Beta

×

Welcome to the Slashdot Beta site -- learn more here. Use the link in the footer or click here to return to the Classic version of Slashdot.

Thank you!

Before you choose to head back to the Classic look of the site, we'd appreciate it if you share your thoughts on the Beta; your feedback is what drives our ongoing development.

Beta is different and we value you taking the time to try it out. Please take a look at the changes we've made in Beta and  learn more about it. Thanks for reading, and for making the site better!

Google Kills Desktop Search and Gadgets

Unknown Lamer posted more than 2 years ago | from the ol'-desktop-went-to-google-heaven dept.

Cloud 138

CWmike writes with an article in Computerworld about Google axing yet another product. From the article:"Google has decided to retire Desktop, an application it first launched in 2004 that is designed to let people search for files and data stored in their computers' hard drives. It was one of the first products Google aimed against Microsoft and was intended to improve upon the native search functionality found in Windows. Desktop search became an area of competition, as Microsoft responded to the challenge and others such as Yahoo launched their own products. However, Google has decided that, with the popularity of cloud computing and users' increasing comfort with Web apps, the time has come to decommission Desktop, it said in a recent blog post. As of September 14, Google will also end support for Desktop APIs, services, plug-ins and gadgets." From the looks of it the announcement implies that Google Gadgets are getting the axe too, which a few more people might be using.

cancel ×

138 comments

Sorry! There are no comments related to the filter you selected.

Time to decommission desktop? (1, Insightful)

ge7 (2194648) | more than 2 years ago | (#37320448)

Google has decided that, with the popularity of cloud computing and users' increasing comfort with Web apps, the time has come to decommission Desktop

I really don't like this development. Web apps tend to be really buggy and never really work as required. Either the feel is slow, you accidentally click somewhere or do something that loses all your work and most of the just doesn't feel as good as desktop app. I can't see anyone serious moving from Microsoft Office to Google's web-based offerings. Imagine if you had to do all your real development and coding within some web application. The same goes for games. I rather play real good games than some Farmville shit. I know I don't need to use them, but things like this affect everyone on larger scale. Google is destroying computers.

Re:Time to decommission desktop? (0, Troll)

vlm (69642) | more than 2 years ago | (#37320540)

... apps tend to be really buggy and never really work as required. Either the feel is slow, you accidentally click somewhere or do something that loses all your work ...

just like windows apps...

Re:Time to decommission desktop? (1)

Riceballsan (816702) | more than 2 years ago | (#37320680)

Indeed I would have to say much of the way googles apps tend to work, are more reliable then desktop apps. Both tend to autosave and allow recovery in the event of a power outage or something mid-work (or a misclick as you mentioned). But lets say that power outage was catestrophic, say it burnt out the power supply, or god forbid the hard drive. With the google apps you can log back in, recover from the autosave, print out or keep working whatever you were working on, while the local copy you need to either get the new power supply, put the HD in another system, and if a catestrophic HD crash, well you are looking at major time+money on data recovery then. I will be the first to admit, google has a ways to go on things like complicated excel spreadsheets etc... but honestly I still have to say in disaster recovery and likelyness of losing your stuff, google has an edge.

Re:Time to decommission desktop? (2)

Dan667 (564390) | more than 2 years ago | (#37320698)

I could not do any meaningful work with google web apps.

Re:Time to decommission desktop? (1)

Eponymous Coward (6097) | more than 2 years ago | (#37321008)

I've been using them exclusively as my office apps for almost a year now and I've grown rather fond of them. The subset of features they offer fits my needs quite well.

I've recently started automating some of the more repetitive things I do with their scripting interfaces and am pretty happy with the results.

Re:Time to decommission desktop? (1)

Jeremiah Cornelius (137) | more than 2 years ago | (#37321918)

I am especially enthusiastic about the discipline imposed by my GoogleDocs size limit of 1 Mb.

So novel and revolutionary!

Re:Time to decommission desktop? (1)

Aighearach (97333) | more than 2 years ago | (#37321288)

I could not do any meaningful work with google web apps.

Doubtful.

More likely "would not" or "will not."

Re:Time to decommission desktop? (3, Insightful)

Goody (23843) | more than 2 years ago | (#37322872)

Please describe the most complex spreadsheet you've ever done in Google Apps. Please include the number of graphs and pivotables and how many tens or hundreds of meg of data that's in it. Bonus points if you used the solve function. Google apps is like the Fisher Price of office suites.

Re:Time to decommission desktop? (2)

unencode200x (914144) | more than 2 years ago | (#37321080)

Just as an informational item, there are lots of options with Windows. A few that come to mind:

1) www.dropbox.com - Replicate a folder to the DropBox cloud.

2) www.Office365.com - Office 2010 in the cloud (yes, Word, Excel, and PowerPoint in a browser) with lots of awesome features. For example, get a live.com account with Mesh and you can use it interchangeably with the documents on your PC. Mesh works a lot like DropBox. It also has SharePoint like features where you can open documents that are hosted on live.com or Office365.com right from Word, Excel, PowerPoint, OneNote, etc. and save them to the cloud. Not to mention Exchange and SharePoint can be had with it and there are mobile apps, etc. Lots of SMBs I run across are using this. Anyone can get a Live account with Mesh and 25 GB of storage/5GB of Mesh if I recall.

