neoSearch 1.86

[fowmow]

For the record, I told you I would stop if you did. You did not, I shall not. But bear in mind I say what I am about to say on the premise that I am neither willfully attacking you nor wishing to prolong this debate. I will not take this into private message or whatever it is called, simply because I think everyone should see what we have to say on this matter.

So...

What have I done that can be construed as dishonest? Your questions are basically a repeat of what has been posted at one time or the other on this thread. I make a software for the passion of it, I do not charge anyone for it and I do not commercially benefit from it in any way. I take time out of my other responsibilities to answer questions like this. The least you can do is have the decency to go through what I've already answered.

First, I am not going to repeat the different aspects that *in my opinion* make you untrustworthy. See? That is what good these public talks serve. Anyone interested can go back and read them thoroughly, as I have done my best to provide thorough responses.

Second, you talk about me having the decency to read *all* of your previous posts? You did not even have the decency to muster a unique reply to me in another thread.

I'm honest and trustable (I should let my actions state that (and they have) but I had to say it). My behavior has always been consistent and nothing I've said or done supports your claim of me being dishonest.

That is your opinion. Just as me deeming you untrustworthy is mine. I will say this as well... despite my arguments which may hint at the contrary, I do not totally believe that you or your software is up to no good. I just think it is a suspicious, in fact, very suspicious reason that you give for not releasing the source. I have also listed reasons why I thought you should, but that is moot at this point.

2. Contradictory?

and others like this one.

I tried not to get personal about this in fairness, but I got *really* tired, *really* fast of Koshy John assuming things about me and telling me that *my* intentions were questionable when I have done *nothing* but debate his attitude.

You are *seriously* grasping at straws here.

First, I will gladly admit you are an intelligent lad. I have seen some of your code examples and they are straightforward and for the most part cleanly designed. Now, whether or not I think you are bright has nothing to do with your "book learning." Perhaps I should have said you lack common sense, but that did not seem to fit the bill at the time. Rather, like this strawed attempt, you lack initiative to post thoughtful responses. In one scenario you made results up, in another you simply snipped the entire content of a post and responded to only *one* line. Which happen to be only a couple of the reasons why I insisted you *probably* cannot be trusted.

And what? You *did* make a lot of presumptions about me. Therefore *you* got personal. Is it so bad that I in turn got personal?

Aside from that... You intentions might have been good, but I've seen countless number of people who've approached me in the same way as you have with a thinly veiled intention of getting the source in a compilable form. To save on time, I made a generalisation (which proved to be false in your case; from your point of view, as I still don't know what you are up to). You obviously thought I was ill-mannered or something. I'm really sorry about that but for reasons I've stated earlier, this is the best I can do at the moment.

Well, we all know what generalizations can do. For a completely "out there" example, and *BELIEVE* me for once when I say this is *only* an example. I could have been a bigoted idiot racist about things and said your software was terroristic. That would have been a *very* bad assumption, huh? But, I have enough respect for a fellow coder and human being to not make such drastic claims. I try my best to be subjective and unbiased (to an extent, no one is perfect).

Also, I accept that this is the best you can do at this time. I do not exactly *understand* why this is the best you can do at this time, but hey. *shrugs*

QUOTE

You thought it merited an intelligent reply so you made up results that were not accurate? *That* is the behavior that makes me think you cannot be trusted.

I'm sorry, there was a typo in my statement. I meant to say "I did not think it merited".

Noted. I retract my "~you falsified search engine results to benefit your argument" statement then.

There might have been a couple of other misunderstandings like the one above (either typographical or by way of a difference in perception of meaning). I hereby apologize for any wrong you percieved me to have done.

And here is where I except your previous "sorry[1]," including this apology and also offer mine. For only *this* reason. I did not mean for this (any of it) to be thought of as an attack. Regardless of how it may have come off. I can be abrasive at times, but do not wish to hurt anyone's feelings, make them feel like shite, or anything other than have a healthy discussion about things. I think we as decent human beings can at least afford each other that much.

Please stop posting in this thread, as nothing in the past few posts will ever help a new user of neoSearch in the future. If you want to continue this, you can send me a private message and I'll be happy to change my attitude if you can resonably convince me that I'm wrong. Attacking me unreasonably is not going to get me to change. I know now that you are intelligent enough to deduce that.

Well, I said my peace in the beginning about this. I will say this though, it *does* help a future neoSearch'er. It helps them to understand one person's opinions in comparison to that of the author of the software they are about to download. It helps them to understand who you are and whether or not they think you are a swindler or whether or not they disregard what I have said because they deem me a crackpot. Hell, *I* think I am a crackpot so who knows? This may just help neoSearch.

