Why is Everybody so clueless on the importance of Desktop Search to the Masses?
-
you lost me at VB 5.0.
-
It's nice to know I'm part of something so epic, that it's spanned to 19 pages and over 900 posts.
If only I had a way to download this thread, and then some kind of tool to search the contents so that I could find key points.
Oh, and if it had the ability to take random screen shots of this thread and place it as a screen saver, that'd be almost perfect.
-
"What does the post count say about his trolling power?"
"It's over NINE HUNDREEEEEED..."
-
Pure Speed with SSDS
@Tachyon said:
you lost me at VB 5.0.
Don't need to know VB 5.0. It's there just in case somebody wants to make a change to the code. It's not that hard to rebuild the exe. Geez I can do it. And I'm the dumbest sob ever.
My demo use of Cam Studio is here:
http://video.google.ca/videoplay?docid=-6255167552030368326
You won't get to see your textual data faster than this.
The counts for the VB exe build is at 20 for yesterday. Even if a couple of you have a VB version and try build a new executable. I'll be proud. So don't let the forum bullies scare you off. Do some demos back me up. I could use it.
I need to do a little work on my Cam Studio. Like moving the focus and changing size of the view area. I just wanted to get the video up as soon as possible. Then maybe OTHER people would hold up their part of the bargin.
-
@SpectateSwamp said:
@Tachyon said:
you lost me at VB 5.0.
Don't need to know VB 5.0. It's there just in case somebody wants to make a change to the code. It's not that hard to rebuild the exe. Geez I can do it. And I'm the dumbest sob ever.
My demo use of Cam Studio is here:
http://video.google.ca/videoplay?docid=-6255167552030368326
You won't get to see your textual data faster than this.
The counts for the VB exe build is at 20 for yesterday. Even if a couple of you have a VB version and try build a new executable. I'll be proud. So don't let the forum bullies scare you off. Do some demos back me up. I could use it.
I need to do a little work on my Cam Studio. Like moving the focus and changing size of the view area. I just wanted to get the video up as soon as possible. Then maybe OTHER people would hold up their part of the bargin
Wow... you STILL managed to fail...
It really looks like you videoed the screen again. WTF.
Not to mention this is once again no better than my demo using notepad's find function.
Once again. YOU FAIL.
-
@SpectateSwamp said:
You won't get to see your textual data faster than this.
http://www.mediafire.com/?bjudcl2lmo2
Explain to me again how SSDS performed any better than notepad did in this video?
-
@SpectateSwamp said:
You won't get to see your textual data faster than this.
THIS.
IS.
SLOWER.
THAN.
GOOGLE.
Seriously, this is SLOW. The frigging video alone is two and a half minutes long! How is two and a half minutes FASTER than one second?
FFS, you can't even work out how the screen capture application works, how can you even expect to be capable of writing decent software?
-
@rc_pinchey said:
@SpectateSwamp said:
You won't get to see your textual data faster than this.
THIS.
IS.
SLOWER.
THAN.
GOOGLE.
Seriously, this is SLOW. The frigging video alone is two and a half minutes long! How is two and a half minutes FASTER than one second?
FFS, you can't even work out how the screen capture application works, how can you even expect to be capable of writing decent software?
Caveman like flashy things!
-
@MasterPlanSoftware said:
Caveman like flashy things!
Maybe someone should write him something that wraps google's results in a blink tag.
-
@SuperousOxide said:
@MasterPlanSoftware said:
Caveman like flashy things!
Maybe someone should write him something that wraps google's results in a blink tag.
Or just something like:
GoogleResults gr = GoogleDesktopSearch.Search("MyKeyWord");
foreach(GoogleResult r in gr)
{
Console.WriteLine(r.ToString());
Console.ReadLine();
}
Would be the same thing really.
EDIT: What is the best thing to wrap code with in this editor? [code] is clearly awful.
-
@tdittmar said:
Most people are also sure that God exists - but is there any evidence?
Godwin wasn't enough, you had to invoke God as well? That's just what we need, is SS expounding on his literal religious beliefs. Might as well replace the entire thread with TimeCube at that point.
@MasterPlanSoftware said:
@emurphy said:
How long does it take for the first result to appear? Give us an actual goddamn number, not some useless platitude like "it shows up fast fast fast".
Wouldn't that require him to be able to tell time?
You are asking an awful lot of this prehistoric retard....