3) SharePoint - Save any type of document to a company's private cloud with tight integration for Office 2003+ with versioning and a ton of other workflow/business features baked in. I've worked on docs in SharePoint on one computer, switched to another and kept on going.

Re:Time to decommission desktop? (1)

Riceballsan (816702) | more than 2 years ago | (#37321886)

Haven't spent alot of time in 2 and 3. but I can say with absolute certainty 1 has a huge flaw to it. if 2 people open the same document at the same time. Person A changes a part at the top, person b changes a part at the bottom. Whoever saves 2nd will overwrite the work of the first and undo their changes, or depending on how you set it up, 2 different versions of the file will be created and you will have to merge them later adding unnecessary confusion or mess, while if it were done in google docs, the 2 people would see eachother working in real time know what changes are being made by who while they have the spreadsheet or document open, There is a difference between saving to the cloud and editing in the cloud, editing in the cloud means all parties can watch the changes in real time, and thus work can be done simultaniously, saving to the cloud means all parties can see the changes when they are submitted, which leads to problems if multiple people submit at the same time. Office 365 has the advantage of exchange integration, I will give it that as it's greatest advantage for an established company that already has it's network set up, for a new startup though I would give an edge to google apps. Secondly though wasn't this discussion intended to be about cloud vs local, When did this turn into cloud vs cloud? The main complaint that started this discussion was the idea of working on something in the cloud vs working it on a locally installed program.

Re:Time to decommission desktop? (1)

mollymoo (202721) | more than 2 years ago | (#37322438)

At least for me, being out of 3G coverage or my broadband going down are a damn sight more frequent than hard drive failures.

Re:Time to decommission desktop? (1)

PNutts (199112) | more than 2 years ago | (#37320682)

... apps tend to be really buggy and never really work as required. Either the feel is slow, you accidentally click somewhere or do something that loses all your work ...

just like windows apps...

That that doesn't make sense, but you really believe that only apps on the Windows platform are buggy and never really work as required or slow or you can accidently lose your work then it's just sad that you posted it in a pseudo-tech forum.

Re:Time to decommission desktop? (1)

ocdscouter (1922930) | more than 2 years ago | (#37320966)

... apps tend to be really buggy and never really work as required. Either the feel is slow, you accidentally click somewhere or do something that loses all your work ...

just like windows apps...

That that doesn't make sense, but you really believe that only apps on the Windows platform are buggy and never really work as required or slow or you can accidently lose your work then it's just sad that you posted it in a pseudo-tech forum.

But where else are people supposed to share their pseudo-informed opinions?

Re:Time to decommission desktop? (1)

vlm (69642) | more than 2 years ago | (#37320976)

That that doesn't make sense, but you really believe that only apps on the Windows platform are buggy and never really work as required or slow or you can accidently lose your work then it's just sad that you posted it in a pseudo-tech forum.

"only", no. "about the same as", sure, although I'd place google apps in the lead.

If google really wants to compete with MS for office software supremacy, they are gonna have to change their user interface completely every couple years, while claiming no one can change to openoffice because its too different. From memory, google apps pretty much look and work the same as they did when they rolled out, so they're falling way behind in the critical "creates user frustration" metric/checkbox.

Re:Time to decommission desktop? (1)

bonch (38532) | more than 2 years ago | (#37321404)

... apps tend to be really buggy and never really work as required. Either the feel is slow, you accidentally click somewhere or do something that loses all your work ...

just like windows apps...

How do awful posts like this make it to +3? You didn't even bother with capitalization.

Re:Time to decommission desktop? (1)

Missing.Matter (1845576) | more than 2 years ago | (#37321562)

Because it's a dig at Windows. I'll be surprised if it doesn't make it to +5 Insightful.

Re:Time to decommission desktop? (1)

The MAZZTer (911996) | more than 2 years ago | (#37320620)

I really don't like this development. Desktop apps tend to be really buggy and never really work as required. Either the feel is slow, you accidentally click somewhere or do something that loses all your work and most of the just doesn't feel as good as desktop app. I can't see anyone serious moving from Google's web-based offerings to Microsoft Office.

This is more accurate IMO. Have had tons of problems with Office at work, especially trying to collaborate on documents (can only use Excel, not Word, can only see others' changes when you save, periodically sharing will be turned off somehow by accident, etc). When I try to change the foreground color of text in Excel, the whole app locks up for 15 seconds or longer. If a virus scan happens to be running everything goes even slower. I really wish we could use Google Docs (can't, proprietary information and all that, we could probably get some sort of local copy with an enterprise license surely though?), the collaboration features are awesome. And the great thing about web apps, at least Google's, is that they do autosaves so your data is safe. Plus managing data backups etc is on their end, and you know they gotta do a better job than we do on our own personal data!

Re:Time to decommission desktop? (1)

TrueSatan (1709878) | more than 2 years ago | (#37321160)

There are a few open source alternatives (search on Sourceforge) to Google's web apps that you could host yourself and that might get past your proprietary/enterprise/security concerns. The other benefits you cite for Google systems could be seen in such an arrangement without having to do too much setting up. I prefer this sort of arrangement to handing it to a third party and it avoids giving yet more information to Google (or another provider).

