Beta

Slashdot: News for Nerds

×

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 Desktop Now on Linux

samzenpus posted about 7 years ago | from the yes-it-does-run-linux dept.

Google 293

mytrip writes "Google was set to launch late on Wednesday a beta version of Google Desktop search for Linux in a sign of encouragement by the search giant for Linux on the desktop. Google Desktop allows people to search the Web while also searching the full text of all the information on their computer, including Gmail and their Web search history. Because the index is stored locally on the computer, users can access Gmail and Web history while offline."

cancel ×

293 comments

Google This! - shameless website plug (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | about 7 years ago | (#19674243)

Globaltics [globaltics.net] Global Political Discussion running on slashcode

- Uncle Willy

Privacy (5, Insightful)

PaisteUser (810863) | about 7 years ago | (#19674249)

Does anybody have concern for Google knowing what's on their local disks?

Re:Privacy (1, Funny)

Silver Sloth (770927) | about 7 years ago | (#19674273)

Because the index is stored locally on the computer,
What, outside of an inbuilt level of paranoia, leads you to think that Google will know what's on your hard drive?

Anyway, all my pr0n is stored on M$'s filestore from now on.

Re:Privacy (3, Interesting)

suv4x4 (956391) | about 7 years ago | (#19674353)

What, outside of an inbuilt level of paranoia, leads you to think that Google will know what's on your hard drive?

They have actually a somewhat poor track record of security in their desktop offerings (desktop and web accelerator).

My built-in level of paranoia says, the problem's more to do with this app being a generic attack vector for anyone willing to abuse your computer.

Re:Privacy (2, Informative)

molarmass192 (608071) | about 7 years ago | (#19674725)

this app being a generic attack vector for anyone willing to abuse your computer.

Yeah but even then, that's when the beauty of Linux kicks in. If someone discovers, for example, a buffer overflow in the app, they're still facing an unknown kernel version, distro filesystem, and GCC version on top of Linux's user privileges. It's much harder to create an exploit that could be used to take over your account, let alone take control of the system. There's really no wide reaching baseline from which to build an attack on Linux, unlike Windows which has one distro, one compiler. The best they could do on a broad reaching basis is crash the application consistently or maybe corrupt the binary to delete files from your home directory if you install the application locally.

Re:Privacy (4, Insightful)

st0nes (1120305) | about 7 years ago | (#19674277)

Will they know? It says the index is stored locally, does that mean it never goes to Google?

Re:Privacy (2, Insightful)

Simon (S2) (600188) | about 7 years ago | (#19674289)

Does anybody have concern for Google knowing what's on their local disks?
Yes I do. That's why I will never use this (or any other Desktop Search that is not Open Source).

+500 Insightful (1, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | about 7 years ago | (#19674499)

If it was another company it would've been flamed to ashes. But nooooooo, closed source from google is supposed to be cool?

Waiting for the -paid by MS- blogers to talk about "the Desktop Users" and "the corporate Customer", both of which are imaginary and used as excuses to create dumb, insecure and user friendly software.

Women bleed! (0, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | about 7 years ago | (#19674599)

We women bleed for 5 days! Did you forget?

Re:Privacy (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 7 years ago | (#19674789)

And will you trawl through every line of the code just to make sure it's doing what you think it's doing?

No you won't, because you can't personally have all the thousands of man-hours that will take.

When did the words "open source" suddenly imply best, most secure, 100% trustworthy?

Re:Privacy (1)

DaveWM (1114909) | about 7 years ago | (#19674321)

Careful pal, you might want to curb your negative comments against Google. Who knows what data Google has collected from someones desktop about YOU? =V

Re:Privacy - But is it open source? (1)

DuncanE (35734) | about 7 years ago | (#19674763)

Not really. I've used Google Desktop on Windows and it gives you the option to turn off sending stuff to Google servers.

The bigger issue for me is if it includes the source so I can check it doesn't "phone home". Plus it would be easy to extend of course.

So, Google, any chance of releasing the source code? GPL even?