Intentionally. Even bearded dinosaurs seem capable of a little bit of learning. (The latest video looks like it actually was done with a screen capture app, at least the part that I bothered to watch.) Either that, or eventually his head will pop.
-
@SpectateSwamp said:
I just held my finger down on the enter key. I'm sure this app puts all matches up on the screen way more instant than yours does.
I didn't have to hold down anything to get these results - I just typed the text in:
(Note: this is another animated GIF)
As you can see, the results were appearing while I was still typing.
-
Swampie, you do realise that you just put up a video that shows your SSDS takes 2 and a half minutes to show you all your results? And what happens when you need to check those results in context?
The reason nobody's adopting SSDS as their desktop search is that it isn't a desktop search, and as a text file searcher it is a very lousy one. Why would anyone bother with your application if they can get their information in less than 10 seconds in context, linked directly to the relevant files, in a scrollable window?
On top of that, my WDS is set up to search my local drive, my 2 email accounts, my 2 email archives (damn stupid Exchange limit) ánd the SharePoint website our team is using to share information and to collaberate on projects, containing a wide range of files, many lists and even links to external databases. By just typing in the project name of the project i'm working at, I get all relevant files, emails, lists, documents, database entries and even team calendars on that project.
-
@ender said:
@SpectateSwamp said:
I just held my finger down on the enter key. I'm sure this app puts all matches up on the screen way more instant than yours does.
I didn't have to hold down anything to get these results - I just typed the text in:
(Note: this is another animated GIF)
As you can see, the results were appearing while I was still typing.Just out of curiousity, what are you using to make these screencap .gifs?
That might come in handy someday....
-
@MasterPlanSoftware said:
Just out of curiousity, what are you using to make these screencap .gifs?
VMWare's Capture Movie function, then I convert them to GIF with VirtualDub and optimize the result with Trout's GIF Optimizer.
-
@ender said:
@MasterPlanSoftware said:
Just out of curiousity, what are you using to make these screencap .gifs?
VMWare's Capture Movie function, then I convert them to GIF with VirtualDub and optimize the result with Trout's GIF Optimizer.Cool. Thanks.
-
I found this article (http://www.randi.org/joom/content/view/151/27/#i13) and it reminds me of the way SS is acting.
-
Looooong thread
This is nothing. I just bought a new LCD TV, and someone was showing me a site called avsforums. They seem to have a single "official thread" for each popular brand TV. The brand I bought has over 550 pages of posts!
Although their forum software has a 'download thread' button. Extrapolating from there -- I guess now I'm clued-in on the importance of desktop search to the masses.Ex
-
@DrPhil said:
I found this article (http://www.randi.org/joom/content/view/151/27/#i13) and it reminds me of the way SS is acting.
years ago I had a gig at the local public library as the mail clerk. One of the letters I had to open (not addressed to a specific person/department) was from an obvious "crank". He was writing from some podunk pissant microscopic chunk of nowhere outside of town to tell us all about his New Math To Explain The Universe. All the Library had to do was find a publisher for him, pay all the costs to print/distribute/advertise The Book, and when he won his Nobel Prize, he'd make sure The Next Edition would mention us in The Acknowledgements. (Yes, things were capitalized that way).
This took about 3 pages of dense handwriting to "explain". I filed the letter under (G)arbage.
You can't deal with people like this. They've wound themselves into such a tight knot mentally that ANYTHING you tell them reinforces their delusion. Congratulate them on their "accomplishment" and they're happy. Tell them they're morons and know nothing, you're "one of the Opposition against My Discovery". Criticize or otherwise mention anything negative about The Accomplishment and you're obviously trying to discover The Secret Before The Awarding of The Nobel Prize, yada yada.
Swampie's exactly the same. The fact that no one takes up his search challenges means we all admit his is the superior way. The fact that we criticize his work means we're trying to supress his discovery. The fact we can demonstrate better solutions mean we don't understand his accomplishment and therefore are dumb/know nothing and that his is still the superior method, etc...
So.. yeah... religious crank, if you redefine 'god' to be 'desktop search', 'random video' and 'merging text files', and realize that Swampie is The Prophet, and his patron saint is Jude.
-
I must admit that I'm not a professional programmer, so I perhaps belong to the clueless masses. I must also admit that I mostly don't use any kind of desktop search. I have shortcuts to the master folders of the projects I'm currently working on (and those would be deleted after the project is comleted), and I can locate the rest using a fairly sensible folder hierarchy (both at work and at home) without knowing any particular keyword to look for at all.