Re:Time to decommission desktop? (1)

couchslug (175151) | more than 2 years ago | (#37320700)

"Google is destroying computers."

Not mine.

"Imagine if you had to do all your real development and coding within some web application."

Why? I don't nor will I ever.

Did you ever use Google Desktop? (1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#37320858)

Seriously, Google Desktop sucks. It slows your whole machine down to provide a service that the Windows XP search has provided for some time. And since it used to be bundled with all of Google's other offerings, it was unnecessarily ubiquitous. It is one of those things that I always clean off of a machine first when users complain that it is slowing down...

Re:Time to decommission desktop? (5, Insightful)

MozeeToby (1163751) | more than 2 years ago | (#37320968)

I can't be the only person to think that the real reason is that the built in search features on Windows 7 (and Vista for that matter) are actually pretty good. I personally haven't felt the need to go grab a desktop search tool for windows since indexed searching was baked into the OS.

Re:Time to decommission desktop? (1)

atomicbutterfly (1979388) | more than 2 years ago | (#37322518)

Yup. I think the Windows 7 one is superior to Vista in terms of recall speed as well, though I've never compared it to third-party desktop indexing software.

dup (5, Informative)

Warwick Allison (209388) | more than 2 years ago | (#37320472)

http://tech.slashdot.org/story/11/09/03/1611214/Google-To-Shut-Down-10-Products

Re:dup (1)

g051051 (71145) | more than 2 years ago | (#37320548)

Didn't take long for the dupmasters to take over again, eh?

Re:dup (4, Funny)

Nimey (114278) | more than 2 years ago | (#37320588)

Taco would never have allowed these dupes to happen.

CMDRTACO NEVER FORGET.

Re:dup (-1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#37321298)

Taco was a total dickface. Not that current management is any better but Rob Malda was a royal shitball and his contributions to Slashdot for the past 5 years or so have been total shit about retarded films and equally shitty video games.
 
Kiss my ass, Rob. You're not missed. Fucking fucktard.
 
Sad how this place went from one of the most influential tech sites to a total shit pit in about the same amount of time it took for kdawson to fuck everything up. My bet is that the real masters of Slashdot told Malda to get out while he could still leave with a few fanbois swinging off his nutsack or they would toss him out for totally fucking up a once good thing. I know, i know... Rob claims he left to spread his wings even though he admitted he had no direction. The only time people truly do that without being pushed out of the nest is they've either won the lottery or they're terminally ill.
 
If Rob is reading this? Rob, you're a cunt and I hope you're working at 7-11 in an effort to keep your wife from leaving you for another woman.

Re:dup (1)

Aighearach (97333) | more than 2 years ago | (#37321334)

It's not really a dup because the original had accurate information, and this one has wild and inaccurate speculation about Gadgets.

Of course in the actual announcement it is clear that it is the gadgets for google desktop that are going away. The more normal use of gadgets, which is for web sites, is not endangered.

So it's half dup, half FUD.

Too bad (1)

boret1 (894066) | more than 2 years ago | (#37320498)

Too bad, it was one of the first google apps I ever used and really liked it. It turned me into google apps.

Re:Too bad (1)

Ishkibble (581826) | more than 2 years ago | (#37320572)

It turned you INTO google apps?! You should see a doctor!

Re:Too bad (2)

nigelo (30096) | more than 2 years ago | (#37320610)

(pause) He got better?

Re:Too bad (1)

boret1 (894066) | more than 2 years ago | (#37321272)

LOL. Recovering ... ;)

Re:Too bad (1)

The Grim Reefer2 (1195989) | more than 2 years ago | (#37320746)

It turned you INTO google apps?! You should see a doctor!

See? This is proof that Google was justified in "killing" this app.

I'd say he was lucky the Gov't didn't decide to cover this one up. This kind of thing never turns out well for zombies. I can't image that apps would fair any better.

Something Microsoft does well (1)

Mean Variance (913229) | more than 2 years ago | (#37320526)

During that heyday of competing desktop search products, I tried all that I could find.

I ended up settling on MS Desktop Search. It didn't seem to get in the way, searches were decent. To this day, it just runs on my work machines and comes in handy from time to time.

It's a very useful product when needed but not very sexy. I didn't RTA, but I presume Google got bored and couldn't monetize their version.

Re:Something Microsoft does well (1)

mr1911 (1942298) | more than 2 years ago | (#37320568)

Yeah, Google couldn't monetize desktop search. But it did keep their name as the verb for search, and help keep folks thinking Google.

Is Google getting jealous of HP?

Re:Something Microsoft does well (2)

Cinder6 (894572) | more than 2 years ago | (#37321116)

Google doesn't actually want [blogspot.com] "Google" to be a verb.

Re:Something Microsoft does well (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#37321252)

That is what the lawyer's say. I wonder what the marketing folks say about it.

Re:Something Microsoft does well (1)

Aighearach (97333) | more than 2 years ago | (#37321368)

For those that didn't read the link, google's lawyers claim that the marketing folks find it "thrilling."

Re:Something Microsoft does well (2)

bonch (38532) | more than 2 years ago | (#37321416)

That's just how the trademark lawyers feel.

