Windows Explorer search behaviour problem

Hi,
I have found this strange little bug in the quick search feature. There are pictures on my CompactFlash memory. I was searching for a specific file (with the number "2755" in the name), and the search gave me no results. After manual search, i found it:



But still, the Search can not find it:


Maybe it's because my Flash drive is ancient and slow?
Or, because it is removable?
Or, because it is formatted in FAT32?

Any thoughts? Just thought it was weird.

I have noticed a similar thing with search it seems partial filenames are not detected properly.

Neutron16 said:

Drive has nothing to do with it.
Windows Explorer Search in Windows 7 is different from one in XP.

To search for that file you would have to type:
*2755*.RAF

*- any symbols
and file extension is mandatory

Thanks. The asterisk did really help, did NOT need to specify file extension, though: "*2755*" did the trick.
Funny, i thought we live in a day and age, where regular expressions are optional, not mandatory.

batukhan said:

Neutron16 said:

Drive has nothing to do with it.
Windows Explorer Search in Windows 7 is different from one in XP.

To search for that file you would have to type:
*2755*.RAF

*- any symbols
and file extension is mandatory

Thanks. The asterisk did really help, did NOT need to specify file extension, though: "*2755*" did the trick.

Yes, the asterisk is what it always was...a wildcard character, and you only need the leading asterisk. And you are correct in stating that the file extension is not needed.

Funny, i thought we live in a day and age, where regular expressions are optional, not mandatory.

In reality, in this age where we have more and more (and more) data, we need these expressions to narrow the field and speed up searches. Speaking from the angle of one who 'dismissed' Win 7 search as pointlessly complicated, taking the time to educate yourself on the set up of search and the search syntax (filters, expression and use of) is rewarded by a very comprehensive and effective search engine.

You can also use Boolean expressions (and even in conjunction with filters). Here are a few links to some helpful Search resources:

1st, a recent thread where a poster is asking how to find only selected multiple file types:

Is it possible to search for multiple file types in Windows 7?

And other helpful links:

Windows Search - Configure and Use

Mastering Windows Search using Advanced Query Syntax

Become a Windows Search ninja with Advanced Query Syntax | Ed Bott's Windows Expertise

And it really isn't overly complicated as I at first thought. Intricate would be a better term. Win 7 search's greatest flaw is that it seems inaccesible to the masses, and indeed, for some, it is. Perhaps the next iteration will be a bit simpler.

James

[QUOTE=James Colbert;1421297]

batukhan said:

In reality, in this age where we have more and more (and more) data, we need these expressions to narrow the field and speed up searches. Speaking from the angle of one who 'dismissed' Win 7 search as pointlessly complicated, taking the time to educate yourself on the set up of search and the search syntax (filters, expression and use of) is rewarded by a very comprehensive and effective search engine.

You can also use Boolean expressions (and even in conjunction with filters). Here are a few links to some helpful Search resources:

1st, a recent thread where a poster is asking how to find only selected multiple file types:

Is it possible to search for multiple file types in Windows 7?

And other helpful links:

Windows Search - Configure and Use

Mastering Windows Search using Advanced Query Syntax

Become a Windows Search ninja with Advanced Query Syntax | Ed Bott's Windows Expertise

And it really isn't overly complicated as I at first thought. Intricate would be a better term. Win 7 search's greatest flaw is that it seems inaccesible to the masses, and indeed, for some, it is. Perhaps the next iteration will be a bit simpler.

James

Yes, well, in my case, it narrowed the search results down to zero. You're right, it is not for the masses, i think that's a problem. I'm all for the use of complex search queries, just don't make it mandatory.
Thanks for the links, will check them out!