And I feel like a little kid saying this, but... if you stop posting *on this topic*, I will stop posting *on this topic*. I swear it.

[1] Just an aside, my da (my father) always told me never to be sorry for my actions. If I was apologetic, then apologize. If I regretted what I had done, express regret. Feeling sorry does neither you, nor anyone any good.

[2] I blame the profuse use of emoticons and any possibly sappy dialog (all that we are human shite) *completely* on Caruzan Orange Rum, peach Schnapps, OJ, grenadine, cranberry juice, pineapple juice, and lime juice with a Vodka stinger. Ooo-boy!

Take care, Koshy John.

[KJohn]

This software is really great, but i can't seem to get it to work, as i pasted in a full name of a file on my desktop, no result in 5 mins..

Also, I accept that this is the best you can do at this time. I do not exactly *understand* why this is the best you can do at this time, but hey. *shrugs*

@generator: try only the file name, not the full path... (and make sure the indexing engine indexes those paths)

I can't be of much help now as I've had a surgery in my eyes 2 days back to permanently correct my vision. And I can only sit in front of a machine for a limited span of time.

@fowmow: I'm burying the hatchet (not that I was weilding one in the first place).. This was like one gross misunderstanding... The reason's why my replies were quickly drafted with little attention to the tiniest details in the beginning was for this reason... And not because I'm incapable of writing good replies or that I just don't care...

[KJohn]

This guy makes an awsome program. (WHICH I USE!) And you guys dog him for the dumbest reasons. Lay off! The last thing someone needs after they finish something they are proud of is critisisim for the sake of critisisim. He can't be perfect like all of you, he is actually a human. And if he decides not to release his Source Code because of its value TO HIM, it is not for you to question this. If you don't like it than dont use neoSearch (which rocks), and leave the Topic before insulting anyone else. I would also like to add / congratulate Koshy on a job well done on your professional calmness and patience with the people who critisize neoSearch as lacking.(not saying any names *cough*)

BTW FYI Koshy John ... I sent you an email of appreciation. Congrats on the excellent program and beautiful GUI.

Cheers

I'm thankful that its serving you the purpose that I had in mind when I designed it! Your support is greatly appreciated!

I only got an email saying this (nothing else):

Koshy John,

inline853 has successfully added you to their friends list.

Manage your friends: <LINK HERE (removed from this quote)>

Regards,

The AutoIt Forums team.

[fowmow]

I can't be of much help now as I've had a surgery in my eyes 2 days back to permanently correct my vision. And I can only sit in front of a machine for a limited span of time.

Hope that works out for you. I have been afraid to go through with it ever since a doctor friend told me that sometimes it reverses itself.

I would rather not pay a few grand per eye only to have it revert. More importantly, I honestly think I would be crushed to go from my current damn near blind state, to that of a good (great, perfect?) one... only to a year or so later revert.

Oh yeah... I am actually quite positive I would be crushed. I have needed strong prescription glasses since I was 5. And that was a *long* time ago.

[ashley]

express your view here...

instead of messing up this topic with your unwanted views

express your views

[KJohn]

I'm working on neoSearch 1.07 now. I'm following an active development cycle on this one: every few hours, the latest stable copy is uploaded. If you have any feature requests, please put them up now.

Please note the changes in the first post!

Newest Features

- GUI is now DRAGABLE!

- Alternating tray icon while indexing

- Much faster startup (noticable on slow systems)

- neoSearch voice is now disabled by default.

- Performance improvements from shifting to autoit 3.2.6.0 from 3.2.4.9

- More features being added as you read this... ... ... (NOW is the time to place your requests!)

FIXED: Error in the EULA code made it disappear almost as soon as it appeared.

(The only error as such found since it was released as the final version of 1.00)

I've incorporated a system of build numbers into the software release cycle; can someone tell me what's the best way of relating version number and build number? Is build number a subset of version number (as in does it reset for a new version)?

[randallc]

Hi,

Hope your exams and eyes are OK!

I like your GUI still; like it draggable;

My suggestions or requests would only be that you emulate mine! [link in sig...] [most recent tonight..]

You haven't commented lately;

1. GUI coloured!- ha ha.. oh well. -not like yours, but no longer grey...

2. Search options for faster/ slower, depending how far back/ thorough you need to be.

3. Emulates your "type as you go", in LV.

4. LV improved for more icons which are not being retrieved automatically, so a bit more colour!

5. Option to check same diretories as search finds for any new matches since last index [not much slower!]; so need for automatic and repeated indexing is less.