But I gotto say that SSDS would be a perfect program if my computer usage patterns were the same as Mr Swamps. That is - if I had tons of short pointless videos that noone would bother to watch for more than 8 seconds and I kept all my email from 1997 (I guess SS is forced to keep them because "reindexing" after deleting a few messages would mean too much work). What sane person would watch random town council meetings for more than 8 seconds [i]unless there was some random [b]moose[/b] inbetween[/i]?!
-
SSDS shows all. They just report totals and claim results.
@wooter said:
SSDS takes 2 and a half minutes to show you all your results?
Yup and I saw all 124,140 matches. Your demo showed nothing. Maybe a handful of matches. Pathetic.
You wouldn't want to try search the 263MB file with your other choices. They just will not do it.
Maximum indexing file size for these search engines is as follows:
(1) Yahoo would not index a 81MB text file
(2) Google would not index a 44MB text file
(2.5) Exalead would not index a 19.78MB text file.
Spectate Swamp has no known text file size limit!!!I did this check 6 months ago. Maybe these numbers are larger now. I would have thought you all knew of the LIMITS to file size.
-
Random Politics is BAD
@fist-poster said:
What sane person would watch random town council meetings
I really should have taken the political videos out of the folder I used. That was insane. I'll change that for any future demos.
-
@SpectateSwamp said:
(1) Yahoo would not index a 81MB text file
(2) Google would not index a 44MB text file
(2.5) Exalead would not index a 19.78MB text file.But who, except you, has 20MB text files? The only large text files I have here are logs, and even those logs could be rotated.
-
@shadowman said:
The brand I bought has over 550 pages of posts!
I have cut and pasted the first 18 pages into thedailywtf.txt file. I used SSDS to find the reference to Cam Studio.
-
All the results no matter what the file size
@Renan_S2 said:
But who, except you, has 20MB text files?
It is handy to know these limits. Otherwise you are in for a nasty surprise.
Who on earth needs tens of thousands of seperate files? Nobody.
-
Swamp training with Cam Studio video.
I have always been a screen capture nut. Ever since I could make use of them with SSDS. Cam Studio (now I have found the full screen) is the tool I need. Not only cut and paste the text from this post. Also get an avi of it from start to finish. It might take a few 2 minute clips. but not a big job. Some of the graphics are wonderful, the humor shows.
-
@SpectateSwamp said:
Who on earth needs tens of thousands of seperate files? Nobody.
Who wants tens of thousands of separate files? Everybody. Except you, apparently.
<font size="108">Nobody wants to merge their files just to make them searchable!</font> Honestly, I don't know how we can possibly make this any clearer, except perhaps by sponsoring busloads of Common Men to go to your trailer and tell you in person how stupid your program is. Sheesh.
-
@SpectateSwamp said:
Yup and I saw all 124,140 matches. Your demo showed nothing. Maybe a handful of matches. Pathetic.
His search showed everything that it found. It was perfect. You lost and you cannot admit it. That is fine, we can all see the difference.
@SpectateSwamp said:
Maximum indexing file size for these search engines is as follows:
(1) Yahoo would not index a 81MB text file
(2) Google would not index a 44MB text file
(2.5) Exalead would not index a 19.78MB text file.You make these claims all the time, and the numbers vary wildly. You refuse to back them up with proof, and in fact, a WDS developer told you that you were full of shit.
None of your claims are valid. Back them up or we can continue to ignore them.
-
@SpectateSwamp said:
@shadowman said:
The brand I bought has over 550 pages of posts!
I have cut and pasted the first 18 pages into thedailywtf.txt file. I used SSDS to find the reference to Cam Studio.
The search box at the top of the site would have done the same thing, with no effort. Learn to actually use a computer, and your life would be a lot simpler.
-
@SpectateSwamp said:
I have always been a screen capture nut. Ever since I could make use of them with SSDS. Cam Studio (now I have found the full screen) is the tool I need. Not only cut and paste the text from this post. Also get an avi of it from start to finish. It might take a few 2 minute clips. but not a big job. Some of the graphics are wonderful, the humor shows.
No you haven't. You had zero clue how to do this until today. Repeating things over and over again does not make them true.
