Desktop Search Engine DocFetcher
Another difference between DocFetcher and other desktop search engines is that the former was designed to index document folders only and not an entire hard drive. This means that the initial setup of the document search engine is more time consuming as the user has to point the application to specific folders on the computer's hard drive that contain the documents that should be indexed by the program.
The advantage of this method is that the program uses less system resources and is able to offer a better result quality. A few options are available to filter the result list. It is possible to specify a minimum and maximum file size, select some or all of the supported file types and locations that have been indexed by the desktop search tool.
Search results are displayed in the same interface with their title, size, filename, type, path, author, modification date and score that is computed by DocFetcher. A left-click on any document will load a preview of the document's contents in a preview area in the interface which is great for accessing information of documents quickly as the search term is highlighted in the preview of the document.
DocFetcher (via Essential Freebies) comes as an installer or portable version for the Windows and Linux operating systems. It requires Java to be installed on the computer system.
Advertisement
Recently, I came up with Puggle (http://puggle.sourceforge.net). It’s open-source and very promising application.
It has a wonderful user interface and runs pretty fast in both windows and linux!
docfetcher, google, WDS…I tried them all, but the best search tool is without any doubts lookeen! unbelievable fast, very accurate, great handling and lots of filters and functions. just to mention some features: as lookeen being an outlook add-in, you can search very comfortable your mails plus attachments in multiple (!) PST-files. lookeen is compatible with microsoft exchange servers and offers the use of an shared index (to spare system resources)…no other prog offers so many features.
http://www.lookeen.net
leon
@ Jeff:
Everything does not search file contents, only file and folder names. DocFetcher, Google Desktop, Copernic, etc. on the other hand perform full text extraction. That’s why Everything is faster.
“…advantage of this method is that the program uses less system resources and is able to offer a better result quality…”
Compared with Everything?
Speed?
Resources?
Set up?
Everything?
Please do explain.
If Everything indexes in minutes in a small space and searches instantly with 0 to no impact on resources, why should one restrict search to pre-selected folders? Throw the whole HD at Everything and be done with it.
I like the concept.
I don’t like the Java Runtime.
I’m allergic to the .NET Framework too.