Here's the link. (5, Informative)

Anonymous Coward | about 7 years ago | (#19674261)

Re:Here's the link. (5, Funny)

suv4x4 (956391) | about 7 years ago | (#19674485)

And notice the subtle and elegant interface [google.com] the search is implemented with. That aged, oversized and messy look, a look that says "Linux desktop".

Disclaimer: yea, I totally mean what I said.

Re:Here's the link. (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 7 years ago | (#19674825)

Be fair: some google employee and probably coded this during his 20% hobby time.

Spousal Abuse (1, Interesting)

eldavojohn (898314) | about 7 years ago | (#19674263)

It's kind of sad that a company who powers its hundreds of thousands of computers [redhat.com] in clusters with a trimmed down RedHat puts Linux second on the list of operating systems to support with its software.

I know Google's just playing the numbers (far more Win users than Linux) but you would think that there would be at least enough respect present for them to develop and release for both platforms in tandem. Google has the resources to do that, it's almost like some sort of 'love yet neglect' relationship that churns out of American movies these days.

I hope Google has bigger plans than slowly rolling out its apps in Linux well after it's put them out in Windows.

Re:Spousal Abuse (5, Insightful)

EveryNickIsTaken (1054794) | about 7 years ago | (#19674311)

Google is a publicly held company, not a soup kitchen.

Re:Spousal Abuse (3, Insightful)

ElleyKitten (715519) | about 7 years ago | (#19674349)

Google is a publicly held company, not a soup kitchen.
That analogy would only work if all the homeless people at the soup kitchen wrote their software and ran their company, yet Google would still not allow them to try their products until everyone else had.

Re:Spousal Abuse (0, Flamebait)

EveryNickIsTaken (1054794) | about 7 years ago | (#19674403)

yet Google would still not allow them to try their products until everyone else had.
No, that's not a correct analogy, as Google does not have to produce and sell any product just because *you* say so. A better analogy would someone getting pissed because they can't get a Ferarri engine put in their VW bug.

Re:Spousal Abuse (2, Interesting)

ElleyKitten (715519) | about 7 years ago | (#19674547)

yet Google would still not allow them to try their products until everyone else had.
No, that's not a correct analogy, as Google does not have to produce and sell any product just because *you* say so. A better analogy would someone getting pissed because they can't get a Ferarri engine put in their VW bug.
No, it would be like a company where everyone drives a VW and uses a VW in their daily work and would be less productive if they had to switch to a different vehicle, but the company releases Ferrari accessories first and foremost and only releases VW versions long after the Ferrari versions.

And the analogies get stupider and stupider, but the point is, while no one can demand Google do anything, it's really weird that they use almost exclusively Linux computers in their work, yet Linux gets second (or third) shrift when it comes to releasing products. If they think Linux is so great you'd think maybe they'd want to support it to help make sure it's always around for them.

Re:Spousal Abuse (0, Flamebait)

EveryNickIsTaken (1054794) | about 7 years ago | (#19674571)

Desktop searches are designed for the non-techies. Non-techies typically use Windows. 'Nuff said. Look, I know everyone here has hard-ons for Linux here, but please use some common sense.

Re:Spousal Abuse (2, Interesting)

ElleyKitten (715519) | about 7 years ago | (#19674641)

Desktop searches are designed for the non-techies. Non-techies typically use Windows. 'Nuff said. Look, I know everyone here has hard-ons for Linux here, but please use some common sense.
There's plenty of people who use Linux on the desktop, and I'm not saying they have to release Linux programs at the same time as Windows or Mac, I'm just saying it's weird that they use Linux but don't put a priority on making software for it.

That said, I'm actually just happy they've release what they have. We have Google Earth, Picasa, and now Google Desktop. We've dealt with worse from other companies.

Re:Spousal Abuse (1)

BlackCobra43 (596714) | about 7 years ago | (#19674855)

I, for one, profoundly hate our car-analogy making overidiots.

Re:Spousal Abuse (0, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | about 7 years ago | (#19675065)

it's really weird that they use almost exclusively Linux computers in their work


When you go to work as a google dev, you're offered a windows machine or a mac machine. They consider linux a server OS.

