank
>