Search Hidden/System Files?

[Gene Wirchenko]

[snip]

I don't know how much RAM the typical Windows 7 system has these days,
but I suspect it's at least 4GB, in which case 3-5MB on the low end or
45MB on the high end are a tiny speck. Nothing to be concerned about
there. Besides, memory is there to be used. If you can't spare 10MB,
then your system is already running on the ragged edge and needs help.

My XP box has 1.5 GB. Firefox recently (with version 13) added
an option that tabs do not load until selected. That has knocked down
my system's usual memory use considerably from often going over 1.5 GB
to around 1 GB. I like this feature a lot.

SQL Server, once it grabs memory, seems reluctant to give it up.
It can be doing nothing for days and it will still keep memory that it
does not need.

I appreciate when programmers do not assume that they have all of
the resources of my system to play with. The playground is for more
than one kid, as it were.

I am a programmer myself.

[snip]

Sincerely,

Gene Wirchenko

 

[Char Jackson]

I don't know either, but my guess is that it's closer to 2GB than to
4GB.

I did a quick check of the laptop/netbook area at Newegg. Specifying
2GB or less returned 65 hits. Specifying 3GB or more returned 685
hits. Specifying 6GB or more returned 322 hits. I think I'll stick
with my conservative guess that 4GB is typical.

 

[Gene E. Bloch]

I did a quick check of the laptop/netbook area at Newegg. Specifying
2GB or less returned 65 hits. Specifying 3GB or more returned 685
hits. Specifying 6GB or more returned 322 hits. I think I'll stick
with my conservative guess that 4GB is typical.

From casually looking at ads, I thought 4GB was a better guess, but I
couldn't figure out a way to prove or disprove that idea.

Thanks for showing us a way.

 

[Ken Blake]

I did a quick check of the laptop/netbook area at Newegg. Specifying
2GB or less returned 65 hits. Specifying 3GB or more returned 685
hits. Specifying 6GB or more returned 322 hits. I think I'll stick
with my conservative guess that 4GB is typical.

You, of course, are free to stick with your guess, but let me say the
following:

1. What they are selling today is not necessarily what they were
selling when they sold most of their Windows7 machines.

2. What they advertise and what they mostly sell are two different
things. Many people will chose the cheaper alternative, rather than
the one they advertise the most, the one with more RAM.

My guess is founded on the amount of RAM that is had by most people I
know who are running Winning 7.

As an example of what I mean, I have three machines here running
Windows 7. Mine (custom-built) has 6GB. My wife's (a Dell--what Dell
had to offer when I bought it) has 2GB. My EEE netbook has 1GB (don't
ask why it has so little; its performance is very poor).

 

[Ken Blake]

From casually looking at ads, I thought 4GB was a better guess, but I
couldn't figure out a way to prove or disprove that idea.

As I said, what they advertise and what they sell are two different
things.

 

[Gene E. Bloch]

As I said, what they advertise and what they sell are two different
things.

But you said it after I posted my remark and in a (slightly) different
part of the thread.

But I do hope you will leave me free to disbelieve your implication...

 

[Ken Blake]

But you said it after I posted my remark and in a (slightly) different
part of the thread.

Yes, I didn't mean that to be at all accusatory. I was just repeating
my point.

But I do hope you will leave me free to disbelieve your implication...

Of course.

Ken

 

[Gene E. Bloch]

Yes, I didn't mean that to be at all accusatory. I was just repeating
my point.


Of course.

Ken

Thanks. No, I'm not being sarcastic - I see your reply as gentlemanly
(both parts).

 

[Stan Brown]

"Andy Burns" a écrit dans le message de groupe de discussion :
(e-mail address removed)...



You can use the AQS format "attributes:number"

where the number is a logical-or of the relevant attribute bits from

http://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/library/gg258117(v=vs.85).aspx

You might not be aware of a big problem with your quoting style.
The way your newsreader is doing it, when someone else follows
up, it looks like you *said* what you actually only quoted.

The problem is that Windows Live Mail 2011 (version 15) has a
quoting style that is completely broken. Unfortunately that poses
a painful choice to you: either fix every quote manually, or get
a real newsreader such as Gravity, Xananews, and Forte Agent (to
mention some that come to mind at the moment). OR, if you really
want WLM, some say that WLM 14 will serve; see "SC Tom" below.

update 2011-04-02: I've seen a newsgroup posting claiming you
can un-break WLM 15 by installing and using an Autohotkey script:
http://www.dusko-lolic.from.hr/wlmquote/

Thanks for your consideration!