Re:Something Microsoft does well (1)

haruchai (17472) | more than 2 years ago | (#37322952)

Let people start saying "Let me Bing that for you" on a regular basis and they'll stop complaining about it

Re:Something Microsoft does well (1)

drinkypoo (153816) | more than 2 years ago | (#37320790)

I thought google desktop search was narrowly better at finding things than what comes with windows now, but it was also more intrusive. Which is surprising. Since Windows 7 has indexed search and gadgets, there's no reason for either of these things to exist on Windows. The death of google gadgets on personalized google is a little more surprising.

Re:Something Microsoft does well (1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#37321072)

I've tried most of the indexing utilities for Windows, and Everything [voidtools.com] is the one I ended up choosing.

It builds its index in seconds, and searches in realtime. It does not search inside files, though, but usually I know the filename.

It never worked quite right... (1)

dmacleod808 (729707) | more than 2 years ago | (#37320542)

I used Desktop every couple of years as an alternative to windows search, and it never seemed to work quite right with multiple physical drives (and i have... many) and the results tended to not be any better than explorer. Additionally, being in a web page style results page, made file manipulation annoying.

AAARGH! (5, Insightful)

jothar hillpeople (1789504) | more than 2 years ago | (#37320544)

The cloud can't replace local storage. A 10mbps cable line is no match for an internal sata drive. And google desktop search is much faster than windows search, and is much better at finding emails than outlook's own search. I have come to rely on this at work, and am loathe to install windows search instead. I would love to see this become open-source.

Re:AAARGH! (2)

blair1q (305137) | more than 2 years ago | (#37320810)

I'd like to have Google's desktop search at work, but as it's Not Invented Here, it's considered a Security Risk.

Pretty sure the CIO owns an assload of MSFT, as well.

Re:AAARGH! (2)

schlesinm (934723) | more than 2 years ago | (#37320866)

I use Google Desktop Search at work. The IT people keep threatening to shut it down (but I guess Google beat them to it). It's immensely useful to help me sift through my email and files to find the one document that I need to forward to a colleague. But, due to security and privacy concerns, I can't have any of this data available online. If it's not running locally and stored locally, I can't use it.

Re:AAARGH! (1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#37320922)

I also found google desktop search to be way faster than windows search and it was superior to searching emails than Outlook (what a slow, bloated application that is - everyone who hates on Lotus Notes must not be using Exchange/Outlook). Maybe the search in Windows 7 is finally up to par, but not in XP or Vista by a long shot.

Re:AAARGH! (1)

Taty'sEyes (2373326) | more than 2 years ago | (#37321124)

The search in the cloud would happen within the servers of the cloud, not across a 10mbps connection. The query and result would however traverse the 10mbps connection. Is that not fast enough?

Re:AAARGH! (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#37322134)

> the 10mbps connection. Is that not fast enough?

No, that is not fast enough. Even the oldest lines I worked with were 110 bps (Bell 101). That is 11,000 times faster than your bad example. Seriously, why even talk about something that was 11,000 times slower than the state of the art in 1959?

Re:AAARGH! (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#37321372)

try a superior product, dtsearch

Re:AAARGH! (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#37321470)

> A 10mbps cable line is no match for an internal sata drive.

A cable that is only 0.01 bps is no match for even a carrier pigeon. Your analogy is ridiculous. How about a more realistic comparison between an internal SATA drive at around 50 MBps to a fast cable download of around 50 Mbps. Then, the cable is only 8 times slower, and is fast enough for most tasks.

Re:AAARGH! (3, Insightful)

vux984 (928602) | more than 2 years ago | (#37321746)

How about a more realistic comparison between an internal SATA drive at around 50 MBps to a fast cable download of around 50 Mbps.

I have a 50Mbps broadband service, and to suggest that it is even in the same league as a local hard drive is complete nonsense.

Your hard drive actually delivers 50MB/s uninterrupted. For your internet service to deliver you 50Mbps they actually need the source to be able to send it to you at that rate reliably.

Even with 50Mbps, you tube still stutters and buffers on a bad day.... despite the content usually being less than 1Mbps.

Unless your remote hard drive is in your ISPs data center, the comparison is absurd. The internet will be slower, often much slower, and routinely inconsistent.

Then, the cable is only 8 times slower, and is fast enough for most tasks.

Even assuming it was simply 1/8th the speed. A file copy that takes 7.5 seconds locally... takes full minute to the cloud. If it takes 7.5 minutes locally... there goes an hour.

50Mbps... A 3.2GB Quantum fireball hard drive from 1996 does nearly 80Mbps. To get down to 50 we have to go back to when hard drives were measured in megabytes, Windows 3.11 was shiny, and most of us ran DOS and had a 386 or 486 CPU.

Re:AAARGH! (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#37322544)

Hey moron, no one suggested they were the same. How about never posting on this site again with your illogical nonsense and hate!

Re:AAARGH! (1)

crdotson (224356) | more than 2 years ago | (#37321984)

Yeah, try that and see if it works.

Re:AAARGH! (1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#37322796)

The cloud can't replace local storage. A 10mbps cable line is no match for an internal sata drive. And google desktop search is much faster than windows search, and is much better at finding emails than outlook's own search. I have come to rely on this at work, and am loathe to install windows search instead. I would love to see this become open-source.