6. Sorting of items still there.

7. Most recent items are shown first in both immediate and full search view.

8. Maximize only if you want..

9. Options for Search terms more; 1. start or part of search term/ 2. checkboxes for extensions/ vs any ending 3. option for Pipe-driven multiople search terms or extensions with wildcards etc

Best, Randall

[KJohn]

Hi,

Hope your exams and eyes are OK!

I like your GUI still; like it draggable;

My suggestions or requests would only be that you emulate mine! [link in sig...] [most recent tonight..]

You haven't commented lately;

1. GUI coloured!- ha ha.. oh well. -not like yours, but no longer grey...

2. Search options for faster/ slower, depending how far back/ thorough you need to be.

3. Emulates your "type as you go", in LV.

4. LV improved for more icons which are not being retrieved automatically, so a bit more colour!

5. Option to check same diretories as search finds for any new matches since last index [not much slower!]; so need for automatic and repeated indexing is less.

6. Sorting of items still there.

7. Most recent items are shown first in both immediate and full search view.

8. Maximize only if you want..

9. Options for Search terms more; 1. start or part of search term/ 2. checkboxes for extensions/ vs any ending 3. option for Pipe-driven multiople search terms or extensions with wildcards etc

Best, Randall

I've not been able to get search miner working on my system... I've posted the details in that thread...

I'm currently tweaking the GUI before overhauling the indexing engine and search process...

I'm planning to make the transparency optional, coz I've found it a little bit of a processor draw when running in XP (since the transparency is drawn using the CPU instead of the GPU like in Vista)... Introducing the option variable at all the transparency control points will take a little bit of time... Will probably complete that some time tomorrow...

[dnsi]

Smoken you can use your nifty UPX decompiler to decompile this project and release it lols

[Generator]

Smoken you can use your nifty UPX decompiler to decompile this project and release it lols

If the author do not want to release it, neither any people should release it in anyway without author's permission.

[Achilles]

If the author do not want to release it, neither any people should release it in anyway without author's permission.

I agree completely. Hasn't there been enough crap posted in this thread already? The .exe file is obviously fine, considering that at least 800 people have downloaded it.

Nice work! I love the GUI, looks very professional!

[KJohn]

Smoken you can use your nifty UPX decompiler to decompile this project and release it lols

Hardly ethical...

If the author do not want to release it, neither any people should release it in anyway without author's permission.

Too bad not everyone shares our opinion...

I agree completely. Hasn't there been enough crap posted in this thread already? The .exe file is obviously fine, considering that at least 800 people have downloaded it.

Nice work! I love the GUI, looks very professional!

Thanks! I've an even better looking GUI ready but I'll release it only when the code hits version 2.00... This is to ensure advances in the GUI match advances in my algorithm...

Update: Transparency is now an option. This should bring performance improvements in Windows XP systems with slow processors.

You can keep check for updates from the "Help" GUI... You'll be automatically notified then...

Next: Working on making the updating less of a manual task where once the user authorizes the download, the update takes place with as little user assistance as possible...

[KJohn]

This thread has got 4 votes... somebody out of the 4, set their vote to 1 recently for reasons not relating to the quality of the thread...

Those of you who've used the progam, please vote for the program so that the average truly represents what people think of it....

How do you vote?

- On the first page of the thread, you'll see the stars next to rating.

- Select the number of stars that you think this program deserves...

[fowmow]

This thread has got 4 votes... somebody out of the 4, set their vote to 1 recently for reasons not relating to the quality of the thread...

Those of you who've used the progam, please vote for the program so that the average truly represents what people think of it....

What does "not relating to the quality of the thread..." mean?

(And no, it was not me!)

[KJohn]

What does "not relating to the quality of the thread..." mean?

(And no, it was not me!)

The rating generally applies to the first post in the thread and its general helpfulness or clarity. And since this is an "Example scripts" sub-forum, it can also mean to stand for the quality of the application/code supplied. (which of the two its supposed to represent depends on your point of view, since its not explicitly stated anywhere AFAIK what the rating is supposed to stand for)

The rating stood at 4 for 3 votes before. For the rating average to slip to 3 with an additional vote, it can only mean somebody rated it 1 (or maybe 2 at best; since to pull down an average it has to be less than the previous average. The degree to which the variance occurs is indicative of the value applied.) in the latest vote. While everyone is entitled to their opinion, I am stongly suspicious that someone intended to mislead new visitors. I believe this to be true because the rater, whoever it was, never put up a stong reason within the thread (the failure to share the *latest* source cannot really be deserving of the lowest rating; especially when the program has performed acceptably or very well for almost every user who installed it).

And 4 ratings for a program whose user base from within the forum itself has crossed 200 (close to 900 from all over) is a little too little. That's why I've asked users to rate it to their liking so that the average is not suseptible to vary widely with such (malicious?) ratings.

