If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below. |
|
|
Thread Tools | Rate Thread | Display Modes |
#1
|
|||
|
|||
Searches
In Windows XP I could create a list of files that had been updated on a
specific date. This list included ALL files form ALL directories on the hard drive. ie similar to dir C: /s In Windows 8 this function does not seem to be available. I can look at the files updated on a date, but then have to do the same operation for every file on the drive. I can do it in a DOS Batch file but looking for something more convenient Can Windows 8/8.1 do the same thing that Windows XP does? This is a very useful functions when trying to locate the data files of a new program, of finding the file you absent mindedly saved but did not note the location. |
Ads |
#2
|
|||
|
|||
Searches
On 03/08/2014 07:31 AM, Keith Nuttle wrote:
In Windows XP I could create a list of files that had been updated on a specific date. This list included ALL files form ALL directories on the hard drive. ie similar to dir C: /s In Windows 8 this function does not seem to be available. I can look at the files updated on a date, but then have to do the same operation for every file on the drive. I can do it in a DOS Batch file but looking for something more convenient Can Windows 8/8.1 do the same thing that Windows XP does? This is a very useful functions when trying to locate the data files of a new program, of finding the file you absent mindedly saved but did not note the location. http://www.computerhope.com/tips/tip202.htm |
#3
|
|||
|
|||
Searches
On 3/8/2014 8:56 AM, philo wrote:
On 03/08/2014 07:31 AM, Keith Nuttle wrote: In Windows XP I could create a list of files that had been updated on a specific date. This list included ALL files form ALL directories on the hard drive. ie similar to dir C: /s In Windows 8 this function does not seem to be available. I can look at the files updated on a date, but then have to do the same operation for every file on the drive. I can do it in a DOS Batch file but looking for something more convenient Can Windows 8/8.1 do the same thing that Windows XP does? This is a very useful functions when trying to locate the data files of a new program, of finding the file you absent mindedly saved but did not note the location. http://www.computerhope.com/tips/tip202.htm Thanks That is more than I was getting the other day when I was trying to use it. However it still is getting only some directories. When I tried it from the c:/ all I got was the system files, not the files in My Documents. |
#4
|
|||
|
|||
Searches
On 3/8/2014 8:31 AM, Keith Nuttle wrote:
In Windows XP I could create a list of files that had been updated on a specific date. This list included ALL files form ALL directories on the hard drive. ie similar to dir C: /s In Windows 8 this function does not seem to be available. I can look at the files updated on a date, but then have to do the same operation for every file on the drive. I can do it in a DOS Batch file but looking for something more convenient Can Windows 8/8.1 do the same thing that Windows XP does? This is a very useful functions when trying to locate the data files of a new program, of finding the file you absent mindedly saved but did not note the location. Sorry about the double post, I thought I posted one to a different newsgroup. |
#5
|
|||
|
|||
Searches
Keith Nuttle wrote:
On 3/8/2014 8:56 AM, philo wrote: On 03/08/2014 07:31 AM, Keith Nuttle wrote: In Windows XP I could create a list of files that had been updated on a specific date. This list included ALL files form ALL directories on the hard drive. ie similar to dir C: /s In Windows 8 this function does not seem to be available. I can look at the files updated on a date, but then have to do the same operation for every file on the drive. I can do it in a DOS Batch file but looking for something more convenient Can Windows 8/8.1 do the same thing that Windows XP does? This is a very useful functions when trying to locate the data files of a new program, of finding the file you absent mindedly saved but did not note the location. http://www.computerhope.com/tips/tip202.htm Thanks That is more than I was getting the other day when I was trying to use it. However it still is getting only some directories. When I tried it from the c:/ all I got was the system files, not the files in My Documents. Getting the whole drive indexed is pretty difficult. Microsoft is smarter than you, which is why some of the exclusions in the Indexer configuration are there. For example, it wouldn't be healthy to point the Indexer, at its own files, since they would constantly change, and leave the Indexer task in a loop :-) This interface (Indexer configuration panel) is like "Whack a Mole" when it comes to getting it the way you like. And some of the terms used, you aren't given a hint what they might be. The CSC here for example, could be the location of the search index files themselves. http://media.bestofmicro.com/windows...