Never mind the fact that cloud storage is also insecure and I for one don't have a connection that offers me the reliability that a hard drive does. Google's unshakable faith in the coming dominance of cloud apps and diskless computers is deja vu to anybody who is old enough to remember the 90s. It's almost as if we've never seen this idea come and go before [wikipedia.org] . I'm sure cloud apps and browser only OSes will carve out a place for them selves now that we have way more bandwidth than we had back then, but Google Docs isn't going to replace MS Office any time soon and I'm not trading in Photoshop for an online photo editor either. Amazing as it may sound, there are things you can't do in a browser. Maybe when internet connections reach internal storage speeds.

The one app I use (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#37320558)

Sigh. Of course Google cancels the one app I use on my machine imprisoned in Vista. Simple, reliable, generally didn't take up too many system resources and you could force kill it without issue if it went berserk. Anyone have a replacement?

alternates? (1)

tkprit (8581) | more than 2 years ago | (#37321024)

recoll, lucene, copernic, locate32... google desktop and it's included "features" wasn't that great, anyway. I see this as a positive development so more projects can get well-deserved support. Let Google focus on the sky while the rest of us work.

Re:The one app I use (1)

PoopCat (2218334) | more than 2 years ago | (#37321244)

A replacement? Do you plan on removing your copy? If so, why, when it works so well for you? Or do you think TEH EVIL GOOGLEBOT will somehow reach out to your hard-drive and erase the desktop software?

No ad £££ (1)

mr_lizard13 (882373) | more than 2 years ago | (#37320560)

Makes sense. No ad money in desktop search, so why would an ad broker support such a product?

Re:No ad £££ (1)

obarel (670863) | more than 2 years ago | (#37320604)

They could bundle it with a webcam, so that they can, you know, just see what's missing in your life and send you a few suggestions.

Re:No ad £££ (1)

DarwinSurvivor (1752106) | more than 2 years ago | (#37322770)

Sorry, I just had a mental image of clipping. "I noticed your child is playing wii without the strap, might I suggest a few television retailers?"

How I Allocate Precious Resources (-1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#37320584)

I don't think I would have a hard time demonstrating that time and money are my scarcest resources. Here is how I put both to good use over the last couple days.

Night before last I sat up all night long and well into yesterday afternoon organizing my music collection.

You might think this is a colossal waste of time, but it should be pretty apparent to you that music is a really, really big deal to me. I listen to music all the time, both for work and relaxation. And no, I don't even own a television. I don't even like watching YouTube.

After I left my appointment at the mental health clinic yesterday afternoon, I took the bus and then the light rail into the city so I could do some coding at a really nice cafe in the city that's open until eleven.

A nice benefit of working at this cafe is that there is a rather nice "neighborhood pub" style strip club on the walk from the cafe to the light rail station. I just about always catch a few dances before carefully timing the very last train home.

But yesterday evening I was really tired from having been up all night fussing over my music tracks, and so felt the need for an energy boost. Thus I dropped by the strip club on the way to the cafe.

I felt bad as I had no cash with which to tip the strippers. The strippers never complain, in fact at this particular club, most of the patrons don't tip at all. But I always make a point of sitting right up front in the "Tipper's Only" chairs and always tip at least a buck a dance, even if the dancer hasn't taken any of her clothes off yet. Those who aren't tipping sit further from the stage, so that's where I sat last evening.

But then it occurred to me that although I did ask the Washington State Department of Social and Health Services to cut off my disability payments, they might not have actually done so yet. Lo and Behold, the strip club had its own Automated Teller Machine. Why don't I check my balance?

        Last night I blew my entire one hundred twenty dollar disability check by cavorting with strippers. Every Last Fucking Penny Of It.

Thanks, Washington State Taxpayers!

A good time was had by all, not just myself because I got to spend the whole night until five in the morning gazing longingly and hungrily at a whole bunch of drop-dead gorgeous buck-naked women, but because I tipped generously and am always polite and friendly with strippers, I made friends with some of them.

I went to some new clubs I'd never tried before and am glad I did. Each club has certain advantages.

For example my favorite has no cover charge. It has a one-drink minimum that a glass of coke will satisfy, and that is rarely enforced. Lots of guys bring their wives and girlfriends there. It's a very small, friendly place.

The last place I checked out quite late in the evening is quite obviously being operated as a house of prostitution. I knew this would be the case when an extremely attractive young woman who wasn't wearing a whole lot more than a G-String took me by the hand upon my arrival, to show me around the club. I knew where she would be taking me.

"Have you ever been in a private room before?"

I told her that I had, and she seemed very, very surprised. She asked where it was. While I told her, I'm not about to post it on the Series of Tubes lest the local Sheriff's Posse get wind of it. This because I regard Houses of Ill Repute as making a valuable and vital contribution to society.

She made it quite clear what she was offerring. And I quote: "We could sex each other up!" She also said we could cover each other with lube. I'm not real clear how one would clean up after that, as the place had no shower that I could see.

I regretfully told her that I had not been earning a whole lot of money while I was developing my own software product. But she was really, really nice, charming, friendly and downright beautiful. I promised to return with more money after Warp Life hit the App Store.

