 |
 |
Personally, I despise Windows Search of any version. In Vista and Windows 7 where it's built-in, it works OK, but when it's bolted onto XP, it's absolutely terrible. It slows everything down, despite claims from MS that it throttles back indexing when it detects you're using the computer, and I've found that it can cause file locking problems. I've not found Google Desktop to be that much better. Since I'm running Windows 7, I allow Windows Search to run, but I NEVER willingly install it on any machines I deploy, nor do I advocate Google Desktop. And to anyone who claims their machine is running slow, one of those two POSs (Pieces of Software) is almost always to blame. /twocents Jon Galbreath MCSE/Security+ Systems Administrator International Studies and Programs Ph: 517-884-2144 [log in to unmask] -----Original Message----- From: MSU Network Administrators Group [mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of Stefan Ozminski Sent: Thursday, July 09, 2009 11:47 AM To: [log in to unmask] Subject: Re: [MSUNAG] Google Desktop We just received a Dell desktop computer with Windows Search 4.0 installed instead of Google Desktop. It has a search box in the same place that Google Desktop had a search box. Has anyone had time to make a comparison? Are we confident that Windows Search does not have a mode where it will put search indexes (and copies of data) on a Microsoft server, causing the same security-privacy complaint as Google Desktop? Kim Geiger wrote: > I know that NAGers universally despised Google Desktop when it was first released, and I just haven't paid much attention to it since then. But now I've had new user inquiries about installing it. > > Does anyone have a current opinion of the utility and security of Google Desktop? > >