-317212-13.jpg Vista search had a feature, that if no result came back, you could follow up with an "Advanced Search", and that potentially covered more of the disk. That doesn't seem to exist in the other OSes. http://windows.microsoft.com/en-US/w...-to-find-files The Windows search is called a federated search, able to combine multiple information sources. That's how you can be searching emails (of blessed tools), ones where a search provider gives a way to index the files. For example, if an email tool uses a database, the database may be a poor candidate for conventional indexing. And then, special code has to be written, to delineate each email message, so it can be properly indexed. Kinda like how some of the email tools have an "export" function and deliver the emails as .eml files. If a tool has information stored in a special format, including a file to help the indexer, makes the content available for search. It's debatable though, whether everyone wants their emails thrown into the indexer files. I certainly don't. If I think something is in an email, I want to search within the email tool itself. Not via an outside means. Paul |
#7
|
|||
|
|||
Searches
On 3/08/2014, R. C. White posted:
Hi, Keith. "Double posting" can usually be avoided by cross-posting, rather than multi-posting. Don't send your message individually to multiple newsgroups. Just create a single message and put multiple newsgroups, separated by semicolons, into the "Newsgroups..." box of that one message. Your cross-posted message will appear in each of those target NGs, and responses in one NG will show up in all of them. This helps to keep the conversation coherent, no matter which NGs the responder reads. And no matter which NG you read. ;) (And I don't have to read your same question in every NG I visit.) Enthusiastic +1 here -- Gene E. Bloch (Stumbling Bloch) |
#8
|
|||
|
|||
Searches
On Sat, 08 Mar 2014 14:57:26 -0800, Gene E. Bloch
wrote: On 3/08/2014, R. C. White posted: Hi, Keith. "Double posting" can usually be avoided by cross-posting, rather than multi-posting. Don't send your message individually to multiple newsgroups. Just create a single message and put multiple newsgroups, separated by semicolons, into the "Newsgroups..." box of that one message. Your cross-posted message will appear in each of those target NGs, and responses in one NG will show up in all of them. This helps to keep the conversation coherent, no matter which NGs the responder reads. And no matter which NG you read. ;) (And I don't have to read your same question in every NG I visit.) Enthusiastic +1 here I'm not sure it's pertinent to what Keith's point was, but I'll add my strong ditto to yours. |
#9
|
|||
|
|||
Searches
On 3/08/2014, Ken Blake, MVP posted:
On Sat, 08 Mar 2014 14:57:26 -0800, Gene E. Bloch wrote: On 3/08/2014, R. C. White posted: Hi, Keith. "Double posting" can usually be avoided by cross-posting, rather than multi-posting. Don't send your message individually to multiple newsgroups. Just create a single message and put multiple newsgroups, separated by semicolons, into the "Newsgroups..." box of that one message. Your cross-posted message will appear in each of those target NGs, and responses in one NG will show up in all of them. This helps to keep the conversation coherent, no matter which NGs the responder reads. And no matter which NG you read. ;) (And I don't have to read your same question in every NG I visit.) Enthusiastic +1 here I'm not sure it's pertinent to what Keith's point was, but I'll add my strong ditto to yours. We're not contributing to his original post, we're criticizing Keith. Oops, sorry, that was supposed to be *assisting* Keith. Slip of the pen there. And to be serious for a second or two: Keith, I hope you really are seeing the advice as helpful. We mean it that way (I know I do). -- Gene E. Bloch (Stumbling Bloch) |
#10
|
|||
|
|||
Searches
On 3/8/2014 6:44 PM, Gene E. Bloch wrote:
On 3/08/2014, Ken Blake, MVP posted: On Sat, 08 Mar 2014 14:57:26 -0800, Gene E. Bloch wrote: On 3/08/2014, R. C. White posted: Hi, Keith. "Double posting" can usually be avoided by cross-posting, rather than multi-posting. Don't send your message individually to multiple newsgroups. Just create a single message and put multiple newsgroups, separated by semicolons, into the "Newsgroups..." box of that one message. Your cross-posted message will appear in each of those target NGs, and responses in one NG will show up in all of them. This helps to keep the conversation coherent, no matter which NGs the responder reads. And no matter which NG you read. ;) (And I don't have to read your same question in every NG I visit.) Enthusiastic +1 here I'm not sure it's pertinent to what Keith's point was, but I'll add my strong ditto to yours. We're not contributing to his original post, we're criticizing Keith. Oops, sorry, that was supposed to be *assisting* Keith. Slip of the pen there. And to be serious for a second or two: Keith, I hope you really are seeing the advice as helpful. We mean it that way (I know I do). I accept the critique of my post but as I said, it started out as one post to this newsgroup, not two to two different newsgroups. Besides give me a break, I am over 70 and getting forgetful. ;-) |