Also, I am still waiting for a response to the performance numbers posted. Saying 2 minutes is faster than 1.6 seconds over and over DOES NOT MAKE IT TRUE.
I also want to see your comments and justifications on the previously posted capture of your application stalling out and using an insane amount of system resources. The file used in that test case is EXACTLY what you have been saying this application is for - searching through a giant merged text file, and it failed horribly. You have managed to dodge that one completely somehow.
-
@SpectateSwamp said:
I have always been a screen capture nut. Ever since I could make use of them with SSDS. Cam Studio (now I have found the full screen) is the tool I need. Not only cut and paste the text from this post. Also get an avi of it from start to finish. It might take a few 2 minute clips. but not a big job. Some of the graphics are wonderful, the humor shows.
Seriously. Did it just get dumber in here?
-
@SpectateSwamp said:
@wooter said:
SSDS takes 2 and a half minutes to show you all your results?
Yup and I saw all 124,140 matches. Your demo showed nothing. Maybe a handful of matches. Pathetic.
What do you mean his demo showed "nothing?" It showed a list of files that matched his search term, along with links to all of them. For one of the files, it even gave him the option of displaying the file's contents. That's a lot more than "nothing." It's exactly what I would want a search application to do.
Also, you didn't actually see all 124,140 results. You saw that they were scrolling by, but I doubt that you're actually able to read them at fifty thousand results per minute. Breaking the search results up into separate pages like Google Desktop Search won't limit the number of results and it isn't likely to slow you down. If anything, it makes searching easier because you're less likely to get overwhelmed by a big wall of several thousand results. What if you missed the one line you were looking for with your search? You'd have to go back to the beginning of the file and spend two and a half minutes scrolling through the whole file again. That's horrible.
@SpectateSwamp said:
You wouldn't want to try search the 263MB file with your other choices. They just will not do it.
Maximum indexing file size for these search engines is as follows:
(1) Yahoo would not index a 81MB text file
(2) Google would not index a 44MB text file
(2.5) Exalead would not index a 19.78MB text file.
Spectate Swamp has no known text file size limit!!!I did this check 6 months ago. Maybe these numbers are larger now. I would have thought you all knew of the LIMITS to file size.
Your search does technically provide an advantage in this case. However, most people (i.e. "the masses") don't have 263 MB text files. If they do, they probably only have a few of them and they probably have some idea of where they're located on their system, so they don't need a desktop search to find them.
Also, you're the first person I've ever heard of who merges all of their documents together into one big text file. Most people have a lot of small files to search through, not one or two really big ones.
-
@SpectateSwamp said:
@wooter said:
SSDS takes 2 and a half minutes to show you all your results?
Yup and I saw all 124,140 matches. Your demo showed nothing. Maybe a handful of matches. Pathetic.
You wouldn't want to try search the 263MB file with your other choices. They just will not do it.
Maximum indexing file size for these search engines is as follows:
(1) Yahoo would not index a 81MB text file
(2) Google would not index a 44MB text file
(2.5) Exalead would not index a 19.78MB text file.
Spectate Swamp has no known text file size limit!!!I did this check 6 months ago. Maybe these numbers are larger now. I would have thought you all knew of the LIMITS to file size.
It showed the files that matched his search, refined the search as he was typing, gave a full preview there and then and then opened the file in the associated tool! What the fuckdo you excpect a file searching tool to do? It did it in considerable less time than your application and (this is the bit everyone apart from you thinks is important) didn't require all the sodding files to be merged together! It searched the 'file system' for 'files' using the entered 'search terms' and produced 'results' - yay a workin and fast 'desktop search'!
As to the comment
@SpectateSwamp said:
Who on earth needs tens of thousands of seperate files? Nobody.
My initial reaction is to declare you a moron, however going against your approach of making a statement without any numbers to back this up I shall produce figures
- On this (my home) pc - the source code folder for my non work related stuff (i.e. this contains personal projects and things I am doing to learn new technologies) contains 3,199 files.
- Work related documents (expenses, powerpoint slides etc.) runs to about 150 files.
- Personal photographs are currently 4,311 files (admittedly a good few of them are not worth keeping)
- Mp3s are 7,408 files.
Are you saying I don't need these files? How am I supposed to maintain the source code or the mp3s and photos other than as separate files?