Re:Spousal Abuse (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 7 years ago | (#19674563)

There is no correct analogy because if you can't understand the topic at hand without having to resort to an analogy you are not now, nor will you ever be, a geek.

Go be an automobile mechanic or something. A a chef at a soup kitched. Just stop cluttering up Slashdot.

Re:Spousal Abuse (0, Offtopic)

EveryNickIsTaken (1054794) | about 7 years ago | (#19674589)

Way to spell, no spell.

Re:Spousal Abuse (1)

skoaldipper (752281) | about 7 years ago | (#19674395)

Google is a publicly held company, not a soup kitchen
Works for them [reuters.com] . Sorry. Couldn't resist.

Re:Spousal Abuse (0, Flamebait)

value_added (719364) | about 7 years ago | (#19674673)

Google is a publicly held company, not a soup kitchen.

So Google's efforts to develop their app is somehow akin to charity? If you're trying to make that argument, you've not done so because it amounts to nothing more than saying a vendor who ignores a subset of their market (non-Windows users) is meeting their fiduciary responsibilities by dismissing it outright. That was said about Firefox users not so long ago and it was proved both wrong and embarrassing.

The OP, on the other hand, articulated clearly what I think is perfectly valid series of observations. None of them is in conflict with making a buck, or whiney as one poster trollishly suggested. Moreover, I think the OP's comments fit well to varying degrees with not only with Google's mission statement, but also their position in a market under constant threat of monopoly power and abuse.

If there's any soup kitchen element to Google behaviour, it's their continuing efforts in offering non-money making betas to the public, or expending efforts and money in an attempt to distinguish themselves in ways that no Fortune 500 company would ever consider.

Re:Spousal Abuse (3, Insightful)

suv4x4 (956391) | about 7 years ago | (#19674331)

It's kind of sad that a company who powers its hundreds of thousands of computers [redhat.com] in clusters with a trimmed down RedHat puts Linux second on the list of operating systems to support with its software.

You assume they built Google Desktop to run it on their own clustered computers? Or is this one blatantly fallacious argument you pulled off there.

How about counting the OS numbers on the machines they're targeting.

gtalk and all the rest (1)

WindBourne (631190) | about 7 years ago | (#19674351)

I have waited for sometime to see gtalk on here. I have disappointed that they have not done so.

Re:gtalk and all the rest (1)

ElleyKitten (715519) | about 7 years ago | (#19675037)

I have waited for sometime to see gtalk on here. I have disappointed that they have not done so
I prefer gtalk within google mail anyways. Even if you don't, since Linux users can at least talk on gtalk I'm not surprised that program wasn't made a priority.

Re:Spousal Abuse (4, Informative)

Xenex (97062) | about 7 years ago | (#19674429)

It's kind of sad that a company who powers its hundreds of thousands of computers in clusters with a trimmed down RedHat puts Linux second on the list of operating systems to support with its software.
Third [blogspot.com] .

Google Desktop has been available for Mac OS X since April.

Re:Spousal Abuse (-1, Offtopic)

Jugalator (259273) | about 7 years ago | (#19674467)

I'll never understand those who whine not when a release is not made, but when a release is made.

Re:Spousal Abuse (1)

Cal Paterson (881180) | about 7 years ago | (#19674871)

Maybe because the whining is not related to the releases, but in fact the attitude of Google themselves?

Re:Spousal Abuse (1)

TheCRAIGGERS (909877) | about 7 years ago | (#19674901)

Google has the resources to do that
Yes, they have the resources to do both, but is it not true that if they devote 100% of their resources to a single platform, they could release sooner for that platform? By my reasoning, EVERY company has the resources to release on multiple platforms at the same time; it just boils down to getting the biggest bang for their buck (as always). Google is after market share, and that means devoting resources appropriately.

Beagle (5, Informative)

prock307 (513323) | about 7 years ago | (#19674265)

They have Beagle http://beagle-project.org/Main_Page [beagle-project.org] to compete with, not sure how useful it will be on Linux. But on Windows at work I can finally find my emails and other documents!

Re:Beagle (3, Informative)

Anonymous Coward | about 7 years ago | (#19674421)

not only beagle, but there's also http://www.gnome.org/projects/tracker/ [gnome.org] to compete with, not written in mono n stuff.