"I can work with the money you have," she suggested.

"What can you do for twenty bucks?" I replied. I actually had a whole lot more than that. I've looked into the price of Ladies of the Evenings in these parts. Despite the fact that craigslist's Adult Services got banninated by the Districts Attorney, both websites and traditional print publications that advertise sex for sale are very, very easy to find here.

("I am not a prostitute. I am not offering sex for sale. You are compensating me for my time, not for sex." Yeah, right. And your customers pay three hundred dollars an hour for intellectually stimulating conversation.)

We probably could have "sexed each other up" with the money I had left, but then that would have been the end of the evening. I was conservative with my cash, and so I was able to sit up-front and tip all the dancers until the club closed at five AM. Believe me, when a customers is a good tipper, and a consistent one, word gets around. These ladies work for a living, you know.

She told me she could do a lap dance for twenty-five. I gave her thirty and said I was giving her a tip. A lap dance in San Francisco will cost you twenty, but the dancer keeps her clothes on. This charming young lass stripped during my dance, and left nothing to the imagination as to what I would enjoy if I were to return with a bit more disposable income.

At another club earlier in the evening, I advised a Lesbian on the proper way to tip a stripper by tucking a dollar bill into her G-String. It was the Lesbian's first time at a strip club, you see. She was absolutely appalled, as everyone knows that one is not permitted to touch the Merchandise at this sort of establishment.

But if you're polite about it, and only lift the article of "clothing" just enough to quickly tuck in a bill, and you don't paw the dancer's skin, they think it's just dandy.

I figured when I got some real money coming in I'd go back and ask to purchase this fine lady's wares. But there was another stripper at the same club who won my heart, I'm afraid.

When I first spied her I thought she was the last sort of woman who would want to work in a strip club. She looked just like a female Caltech Physics professor, with a Page Boy haircut and black-rimmed glasses.

But then she took all her clothes off and did a nice mating ritual dance all over the place. Whenever I tipped her a dollar, she came and sat in my lap, sometimes rubbing her luscious breasts all over my face.

"Would you like a private dance?" she asked.

I wanted one real bad, but had to decline. I told her I would be back when my cash flow improved.

"How much money should I bring for your dance?" I asked. That's not the right way to phrace it; the usual code word is "How generous do I have to be?"

"That depends on what you want," she replied.

Just then her set was over so she had to clear the stage for the next girl. I was hoping she would come to sit with me so I could quietly spell out to her just what I wanted. But I think now that might be bad form. The Walls Have Ears, you know.

Prostitution is illegal in every State in the Union except Nevada, and even in Nevada it's only legal in certain rural counties. But in this place I couldn't even get up to go take a piss without some scantily clad young thing rubbing up against me to make a sales inquiry.

One of them recited a list of the club's services that sounded like it had been composed by a corporate focus group. Her list culminated in "full masturbation shows".

Many of the clubs around here advertise that they have two-girl shows. This place did, with two brass poles about eight feet apart on stage. But there is just one club that specifically advertises "Two Girl Sex Shows".

Two of the strippers offered me a threesome. "We could eat each other out," one of them explained to me. My Fuck, It Makes A Man Want To Knock Over A Liquor Store.

I guess this is some good motivation to finally ship something. It was a big club there had to be two dozen strippers there the whole night. I'd buy a "private dance" from every single one of them if I could.

Just now? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#37320594)

They've been ignoring their Desktop Widgets for a while now. I use Google Reader for RSS, and they had a Google Desktop gadget, but two separate times it completely stopped listing updates to my feeds. The second time I gave up on it being fixed after about 3 months of no feed updates. They work properly on the web page. They've been phasing out "support" for a while now, I'd say.

Hope Microsoft follows suit (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#37320638)

Please, can we get the original Windows search back now? The one that doesn't waste time on useless indexing? The one that used to find everything that matched rather than just a random subset?

Ever since this junk got forced onto Windows I've been using "find|xargs grep" on Cygwin.

Re:Hope Microsoft follows suit (1)

flimflammer (956759) | more than 2 years ago | (#37320876)

Forced? You're aware you can disable indexing completely, right?

Re:Hope Microsoft follows suit (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#37320950)

Yeah, I shut down the service to achieve this. That doesn't fix the fact that it often yields incomplete results.

Re:Hope Microsoft follows suit (1)

Zappy (7013) | more than 2 years ago | (#37321000)

try everything http://www.voidtools.com/ [voidtools.com]

Re:Hope Microsoft follows suit (1)

UnknownSoldier (67820) | more than 2 years ago | (#37322432)

Mod parent up.

Everything is a great windows app. Been using it for almost a year.

Closed source, but it is FAST!

Re:Hope Microsoft follows suit (1)

unencode200x (914144) | more than 2 years ago | (#37321140)

Windows search on 7 works great. It indexes documents, emails, programs, etc. I've been really impressed by it. However, for Outlook I still prefer Xobni (www.xobni.com), although I'm not happy that they're making you get an account these days.

Cloud != No More Desktop (1)

l0ungeb0y (442022) | more than 2 years ago | (#37320642)

You'd think Google would combine Desktop + Cloud search in their Desktop Search offering to provide seamless Cloud integration and use of Cloud as an online file backup.