If I need to find a file containing a particular term (say IDisposable) I can either search the entire system by going to the start button and typing the word or if I open the code folder I can type the term into the top right of explorer and it searched the folder tree from that point. How would I benefit from SSDS? If you say anything along the lines of 'you have the code', or 'merge the files' or even mention 'video blah blah blah' or heaven forbid require me to visit you then you have done nothing more than prove you have no real answers.
-
@SpectateSwamp said:
Who on earth needs tens of thousands of seperate files? Nobody.
OK, now let me merge all my music/video/photos/code into a single file. I think this will make the swampies feel better.
Your so-called "search" is like you: worthless and useless in the real world.
Duh... I feel as if I was talking to a doorstop.
-
@SpectateSwamp said:
Who on earth needs tens of thousands of seperate files? Nobody.
What about the frigging operating system? My "WINDOWS" directory contains 22610 files. If I merge these into one text file, my computer will not boot.
Let me say that again- Windows XP alone requires the computer to have TWENTY-TWO THOUSAND, SIX HUNDRED AND TEN SEPARATE FILES.
So, who on earth needs tens of thousands of separate files? EVERYBODY, Swamp. Everybody.
-
More video testing needed.
@MasterPlanSoftware said:
Seriously. Did it just get dumber in here?
Cam Studio video could be better. At least my latest demo of oldies with captioning didn't turn out that good. I might just do another with my camcorder. It really couldn't be much worse. Maybe less worse.
-
@SpectateSwamp said:
@MasterPlanSoftware said:
Seriously. Did it just get dumber in here?
Cam Studio video could be better. At least my latest demo of oldies with captioning didn't turn out that good. I might just do another with my camcorder. It really couldn't be much worse. Maybe less worse.
It really doesnt matter.
a) In your camstudio video, you apparently decided to be a moron and destroy any possible quality. How you could screw up something so easy is just amazing.
b) Those videos are a joke anyway. You keep demonstrating the dumbest shit. No one here cares if you have any luck proving your point. Your points are absurd, ridiculous, and unprovable.
-
More brute and more force than ever
@stolen_username said:
Also, you're the first person I've ever heard of who merges all of their documents together into one big text file. Most people have a lot of small files to search through, not one or two really big ones.
For the most part I'm searching files that are under 1M my notes.txt is 798kb and most of the others are even smaller. With my email being the main exception.
For text it's just a way quicker way than doing the directory thingy every time. Or do it with indexes. SourceForge.net has 50+ desktop search engines. All indexers. They are on the wrong path. the old Search and Grep had it right. They did search with brute force. We have More brute and more force than ever.
-
@SpectateSwamp said:
For the most part I'm searching files that are under 1M my notes.txt is 798kb and most of the others are even smaller. With my email being the main exception.
Thats just ridiculous and stupid.
@SpectateSwamp said:
For text it's just a way quicker way than doing the directory thingy every time.
No it isn't.
@SpectateSwamp said:
Or do it with indexes.
Like an intelligent, sane person.
@SpectateSwamp said:
SourceForge.net has 50+ desktop search engines. All indexers. They are on the wrong path.
Right. Everyone else is wrong. You are right.
@SpectateSwamp said:
the old Search and Grep had it right.
Intelligent people still use those when it is beneficial. Because they work. SSDS does not.
@SpectateSwamp said:
They did search with brute force. We have More brute and more force than ever.
There is nothing 'brute force' about what you are doing. It is just blatantly stupid.
-
@SpectateSwamp said:
Desktop Search - Computing's EASY button
Reported to Staples Inc. for copyright infringement.
-
@SpectateSwamp said:
For text it's just a way quicker way than doing the directory thingy every time. Or do it with indexes. SourceForge.net has 50+ desktop search engines. All indexers. They are on the wrong path. the old Search and Grep had it right. They did search with brute force. We have More brute and more force than ever.
Except...the raw numbers prove this to be completely false. You keep saying this over and over, and keep ignoring the numbers and data posted by people who have actually bothered to test your stuff and examine the math. You SAYING it is faster has nothing to do with the actual performance.
Please please please, explain to me how ~2 minutes is FASTER than ~2 seconds. Except you won't. You will just respond with "it is faster".
-
@repeater said:
Please please please, explain to me how ~2 minutes is FASTER than ~2 seconds. Except you won't. You will just respond with "it is faster".
There is no difference in 2 minutes and 2 seconds. Just like .02 dollars is the same as .02 cents.
Dumbass.