Re:Beagle (1)

GooberToo (74388) | about 7 years ago | (#19674865)

For those of us that not in the know, which ones are written in Mono. I'd like to know which ones to stay away from.

Re:Beagle (1)

smartin (942) | about 7 years ago | (#19674573)

I had to disable Beagle on mu machine, was sick of it using all my cpu.

Re:Beagle (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 7 years ago | (#19674939)

I second that. My Dell Optiplex GX280 is super loud when the CPU load spikes. I know beagle is running again, when my system gets so loud I have to shout to be heard over it. Plus it seems to run forever just to index my home directory. No offense to the Beagle team, but it needs some work to be a little more kind to other processes on your system, some way to throttle the sucker down. If my system is any indication, it is doing way to much work and has way to big a database for such a small home directory.

Re:Beagle (3, Informative)

nkeric (953623) | about 7 years ago | (#19674827)

check out the tracker project: http://www.gnome.org/projects/tracker/ [gnome.org]

Tracker is a tool designed to extract information and metadata about your personal data so that it can be searched easily and quickly. By using Tracker, you no longer have to remember where you've left your files. To locate a file you only need to remember something about it, such as a word in the document or the artist of the song. This is because as well as searching for files in the traditional way, by name and location, Tracker searches files' contents and metadata.
It should be faster and more light weight :)

Re:Beagle (4, Informative)

oever (233119) | about 7 years ago | (#19675121)

Not only Beagle but 4 other desktop search engines. Beagle, Strigi, Pinot, Tracker and Recoll are five search engines that work together on a common search API for the free desktop called Xesam [freedesktop.org] . The Xesam API is nice and the free desktop search programs are powerfull. More importantly, they have commandline tools, are faster and allow more tuning of what to index and what not. On top of that an ontology (hierarchy of fields) has been worked out that will be supported by these search engines. This will allow any desktop application to use any of these search engines to integrate tightly. No doubt a translation layer will be written to let GDS also use this API. Browsing the GDS website, these things are notable. Google Desktop Search
  • is closed source software
  • is widely deployed and tested on other platforms
  • has a stable well documented API
  • uses COM for communication
  • has a large brand recognition and there will a demand for it
  • calls analyzer plugins based on file extension
  • has a limited, unexpandable list of categories for files
  • identifies files by mtime + uri
  • uses wchar_t internally
  • is file based
  • has a documented API for querying the search daemon ( I do not know which protocol )
  • has no command-line tools

This means that just as the existing programs are starting to come to terms, Google comes and returns the chaos on the desktop search scene. While I like Google internet search, their desktop offering has me feeling eerie. I would prefer using Mono over Googles closed source program. But even better is the ultra-efficient Strigi [sf.net] which will be part of KDE4 and indexes streams instead of files.

I think I'll wait (5, Funny)

niceone (992278) | about 7 years ago | (#19674271)

I think I'll wait until it's out of beta, won't be long, right?

Re:I think I'll wait (1, Interesting)

Don_dumb (927108) | about 7 years ago | (#19674369)

Beta testing has lost all meaning thanks to Google, how long before we see companies using 'Gamma' testing, for products that they want the consumer to have more faith in than a beta product but still have the excuse of "it's in gamma testing at the moment" when anything goes wrong.

That sounded too 'marketing', I feel sick.

Re:I think I'll wait (2, Interesting)

alexgieg (948359) | about 7 years ago | (#19674767)

Some people already do this. The Auctioneer [auctioneeraddon.com] addons pack for World of Warcraft has alpha, beta and gamma versions released before the official release.

slocate? (1)

Helmholtz (2715) | about 7 years ago | (#19674283)

Even with the privacy concerns aside (though I do think they are significant), I don't see any reason why I would want to use google destktop instead of slocate.

Re:slocate? (1)

jonesy2k (934862) | about 7 years ago | (#19674481)

The obvious reason would be because google desktop search can search inside files and thus index emails etc.

Re:slocate? (1)

Ant P. (974313) | about 7 years ago | (#19674669)

Yes, but so does grep.

