InsideMicrosoft

part of the Blog News Channel

Take Windows Vista Search To The Next Level

Mike Torres writes about a hidden Windows Vista option that gives you a much more powerful search in Windows Vista. Just hit up the “Folder Options” control panel and enable “Use natural language search” in the Search tab, and you’ll be able to make searches like “pictures taken last week”, “email from bill gates sent yesterday” and “music by enimen rated *****”. There are a few things to be learned about the search syntax, and it isn’t for everyone, but it is certainly worth trying out, since, if mastered, it can make for some really amazing searches and search folders.


Bonus items:

The Windows Vista blog explains why different User Account Control prompts have different colors, and what each of them mean, so you can actually recognize at a glance the difference between verified publishers, unverified publishers, and prompts by the operating system.

Chris Lanier explains what the content restrictions will be in Windows Vista, and it is pretty clear from the list that Vista doesn’t contain more restrictions than XP. In every case, Vista supports more content than XP, or the exact same content, and every already popular method of piracy is still supported. It may be harder to pirate future technologies, but stuff like DVD will always be easy to crack.

Windows Live Search has released an SDK, giving you a ton of options for developing applications that use Windows Live Search. Good for them, considering Google closed down their API recently, so I’d like to see Windows Live step into the void.

Long Zheng has details of the wallpapers that ship with Windows Vista. Turns out some of them are from Flickr. Cool!

February 1st, 2007 Posted by | General, Live, Search, Security, Vista, Windows | 5 comments



Hosting sponsored by GoDaddy

5 Comments »

  1. Interesting to read Long Zheng’s article. Too bad a lot of images appears to be blurry and/or in low resolution – granted, I haven’t checked them in Vista, but all sources appear to have the same image collection.

    And about Chris Lanier’s ‘explanation’: it sent cold chills down my spine. Anyone who is capable of understanding DRM should be maddened, or he/she has to have some personal interest in the technology – obviously, the latter is the case here, as he appears to be a Microsoft Most Valuable Partner. Microsoft should not have let the content industry tell them what to put in Windows. And if they say the decision was made to let you play more media: fuck them. They had the power to at least decide it should not have been done on the level of the operating system, but on the application level instead: software would have been available to play the newer high definition media in full quality.

    I consider Vista to be defective by design, just as Windows XP is (it protects not only system files from modification, but DRM components as well. It probably would have been a decent operating environment if it weren’t for the DRM it enforces.

    By now, I consider it to be much MORE ethical to share “pirated” media on peer to peer networks than to buy the new high definition media. They shoved the Content Scrambling System down my throat, I’m not going to let them do it again with the Advanced Access Content System.

    Oh, and I ditched Outlook.

    Comment by Tim | February 1, 2007

  2. Is anyone ordering the extra 64bit CD-DVD for Vista, I loved the XP Pro 64 verses running a computer set up for 64 but running a 32bit operating system. The resonse is fantastic. Jay

    Comment by Jay Williams | February 1, 2007

  3. Is anyone ordering the extra 64bit CD-DVD for Vista, I loved the XP Pro 64 verses running a computer set up for 64 but running a 32bit operating system. The response is fantastic. Jay

    spelling correction

    Comment by Jay Williams | February 1, 2007

  4. It’s not so much that the content industry is making demands of Microsoft and that Microsoft is giving in to them, as that the content license only allows it to be used under certain conditions. Microsoft could choose to not include support, or to meet those conditions, but including support for the content without an agreement from the owners of licenses would only provoke a copyright lawsuit.

    The important thing to remember is: If it worked in XP, it works the same in Vista. If it didn’t work in XP, it may contain restrictions in Vista. By having DRM on HD-DVD and BluRay, it merely encourages consumers to stick with regular DVD, and I think that’s a good thing. Newer content types, and the restrictions they bring, should fail miserably, and nothing would make me happier. Unless HD-DVD becomes as easy to rip to a hard drive as DVD is, I don’t mind if it is locked down, and thus, a failure.

    Comment by Nathan Weinberg | February 5, 2007

  5. I still feel the content industry was/is making demands of Microsoft. Neither of us knows what would’ve happened if Microsoft would not have supported high definition media out of the box in Vista – and not support the required digital lockdown. Would they really have gone through with their demands, and not even allow software to play the media, because the Operating System does not comply with the DRM guidelines? The Protected Media Path and such? I think there would have been a legal way to play licensed media, without having DRM embedded in the operating system.

    And I’m pretty sure unsigned device drivers were possible in Windows XP 64-bit edition. I think there’s an owner override necessary there. Just give the user a prompt asking whether or not to allow it, making sure it’s clear that installing a low level driver is potentially insecure. I’m starting to wonder whether the 32/64 bit distinction in Vista is intended to measure how many people oppose the treacherous computing-alike scheme enough to stay away from the 64-bit version…

    Anyway, I’m glad to see that even though you appear to be supporting Windows Vista, you’re not even close to the DRM advocate. I hope the “war on DRM” will come to a happy end before the release of the next Windows, though.

    Comment by Tim | February 5, 2007

Leave a comment