-
@MasterPlanSoftware said:
There is no difference in 2 minutes and 2 seconds. Just like .02 dollars is the same as .02 cents.
Dumbass.
Goddamnit, I just googled that, and you are SO RIGHT. A number of well-respected companies follow this math, so I am pretty sure it is correct. I take back everything! A two is a two, after all!
I tried it on a calculator, and it gave me the wrong numbers. Texas Instruments is in on the conspiracy!
-
@repeater said:
@MasterPlanSoftware said:
Goddamnit, I just googled that, and you are SO RIGHT. A number of well-respected companies follow this math, so I am pretty sure it is correct. I take back everything! A two is a two, after all!There is no difference in 2 minutes and 2 seconds. Just like .02 dollars is the same as .02 cents.
Dumbass.
I tried it on a calculator, and it gave me the wrong numbers. Texas Instruments is in on the conspiracy!
Thats right. SSDS is just a front to battle the conspiracy.
-
SSDS allows you to keep more data - easier
@spenk said:
- On this (my home) pc - the source code folder for my non work related stuff (i.e. this contains personal projects and things I am doing to learn new technologies) contains 3,199 files.
- Work related documents (expenses, powerpoint slides etc.) runs to about 150 files.
- Personal photographs are currently 4,311 files (admittedly a good few of them are not worth keeping)
- Mp3s are 7,408 files.
Are you saying I don't need these files? How am I supposed to maintain the source code or the mp3s and photos other than as separate files?
If I need to find a file containing a particular term (say IDisposable) I can either search the entire system by going to the start button and typing the word or if I open the code folder I can type the term into the top right of explorer and it searched the folder tree from that point. How would I benefit from SSDS? If you say anything along the lines of 'you have the code', or 'merge the files' or even mention 'video blah blah blah' or heaven forbid require me to visit you then you have done nothing more than prove you have no real answers.
I don't merge video or music or pictures just text. They never get printed and it's just the details I'm interested in. Same with emails. 7,408 mp3s with random and random start would be quick to test out. Your 4000+ photos need a vewing once in a while. Random makes it better. The tech stuff should be in some form of text. The more of the text you have the more you'll like this search. The videos have just scratched the surface. I'll do more video demos. Now that I have the startup and exe build out of the way.
-
@MasterPlanSoftware said:
@repeater said:
I tried it on a calculator, and it gave me the wrong numbers. Texas Instruments is in on the conspiracy!
Thats right. SSDS is just a front to battle the conspiracy.
I wish we could get our hands on some shaky, out-of-focus, zoomed in and nauseating camcorder movies of this in action. Then we could get this out TO THE MASSES!
-
New video will show the POWER
@Renan_S2 said:
OK, now let me merge all my music/video/photos/code into a single file.
more like have better access to all my music/video/photos/code than the ClueLess
-
@SpectateSwamp said:
I don't merge video or music or pictures just text. They never get printed and it's just the details I'm interested in. Same with emails. 7,408 mp3s with random and random start would be quick to test out. Your 4000+ photos need a vewing once in a while. Random makes it better. The tech stuff should be in some form of text. The more of the text you have the more you'll like this search. The videos have just scratched the surface. I'll do more video demos. Now that I have the startup and exe build out of the way.
For the billionth time in this thread, we don't want more horribly filmed videos of you using the program. This is a developer's forum. We don't need lessons on how to compile VB. We don't need a scolding on our file management preferences. We don't need instructions on how to operate your broken and flawed software.
We want actual answers to the questions asked and the data provided.
As a side note, it is amusing watching you dodge all the critiques and questions for 20 pages, and instead reply with titles like "SSDS allows you to keep more data - easier". What the hell?
-
Don't need to know OS
@rc_pinchey said:
What about the frigging operating system? My "WINDOWS" directory contains 22610 files.
I never ever look at those files. The farther away from the OS the better. My information is what I want access to. SSDS could just as easily merge and catalog these files. But why on Earth would I?
-
@SpectateSwamp said:
7,408 mp3s with random and random start would be quick to test out. Your 4000+ photos need a vewing once in a while. Random makes it better. The tech stuff should be in some form of text. The more of the text you have the more you'll like this search. The videos have just scratched the surface.
Except you cannot just push a single button and display the files randomly, can you? You need to actually enter them in a text file.
Useless.
Windows media player doesn't require this at all. Nor does any other media player. Your random function is useless, and poorly implemented as well. Just like your 'search'.