Re:slocate? (1)

LiquidFire_HK (952632) | about 7 years ago | (#19674711)

Indeed, but grep does not index the files, so searching is slower if you're searching through a large amount of files.

Re:slocate? (2, Informative)

6031769 (829845) | about 7 years ago | (#19675095)

Solution: Swish-e [swish-e.org] .

Yes, it is open source.

Re:slocate? (5, Informative)

LiquidFire_HK (952632) | about 7 years ago | (#19674511)

Because slocate only searches in the file names of files and has to update its database periodically (the latter can be remedied with rlocate [sourceforge.net] ), while things like Google Desktop search, Beagle, etc. search inside the files' contents and metadata as well as the names, update themselves in real time, and can show you matches from multiple sources in one place (search results from files, emails, address book, etc.)

Distributed Desktop Search (4, Interesting)

jonesy2k (934862) | about 7 years ago | (#19674297)

What would be really powerful would be a google desktop search which could search multiple machines at once eg. your desktop, laptop, perhaps even keeping an offline index of your usb drives. Then you could search in one place and easily find whatever you're looking for. I can see the privacy issues now, though.

it does (4, Informative)

oni (41625) | about 7 years ago | (#19674513)

it already does this. click preferences -> search across computers.

QT, GTK or Mono? (0, Troll)

bogaboga (793279) | about 7 years ago | (#19674327)

Anyone know whether this tool will be QT, GTK or Mono based? I slashdotter needs to know, thanx.

Re:QT, GTK or Mono? (4, Funny)

ceeam (39911) | about 7 years ago | (#19674379)

"Requires glibc 2.3.2+, gtk+ 2.2.0+" - well, what do you think?

Re:QT, GTK or Mono? (1)

morbuz (592480) | about 7 years ago | (#19674391)

"Requires glibc 2.3.2+, gtk+ 2.2.0+"

Re:QT, GTK or Mono? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 7 years ago | (#19674393)

Why are you interested if you don't have any clue what those things are? GTK, QT or Mono? Christ.

Re:QT, GTK or Mono? (1)

wild_berry (448019) | about 7 years ago | (#19674417)

Winelib, if Picasa is the pattern they're following.

Re:QT, GTK or Mono? (2, Interesting)

cmacb (547347) | about 7 years ago | (#19674617)

Picasa may have used Wine, but it certainly didn't set a pattern. Google Earth isn't using Wine as far as I can tell:

http://earth.google.com/download-earth.html [google.com]

It runs faster on my Linux box than on my Apple computer. A recent Google presentation claimed they'd be doing more and more things on Linux and I suspect this is just the tip of the iceberg.

Re:QT, GTK or Mono? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 7 years ago | (#19674587)

Does Mono even have a GUI library?

Re:QT, GTK or Mono? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 7 years ago | (#19674821)

It has many. Windows.Forms and GTK#, for a start.

How does it run? (2, Insightful)

oddman (204968) | about 7 years ago | (#19674333)

The article says it was "developed natively." So this is definitely not the win.exe version wrapped in Wine?

bi73h (-1, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | about 7 years ago | (#19674337)

Gtalk ? (1)

kgp_crap (997022) | about 7 years ago | (#19674373)

I hope other google products like GTalk follow soon.

Re:Gtalk ? (1)

slummy (887268) | about 7 years ago | (#19674783)

There are plenty of multi-protocol clients that can handle the Jabber protocol.

Here's one. [pidgin.im]

Re:Gtalk ? (1)

kgp_crap (997022) | about 7 years ago | (#19674877)

Even Gaim supports the Jabber protocol.
But AFAIK theres no IM Client that allows you to 'talk' to with the person your chatting. :)

No 64 bit (5, Insightful)

JackieBrown (987087) | about 7 years ago | (#19674381)

I wish they would start making 64 bit versions of their stuff so we could quit trying to force install their products.

Re:No 64 bit (1)

jfekendall (1121479) | about 7 years ago | (#19674771)

Strangely, it works well in an x64 environment. I installed it and am using it on OpenSuse 10.3 x64 edition with no complaints.