#11
|
|||
|
|||
Searches
On Sat, 08 Mar 2014 19:57:45 -0500, Keith Nuttle
wrote: On 3/8/2014 6:44 PM, Gene E. Bloch wrote: On 3/08/2014, Ken Blake, MVP posted: On Sat, 08 Mar 2014 14:57:26 -0800, Gene E. Bloch wrote: On 3/08/2014, R. C. White posted: Hi, Keith. "Double posting" can usually be avoided by cross-posting, rather than multi-posting. Don't send your message individually to multiple newsgroups. Just create a single message and put multiple newsgroups, separated by semicolons, into the "Newsgroups..." box of that one message. Your cross-posted message will appear in each of those target NGs, and responses in one NG will show up in all of them. This helps to keep the conversation coherent, no matter which NGs the responder reads. And no matter which NG you read. ;) (And I don't have to read your same question in every NG I visit.) Enthusiastic +1 here I'm not sure it's pertinent to what Keith's point was, but I'll add my strong ditto to yours. We're not contributing to his original post, we're criticizing Keith. Oops, sorry, that was supposed to be *assisting* Keith. Slip of the pen there. And to be serious for a second or two: Keith, I hope you really are seeing the advice as helpful. We mean it that way (I know I do). I accept the critique of my post but as I said, it started out as one post to this newsgroup, not two to two different newsgroups. Besides give me a break, I am over 70 and getting forgetful. ;-) I'll be happy to give you a break. I'm also over 70 (76) and also suffer from CRS syndrome. |
#12
|
|||
|
|||
Searches
On 3/08/2014, Keith Nuttle posted:
On 3/8/2014 6:44 PM, Gene E. Bloch wrote: On 3/08/2014, Ken Blake, MVP posted: On Sat, 08 Mar 2014 14:57:26 -0800, Gene E. Bloch wrote: On 3/08/2014, R. C. White posted: Hi, Keith. "Double posting" can usually be avoided by cross-posting, rather than multi-posting. Don't send your message individually to multiple newsgroups. Just create a single message and put multiple newsgroups, separated by semicolons, into the "Newsgroups..." box of that one message. Your cross-posted message will appear in each of those target NGs, and responses in one NG will show up in all of them. This helps to keep the conversation coherent, no matter which NGs the responder reads. And no matter which NG you read. ;) (And I don't have to read your same question in every NG I visit.) Enthusiastic +1 here I'm not sure it's pertinent to what Keith's point was, but I'll add my strong ditto to yours. We're not contributing to his original post, we're criticizing Keith. Oops, sorry, that was supposed to be *assisting* Keith. Slip of the pen there. And to be serious for a second or two: Keith, I hope you really are seeing the advice as helpful. We mean it that way (I know I do). I accept the critique of my post but as I said, it started out as one post to this newsgroup, not two to two different newsgroups. Besides give me a break, I am over 70 and getting forgetful. ;-) When you said "Sorry about the double post, I thought I posted one to a different newsgroup" it certainly seemed that you were *intending* to multipost... But I'll give you a break on your memory for that one too :-) You should try Lumosity. The have little ads on NPR saying that they have games that are designed by neuroscientists to improve memory :-) And no, I can't actually recommend Lumosity, since I know nothing about them, and so I have no reason to think they are either any good or not any good...I just said the above for humor. -- Gene E. Bloch (Stumbling Bloch) |
#13
|
|||
|
|||
Searches
On 3/9/2014 6:50 PM, Gene E. Bloch wrote:
On 3/08/2014, Keith Nuttle posted: You should try Lumosity. The have little ads on NPR saying that they have games that are designed by neuroscientists to improve memory :-) And no, I can't actually recommend Lumosity, since I know nothing about them, and so I have no reason to think they are either any good or not any good...I just said the above for humor. I tried Lumosity but forget how it worked. |
#14
|
|||
|
|||
Searches
On Sat, 8 Mar 2014 09:50:16 -0600, "R. C. White" wrote:
Don't send your message individually to multiple newsgroups. Just create a single message and put multiple newsgroups, separated by semicolons, into the "Newsgroups..." box of that one message. I'm not aware that semicolons will work to separate newsgroup names. The plain old comma is recommended, with no spaces before or after. |
#15
|
|||
|
|||
Searches
On 3/09/2014, Keith Nuttle posted:
On 3/9/2014 6:50 PM, Gene E. Bloch wrote: On 3/08/2014, Keith Nuttle posted: You should try Lumosity. The have little ads on NPR saying that they have games that are designed by neuroscientists to improve memory :-) And no, I can't actually recommend Lumosity, since I know nothing about them, and so I have no reason to think they are either any good or not any good...I just said the above for humor. I tried Lumosity but forget how it worked. LOL! -- Gene E. Bloch (Stumbling Bloch) |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | Rate This Thread |
|
|