It appears Google would disagree.
Cloud or nothing then!

Re:Cloud != No More Desktop (1)

blair1q (305137) | more than 2 years ago | (#37320828)

But then you wouldn't be driven to the cloud. They've got an ROI to maintain.

Bait & switch... (1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#37320656)

... definitely a Google favourite these days.

Re:Bait & switch... (1)

DarwinSurvivor (1752106) | more than 2 years ago | (#37322794)

Bait & Switch is when you advertise one product, then when the person shows up, you tell them it's not available and try to sell them something else. Discontinuing a no-longer-advertised product (and a FREE one at that!) is not even close to a bait & switch.

Back to Konfabulator (1)

M3wThr33 (310489) | more than 2 years ago | (#37320694)

That's still working, right?

Just like will happen with your cloud (1)

countertrolling (1585477) | more than 2 years ago | (#37320726)

Here today, gone tomorrow..

Bloody lemmings (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#37320780)

Cloud
Apps

Ooohhh SHINY!!!

Gawd help us all in a couple of years when we're all just good little consumers.

Re:Bloody lemmings (1)

couchslug (175151) | more than 2 years ago | (#37320904)

"Gawd help us all in a couple of years when we're all just good little consumers."

Nah. Just another market cycle. I'm not opting in to this one and therefore don't give a fuck.

Google wishes... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#37320822)

"...with the popularity of cloud computing ..." and "...users' increasing comfort with Web apps..."

Who is writing this load of thinly disguised PR toss?

Google Desktop Gadgets vs Google Gadgets (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#37320852)

I am fairly certain that when the article in question mentioned 'gadgets', it meant "Google Desktop Gadgets" not "Google Gadgets".

Re:Google Desktop Gadgets vs Google Gadgets (2)

uigrad_2000 (398500) | more than 2 years ago | (#37321056)

Even though the article said "Google Gadgets", it actually links to Google Desktop Gadgets [google.com] , not actually Google Gadgets [google.com] .

One is web-like type apps running on your desktop. The other is desktop-like apps running on your webpage. A bit of confusion here is to be expected.

Windows Search still sucks (1)

Nyder (754090) | more than 2 years ago | (#37320946)

ya, but windows search still sucks badly.

thank god for everything (http://www.voidtools.com/)

Re:Windows Search still sucks (1)

WidgetGuy (1233314) | more than 2 years ago | (#37321768)

Unfortunately, Everything works on local NTFS volumes only. Half a terabyte in my Vista setup is on USB drives that are FAT volumes. Worse, it only searches file names. No wonder it's fast and low-overhead. I usually need in-file searching. Vista's built-in search is actually pretty good. Very fine-grained control over indexing and it's easy to search in files with or without indexing. Everything, well, isn't really everything.

I'll miss Desktop search (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#37320970)

Unfortunately, Desktop Search was not killed by Google, but by Microsoft. They decided that only Windows Search should be able to traverse the oh-precious Outlook. So now us users are left with a useless Windows Search that is both slow and hard to use.

I know people will state something else [blogspot.com] , but I'm sure the real blow was when Google learned that they would be blocked out of Outlook. The team stopped developing around the time Outlook 2010 came around.

Desktop search... (1)

blahplusplus (757119) | more than 2 years ago | (#37321032)

.. didn't go far enough. Why don't these companies actually try to develop full featured file management tool. I think there is a lot of cool apps that individual users could use if only a big company would throw its money behind it.

1) Automatically sorting and tagging files
2) Automatically finding valid duplicate files (i.e. by valid, not system files or important files)
3) Keeping track of software and software like it /w suggestions of other software you might try/like, etc.

There's tonnes of stuff they could have done.

Re:Desktop search... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#37321432)

.. didn't go far enough. Why don't these companies actually try to develop full featured file management tool. I think there is a lot of cool apps that individual users could use if only a big company would throw its money behind it.

1) Automatically sorting and tagging files
2) Automatically finding valid duplicate files (i.e. by valid, not system files or important files)
3) Keeping track of software and software like it /w suggestions of other software you might try/like, etc.

There's tonnes of stuff they could have done.

There are tools out there that aim to do that. You might want to give liquidFOLDERS a try if you're using Windows: www.liquidfolders.net
-Sean

Re:Desktop search... (1)

konstantinkoll (2455414) | more than 2 years ago | (#37321560)

A shame Google discontinues their desktop search. If you're looking for something to pick up where Google leaves, you might want to give liquidFOLDERS [liquidfolders.net] a try!
-Konstantin

too much porn on my computer to use Google Desktop (1)

BLToday (1777712) | more than 2 years ago | (#37321038)

I don't want every search to list my porn files as the first item.

Gadgets on Linux... (1)

martin_b1sh0p (673005) | more than 2 years ago | (#37321090)

Dang, I actually use Google Gadgets on Linux. Luckily I only use it for the Weather.com gadget/widget/whatever. So I'm not heavily invested. I'm sure I can find a replacement. Still a bummer though, it looked like it had potential for a great x-platform widget-ma-dohicky.