Re:No 64 bit (-1, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | about 7 years ago | (#19674813)

Jesus H Christ! Just compile the fucking thing yourself, retard. If you really can't spell "make install", you need to get a fucking Mac.

This delay has been good (2, Insightful)

clashdot (1034936) | about 7 years ago | (#19674385)

Thank you Google for delaying the Linux version! We now have Beagle, Strigi, the Nepomuk project and more as free alternatives to your proprietary software. There would have been free desktop search software anyway, but most likely there would have been a bit less enthusiasm for its development, and some distributions might have flocked to supporting the Google product.

I'm excited that Linux is still flying under the radar to such a large extent, when it comes to commercial software. Soon it will be Ready For The Desktop (TM) and the Linux desktop is still 100% free!

Re:This delay has been good (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 7 years ago | (#19674731)

Have any of the projects you refer to been given front page Slashdot articles?

Hmmmm, no. Yet Google, a for-profit proprietary software company, releases a beta and they get one. This is despite the fact that the Linux version was released well behind both its OSX and Windows counterparts.

Do you know what that means? That the world's premier FOSS discussion site would do something like that? That sound of crickets chirping you hear when you search Slashdot for Beagle articles: It means that no one really cares about closed vs. open.

Even the readership of Slashdot will quickly compromise its ideals to put its hands on something shiny. Google Desktop? Front page news! I sure hope GTalk comes to Linux too!

Or maybe I'm wrong and none of these projects have the kind of Slashvertisement that Google does.

Re:This delay has been good (2, Informative)

McNihil (612243) | about 7 years ago | (#19674847)

Having run beagle (0.2.7-9) on my 300+ GByte $HOME a year ago or so was clearly an indication that it wasn't good enough... it kept on reindexing all the time... causing HD thrashing (even on a RAID0 with 200MB/s throughput.) Granted it was mostly after updates that happened and it isn't a 1.0 release but still.

I am now testing GDLinux and it feels much more sane and does not contain wine nor mono which I am quite happy with.

Hmmm (1, Interesting)

Wolfraider (1065360) | about 7 years ago | (#19674409)

So, how long do you think it will be before Google sues the Linux community to remove slocate and similar programs from the OS?

Re:Hmmm (1)

Nicolas MONNET (4727) | about 7 years ago | (#19674475)

So, how long do you think it will be before Google sues the Linux community to remove slocate and similar programs from the OS?

As soon as slocate achieves over 90% penetration, and qualifies as a monopoly as Microsoft does.

I wonder how likely that is.

Uhh (1)

Inoshiro (71693) | about 7 years ago | (#19674919)

Right around when they file to have Apple remove Spotlight from OS 10.4+ -- when the US Federal court system rules that Apple (or any of the distribution related companies) have a monopoly, and have been proven guilty of leveraging that monopoly to further their own business ends, to the detriment of the market.

Basically never, you troll.

light and works on light windowmanagers (1)

e**(i pi)-1 (462311) | about 7 years ago | (#19674419)

It was a nice surprise for me to see that google desktop does not eat too much resources, even when indexing the harddrive. Better than beagle or even slocate. Also, it works witout needing KDE or Gnome on light desktop managers (who start it up automatically). I use blackbox and the google desktop server by hand with "gdlinux start" from the terminal and double allows searching without an additional gui from the browser. An other surprise was that it works both on firefox and mozilla. Not many extensions do that.

that's right, suckers! (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 7 years ago | (#19674437)

now you can become one with the real borg.

What about a Solaris version? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 7 years ago | (#19674489)

What about a version for Solaris? It shouldn't be that hard to port.

Re:What about a Solaris version? (1)

ajs318 (655362) | about 7 years ago | (#19674875)

The Linux version might compile fine on Solaris; or at any rate, the necessary tweak may be a trivial one (usually some d.h. hard-codes a constant in somewhere instead of getting it from the header files). Linux and Solaris aren't too different, esp. if you have the GNU toolchain installed. Give it a try.

No tarball? (1)

sokkalf (542999) | about 7 years ago | (#19674503)

I could only find .deb and .rpm packages, what about those not running a debian- or redhat-family distro?