Along with what the others have suggested, you can uninstall
WLM 2011 and install WLM 2009 instead, which handles quoting
a lot better:

http://www.microsoft.com/downloads/en/details.aspx?
FamilyID=56883de5-2024-4631-806e-757693072a1c

[or use http://tinyurl.com/25zfouw which redirects to the above]

 

[VanguardLH]

<snip>

It only needs to run when you want to search but then it takes a little
time to check its index. It responds very fast because it is only
looking at file names.

I'm not talking about its user GUI. It claims to monitor file I/O so it
can make immediate changes to its table of filenames. The only way to
monitor file I/O is to have a program always running resident to do that
monitoring.

http://www.voidtools.com/faq.php
item 1.5

If you're claiming that they leave no process running in memory after
you close its UI then they are lying about monitoring for file changes.
If they aren't lying then you aren't aware that they leave a process
running in memory to do that monitoring.

Also consider just how the product is going to do its file indexing. It
a process isn't loaded into memory (nothing runs unless it is in memory)
then it can't run its code which means it can't index any files.

Why would it have a "Run at startup" option during its installation if
the default wasn't to load the program into memory and leave it there?
Yes, I suppose you could opt to not load it on startup but that means it
won't be indexing existing files and it won't be monitoring for
immediate changes (create, delete, rename) to your files; however, that
means you wouldn't have those changed files in its database and would
have it scanning your drive to find the files that were changed when it
wasn't running.

Close the Everything UI. Then please explain what program is running
the "Everything.exe" process seen in Task Manager's Processes tab.
Just how does the Everything tray icon appear if there weren't a process
owning it?

 

[VanguardLH]

I don't know how much RAM the typical Windows 7 system has these days,
but I suspect it's at least 4GB, in which case 3-5MB on the low end or
45MB on the high end are a tiny speck. Nothing to be concerned about
there. Besides, memory is there to be used. If you can't spare 10MB,
then your system is already running on the ragged edge and needs help.

Consider your logic. If every resident process you load on Windows
startup simply decided to load up a huge database/table into memory then
how long before you didn't have much memory left? I've seen the same
poor logic used when arguing about banner windows opened and closed by
startup programs. Gee, it's just one program doing it but imagine the
nuisance if every program loaded on startup did that. You'd be seeing
tons of banners opening and closing.

I knew someone would respond with "I have 64MB of system memory so why
do I care about a measly 10MB". You think all that context switching by
the dispatcher to give a slot of time to each process has no overhead or
consequence? You think having dozens or hundreds or thousands of
concurrent processes doesn't slow down the responsiveness of your host?
Even if every process consumed a mere 1MB, the more processes you have
the more impact to your host they represent. Also, their everything.exe
process runs at normal priority, not at low priority, which means it
competes with all your normal programs despite it is supposed to be a
background process just to do file indexing.

I use Everything for networked drives and other LAN-connected hosts,
as well.

Then you're saying they're lying in their FAQ. They claim otherwise by
stating only local drives (and only NTFS formatted drives) are
supported. Hey, that is what THEY say about THEIR product.

http://www.voidtools.com/faq.php#Can__Everything__index_a_mapped_network_drive
No, "Everything" only indexes local or removable NTFS volumes.
To search a networked computer you will need to run Everything on both
computers.

So you need to install Everything on *both* hosts and run their ETP
server over there. That they can communicate via client-server
relationship does NOT mean your client on your host is indexing files on
the networked host. It only indexes files on YOUR host. To see the
files on the other host means your client has to get a list from the ETP
server running on the other host (where the client on that OTHER host
did its own indexing on that host).

http://www.voidtools.com/faq.php#What_are_the_system_requirements_for__Everything
"Everything" will only locate files and folders on local NTFS volumes.

As I said, "something else would be needed to find files" on non-local
drives, and that something else is to install yet another copy of
Everything on the remote/networked host and run its ETP server over
there. Their client running on your local host doesn't index anything
other than the NTFS drives on your local host.

 

[Char Jackson]

Consider your logic. If every resident process you load on Windows
startup simply decided to load up a huge database/table into memory then
how long before you didn't have much memory left? I've seen the same
poor logic used when arguing about banner windows opened and closed by
startup programs. Gee, it's just one program doing it but imagine the
nuisance if every program loaded on startup did that. You'd be seeing
tons of banners opening and closing.

I believe it's your logic that is poor in this case. We're talking
about a specific program. There's no reason to extend it to every
program that has a resident process. You have to make a separate
decision about every program you consider. In this case, you looked at
the system requirements and the program benefits and decided the cost
was too great. I have no problem with that, but your decision should
have no bearing on anyone else.