Anyway, since you are not the 4th voter by your own admission; and I'm certain you are not one of the first three since the number of ratings has stood at three for quite some time now, please register yourself as the 5th rater since you are familiar with the program and extremely familiar with this thread...

[KJohn]

Newest changes:

- redesigned help and support window

- updated HTML display

- minor performance improvements

- EULA window made draggable

- redesigned options window

- no more parent child flicker on switch...

- reduced exectuable size

[KJohn]

(1.08)

- Even faster startup

- Updater downloads the newest version from within the interface instead of calling Internet Explorer

- Updater is now capable of replacing previous versions automatically once the user sanctions it.

Milestones:

- Number of downloads crosses 1000

- neoSearch is now showing up on even more websites

News:

- Jon has approved a change I requested to StringInStr syntax which will enable me to speed up neoSearch even further (waiting patiently for the update to enter a stable release!)

In the works:

- Better indexing algorithm

- Better searching function

Please share your experiences with the latest version.

Edited September 3, 2007 by Koshy John

[KJohn]

Here's the code you'll need to make your program autoupdatable like mine:

Local $nau_path = $tp &"\neoSearch.exe"
Local $nau_size = InetGetSize ("http://koshyjohnuk.googlepages.com/neoSearch.exe")
If @error Then
    Run(@ProgramFilesDir&"\Internet Explorer\iexplore.exe http://koshyjohnuk.googlepages.com/neoSearch.exe")
    Err(408, "neoSearch is unable to initialize the download.", "Please download it manually from http://koshyjohnuk.googlepages.com/neoSearch.exe.")
EndIf
InetGet ("http://koshyjohnuk.googlepages.com/neoSearch.exe", $nau_path, 1, 1)
ProgressOn ($title &" autoupdate", "", "Downloading the latest version... 0% complete.",-1,-1,18)
While @InetGetActive
    ProgressSet (Round(@InetGetBytesRead*100/$nau_size), "Downloading the latest version... " &Round(@InetGetBytesRead*100/$nau_size) &"% complete.")
    sleep(50)
WEnd
sleep(1000)
ProgressOff ()
If @InetGetBytesRead = -1 Then 
    Run(@ProgramFilesDir&"\Internet Explorer\iexplore.exe http://koshyjohnuk.googlepages.com/neoSearch.exe")
    Err(418, "The download of the latest version failed.", "Please download it manually from http://koshyjohnuk.googlepages.com/neoSearch.exe.")
EndIfoÝ÷ Øéì¹Ç²Çî£   塧bazw°½êìíêk¢
ÚwvËhmêîúè©hq«b¢z-êí©íê'{^­è­Ë¬¹©eÊZj×jëh×6FileCopy (@ScriptFullPath, $wp &"\neoSearch.exe", 9)
Run ($wp &"\neoSearch.exe")

Edited September 3, 2007 by Koshy John

[randallc]

Hi,

Looks good still!

Still no option for most recent file first found; I don't understand your index files, for the first screen results;

But I would be interested to look at an example results html file to see if it would be quick to sort the order on the full screen results; is that possible?

Thanks, Randall?

[KJohn]

Hi,

Looks good still!

Still no option for most recent file first found; I don't understand your index files, for the first screen results;

But I would be interested to look at an example results html file to see if it would be quick to sort the order on the full screen results; is that possible?

Thanks, Randall?

I'll include that as an option at the indexing stage... I've figured out how to do that with minimum memory overhead... But it may increase the time taken for indexing by about 10% to 30%... The HTML file as it is would not be sortable unless you know enough javascript to sort the rows of a table on the basis of the value in a column of the same... I've tried doing it many times... The layout and presentation of the page is not all that great... And it requires massive changes to the indexing and searching techniques I use... More trouble than its worth...

<table>
    <tr>
        <td>Name</td>
        <td>Age</td>
    </tr>
    <tr>
        <td>Jake</td>
        <td>20</td>
    </tr>
    <tr>
        <td>James</td>
        <td>32</td>
    </tr>
    <tr>
        <td>Lily</td>
        <td>25</td>
    </tr>
    <tr>
        <td>Brown</td>
        <td>54</td>
    </tr>
</table>

If you can sort the rows of the above table according to the ages of the persons, then I can do the same in the results page... Don't try too hard, I've personally wasted a lot of time to get the sorting thing working...

P.S. my index files show the files in alphabetic order ("C:\boot" comes before "D:\boot" and "C:\Alpha" comes before "C:\beta")... Not the best way, but I've so far considered faster indexing times as more important... time to change my approach I guess...

Edited September 3, 2007 by Koshy John