GoogleLabs (2)

unencode200x (914144) | more than 2 years ago | (#37321262)

They're shutting down all sorts of things. See http://www.googlelabs.com/ [googlelabs.com] this includes: - Google Breadcrumb
Fast Flip
Aardvark
Google Sets
City Tours
Places Directory
Image Swirl
Google News Timeline
App Inventor for Android (possibly open sourcing?)
Google Squared
Google Talk Guru
Script Converter (replaced)
Realtime Mytracks
Sputnik


This sucks, I've always liked the little projects they have going on there. It sounds like they have some other things cooking though, and I'm happy to see them open sourcing some of it.

Sad to See it Go, Very Useful (1)

syntap (242090) | more than 2 years ago | (#37321424)

Google Desktop has really helped hunt through a decade of docs when I need to do it. I know Microsoft released a desktop search but I use Google Desktop for the same reasons I don't use Bing for Internet search... I like Google's search better.

Sad to see it go, but thanks Google for releasing it. I hope it will still be available and just closed to new development.

Copernic for desktop search (1)

jedwidz (1399015) | more than 2 years ago | (#37321612)

I'm pretty happy using Copernic on Windows XP. Not sure how it compares with the built-in searches on Windows 7, but I gave up on both MS and Google desktop searches due to glitches.

With some improvements to the file preview in the search results, to display larger files faster and allow paging through matches in the document, I'd be a very happy Copernic user.

Reminds Me of Steve Jobs Streamlining Apple (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#37321726)

Steve Jobs returned to Apple in the late nineties and killed off a number of products.
Streamlined the company to focus like a laser on what mattered...

The Real Reason (1)

TheSpoom (715771) | more than 2 years ago | (#37321846)

Why would Google put effort into a search product that doesn't allow them access to your data for targeted advertising?

Anti-logical (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#37321950)

As someo e who is probably the closest thing to a certifiable Google Fanboy, I hate to say this, but quite frankly, this is the worse move they've made in years. The key draw for GDS was always that it would search both the local system, and all your various online data, at the same time, and would cache said data offline as needed. Nothing in Windows 7 or any other system duplicates this functionality - the built in Windows search does not include online data. If anything, with a little bit of love, GDS is the perfect product to bridge the desktop to the cloud in such a manner that they would be nearly indistinguishable.

Google shouldn't be killing GDS, they should be expanding it, and possibly rebranding it more as a cloud bridge than a simple search tool.

Sorry to see Google killing Desktop Search (1)

drgroove (631550) | more than 2 years ago | (#37321970)

Shutting down Desktop search really sucks. GDS was an amazing productivity tool and will be sorely missed; it was and still is so much better than the native search faculties available on Windows and OS X. The review I wrote about GDS [adtmag.com] in '05 still stands.

Also closed: Goog411 (1)

DogDude (805747) | more than 2 years ago | (#37322100)

Just a few months ago, Google closed their free 411 service, which had really awesome voice recognition, too. I relied on that. I know I can still text searches, but that's not nearly as convenient as the Goog411 was. I had my cheap phone set to voice dial Google, and I used their voice recognition to find stuff, and it would dial for me. That was awesome. I could find and call a number without pushing a single button on my phone. Now, you have to have a stupid $300 pants computer to look up something as simple as a phone number. Bummer.

...now what? (1)

trk6640 (2439130) | more than 2 years ago | (#37322616)

I never cared about the desktop search, but it gave me Google widgets that I depend on. I don't want to leave my browser open 24/7 to get my much-needed nags about calendar events and new e-mail. Just because I'm online it doesn't mean I'm surfing the web. So what are my alternatives? MS desktop widgets never really took off, either.

NOO!!! Please say no!!!! (1)

ckaminski (82854) | more than 2 years ago | (#37322676)

Google desktop is the only thing that makes my desktop usable - that can search my gigabytes of Outlook email, that makes my computer USEFUL!

You can pry my Google Desktop out of my cold dead hands!

I don't think Outlook search compares, nor do I think Microsoft's indexing compares. It's just not as comparable, in my opinion.

Re:NOO!!! Please say no!!!! (1)

arehm (794243) | more than 2 years ago | (#37322698)

Might I suggest X1 (www.x1.com). Worth every penny. Kick's Google Desktop, Windows Search, and anything else I threw at it. Not free, but managed nicely with 800k+ items in it's DB.

copernicus (1)

koona (920057) | more than 2 years ago | (#37322730)

well, I'm glad I kept up with Copernicus. eh?

History (1)

Tony Isaac (1301187) | more than 2 years ago | (#37322944)

Windows does NOT have anything that comes close to Google Desktop's "Browse Timeline" feature. I don't know how many times I've used this to look for something I saw a week or two ago, but couldn't remember details. THAT is a Google Desktop feature I will really miss.
Load More Comments
Slashdot Login

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?
or Connect with...

Don't worry, we never post anything without your permission.

Submission Text Formatting Tips

We support a small subset of HTML, namely these tags:

  • b
  • i
  • p
  • br
  • a
  • ol
  • ul
  • li
  • dl
  • dt
  • dd
  • em
  • strong
  • tt
  • blockquote
  • div
  • quote
  • ecode

"ecode" can be used for code snippets, for example:

<ecode>    while(1) { do_something(); } </ecode>