I knew someone would respond with "I have 64MB of system memory so why
do I care about a measly 10MB". You think all that context switching by
the dispatcher to give a slot of time to each process has no overhead or
consequence?

No significant impact, yes. We're no longer running 6502's clocked at
1 MHz anymore. Today's CPU's have far more power than almost any of us
can put to use. If a trillionth of one percent needs to be used for
task switching, I doubt I'm going to notice.

You think having dozens or hundreds or thousands of
concurrent processes doesn't slow down the responsiveness of your host?

Getting carried away, again. We're talking about one specific program.

Even if every process consumed a mere 1MB, the more processes you have
the more impact to your host they represent. Also, their everything.exe
process runs at normal priority, not at low priority, which means it
competes with all your normal programs despite it is supposed to be a
background process just to do file indexing.


Then you're saying they're lying in their FAQ. They claim otherwise by
stating only local drives (and only NTFS formatted drives) are
supported. Hey, that is what THEY say about THEIR product.

No, I'm not saying they're lying in their FAQ. You're being
ridiculous, especially since you figured out in your very next
paragraph exactly how it's accomplished. Sheesh.

http://www.voidtools.com/faq.php#Can__Everything__index_a_mapped_network_drive
No, "Everything" only indexes local or removable NTFS volumes.
To search a networked computer you will need to run Everything on both
computers.

So you need to install Everything on *both* hosts and run their ETP
server over there. That they can communicate via client-server
relationship does NOT mean your client on your host is indexing files on
the networked host. It only indexes files on YOUR host. To see the
files on the other host means your client has to get a list from the ETP
server running on the other host (where the client on that OTHER host
did its own indexing on that host).

I would hope that your conclusion was an obvious one. I certainly
didn't say anything to the contrary.

http://www.voidtools.com/faq.php#What_are_the_system_requirements_for__Everything
"Everything" will only locate files and folders on local NTFS volumes.

As I said, "something else would be needed to find files" on non-local
drives, and that something else is to install yet another copy of
Everything on the remote/networked host and run its ETP server over
there. Their client running on your local host doesn't index anything
other than the NTFS drives on your local host.

You already said that above, and like I said, I would hope your
conclusion was an obvious one.

All in all, if you don't want to use a program, any program, then
don't use it. This nonsense about "every resident process" is just
that...nonsense.

 

[Harry Putnam]

[...]

Try Everything from http://www.voidtools.com/

Sorry to butt in here with a slight off topic twist.

Does anyone in this thread who knows anything about `Everthing' (not a
pun or joke), know how to register at the `Everthing' forum.

http://forum.voidtools.com/

I looked around their pages and FAQ and so forth for a good little
while and never saw a way to register.... Nearest thing I see is a
login button and it does not lead to any registering links.

I thought perhaps I could just post with no login, but no... that
doesn't fly. So there must be a register process somewhere.

And there is not a sign of any kind of contact information on the
forum pages.

 

[Dave-UK]

[...]

Try Everything from http://www.voidtools.com/

Sorry to butt in here with a slight off topic twist.

Does anyone in this thread who knows anything about `Everthing' (not a
pun or joke), know how to register at the `Everthing' forum.

http://forum.voidtools.com/

I looked around their pages and FAQ and so forth for a good little
while and never saw a way to register.... Nearest thing I see is a
login button and it does not lead to any registering links.

I thought perhaps I could just post with no login, but no... that
doesn't fly. So there must be a register process somewhere.

And there is not a sign of any kind of contact information on the
forum pages.

I looked around for a while and by trying to log in with false name/password
a link popped up suggesting I email the board admin. Maybe he knows the
secret method:
(e-mail address removed)

 

[Paul]

[...]

Try Everything from http://www.voidtools.com/

Sorry to butt in here with a slight off topic twist.

Does anyone in this thread who knows anything about `Everthing' (not a
pun or joke), know how to register at the `Everthing' forum.

http://forum.voidtools.com/

I looked around their pages and FAQ and so forth for a good little
while and never saw a way to register.... Nearest thing I see is a
login button and it does not lead to any registering links.

I thought perhaps I could just post with no login, but no... that
doesn't fly. So there must be a register process somewhere.

And there is not a sign of any kind of contact information on the
forum pages.

Here's your answer :-(

http://forum.voidtools.com/ucp.php?mode=register

"Information

Creating a new account is currently not possible."

I had to find that link with a search engine...
I couldn't navigate there, from an existing link on the site itself.

What can happen with forums, is spammers glom onto the registration
page, do a gazillion registrations, then bomb the site with
spam entries. In the hopes, a search engine will index their
spam, and others will find it. A bulletin board owner can try to
protect the registration page with a Captcha...

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/a/a7/KCAPTCHA_with_crowded_symbols.gif

but that doesn't provide the level of protection needed. If you're
a one-man site, fighting with spammers becomes a full time job. And
it's just easier to close the forum up and be done with it.

Now, this is a bit harder to abuse. Yes, boneheads could
fill the queue here with bogus messages. In which case, the
site owner may stop visiting this queue altogether. I've run
into commercial sites, where the level of spam into the
"contacts" interface is so high, they can't find legit
user queries any more.

http://www.voidtools.com/contact.php

So basically, if you have a web site, and any part of it
is "writeable" in the remotest sense, it becomes a full
time maintenance job cleaning it up.

Paul

 

[VanguardLH]

Does anyone in this thread who knows anything about `Everthing' (not a
pun or joke), know how to register at the `Everthing' forum.

http://forum.voidtools.com/

I looked around their pages and FAQ and so forth for a good little
while and never saw a way to register.... Nearest thing I see is a
login button and it does not lead to any registering links.

I thought perhaps I could just post with no login, but no... that
doesn't fly. So there must be a register process somewhere.

And there is not a sign of any kind of contact information on the
forum pages.

http://forum.voidtools.com/faq.php#f0r8

Looks like the product author isn't accepting new registrations for his
forums. Of course, it would be beyond logical to provide an actual
contact for the board admin to report the problem, uh huh.

If you go to their login page (to pretend you are already registered)
and enter bogus login credentials, you'll see a message with a mailto
link to send an e-mail. The e-mail address it gives is:

(e-mail address removed)

However, if new registrations have been locked out then the forums may
no longer be administered or monitored. Their Announcements forum
hasn't had any new posts since November 2009 and that was for version
1.2.1.451a (an alpha version) of Everything; however, the download they
offer is for version 1.2.1.371 so the product hasn't been touched in
over 3 years (the change log for the released version 1.2.1.371 notes a
release date of March 2009). Most development activity looks focused
between Feb to Sep 2009, there was a 6-month delay to the next minor
version (1.1.x to 1.2.1) and then nothing since.

From http://forum.voidtools.com/viewtopic.php?f=9&t=1107, it looks like
the author somemtimes disables his forums. From the author's comment at
http://forum.voidtools.com/viewtopic.php?f=9&t=1106, apparently 2 months
of disabling the forums is considered "temporary". The "Forums Enabled"
post may have simply to make them visible again, not to allow in new
users.

The owner's (nym = void) last post was on Dec 6 2011. David's last
post, another site admin, was back on Nov 25, 2011. They haven't been
been there for awhile. In fact, even before then, void was making it
very difficult for new users to register by obfuscating the meaning of
his challenge question. See:

http://forum.voidtools.com/viewtopic.php?f=5&t=1464&p=4409#p4409

You get users (already asking) why registration isn't working. The
result was that their thread got locked.

http://forum.voidtools.com/viewtopic.php?f=9&t=1101

So it looks like the forums are closed. Only previously registered
users can talk amongst themselves. The product author isn't visiting
there. At least one other site admin isn't visiting anymore, either
(you can't find out who are the admins/moderators until you login which
obviously is impossible if you cannot register there).

From http://forum.voidtools.com/viewtopic.php?f=5&t=1531, I see a new
users that was able to get registered on March 21, 2012. This was this
new user's first post. So there was some way to get in at that time.
Later a regular inhabitant there, therube, noted that registration was
no longer unavailable as of April 7, 2012; see
http://forum.voidtools.com/viewtopic.php?f=2&t=1540.

Good luck getting in. Good luck getting help. The author and admins
aren't there anymore.

 

[...winston]

"Char Jackson" wrote in message

Fyi.
Hidden files are not necessarily the same as 'Protected Operating System'
files. Pagefile.sys is the latter.

Tools/Folder Options/View
- uncheck 'Hide protected operating system files'

Then perform the search (for pagefile.sys)

Once you're done searching ensure you recheck 'Hide Protected operating
system files' unless you have a desire to see desktop.ini files displayed
on
the Desktop or any other folder in which they may be present.

Thanks. That's what I did prior to making the post above. Didn't work.

--

Char Jackson

====
Works here.
http://sdrv.ms/MhgTO2