Re:No tarball? (1)

slummy (887268) | about 7 years ago | (#19674615)

It seems they offer a script that performs an auto-compilation for those of us running REAL distros (Slackware).

http://www.google.com/linuxrepositories/scripted.h tml [google.com]

Re:No tarball? (1)

denominateur (194939) | about 7 years ago | (#19675009)

All that script does is set up the google rpm/deb resositories automatically on systems not running gui's or for people who prefer the shell. Google does not provide source packages for desktop.

Re:No tarball? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 7 years ago | (#19674733)

I guess you should run a better distro then... and I don't mean something with that uses that crap-awful RPM format.

Besides, if you don't have a deb or rpm extractor then what kind of shit distro are you using anyway?

Re:No tarball? (1)

slummy (887268) | about 7 years ago | (#19674817)

for those of us running REAL distros (Slackware).


Can't take the time to login and post, can't take the time to read the post.

Re:No tarball? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 7 years ago | (#19674811)

Use Alien.

But it'll be nice if they did release it...

Linux (1, Funny)

Junky191 (549088) | about 7 years ago | (#19674581)

"Because the index is stored locally on the computer, users can access Gmail and Web history while offline."

Which is a good thing because despite Linux being 60 some years old now I still can't get this damn wireless card to work despite battling with drivers and make install for days.

Re:Linux (1)

RiffRafff (234408) | about 7 years ago | (#19674659)

What?

Just how old do you think Torvalds is?

Re:Linux (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 7 years ago | (#19674937)

In Internet years, Linux is even older than 60.

Re:Linux (3, Funny)

dominious (1077089) | about 7 years ago | (#19675115)

No, this must be a post from the future. Which means in 2050 there will still be issues for wireless cards on linux:/

Web browser interface sucks (2, Insightful)

Danathar (267989) | about 7 years ago | (#19674593)

Although I like Google desktop, I REALLY wish there was a way to have my results come up in some sort of file management application like explorer(windows), or Konqueror (File manager, not browser), or my file management app of choice.

You can't work with the results when they come up in your browser window.

This is one thing that Spotlight really does have going for it. Being able to have a search folder which dynamically has all the results I want whenever I open it is really useful. Now spotlight needs some work and is not perfect, but google desktop is really lacking in this area.

Re:Web browser interface sucks (1)

ljubomir (1027980) | about 7 years ago | (#19674925)

Yes, I really like the way kio_locate works. My favorite uses for it are krusader and file open dialog. But we should really wait for KDE4, and it's strigi integration, which I suppose will be more useful than just plain locate.

Obsession with search (4, Insightful)

Orlando (12257) | about 7 years ago | (#19674601)

Am I the only one baffled by this obsession with local search? I send most of 5 days a week using desktop computers and a lot of the weekends, and I have to say that I very rarely need to search for anything locally. I put stuff where I can find it later using simple directory structures. Is that so difficult?

Re:Obsession with search (1)

tomstdenis (446163) | about 7 years ago | (#19674625)

shhhh. Some people look at all the utils they install as badges of honour. Look, I got anti-vir, anti-spy, anti-drm, firefox quickloader, open office quickstart, google, yahoo, etc... going, I'm so 1337!!!

I too put files where I can find them, and on the occasion I need to find something I use grep. I guess we're the exception?

Tom

Re:Obsession with search (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 7 years ago | (#19674667)

I agree- I don't get it either. Like you, I put stuff where I can find it according to a simple yet sensible method (folders, basically). I'm baffled by the whole desktop-search thing as well.

Mike
QuickTrivia.com

Re:Obsession with search (1, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | about 7 years ago | (#19674839)

back in the day, we had to find all of the individual chunks of the file that get spread out wherever the heads landed that there was free space. It wasn't until MS made MS Defrag that it took me less than an hour to read any of my documents.

Re:Obsession with search (1)

denominateur (194939) | about 7 years ago | (#19675113)

Most people are not that organised, at least not when using computers. (clicl download, immediately click ok, "damn where did it put that file...)

But judgemental issues aside, i think it would be quite useful to have a desktop search application that actually collects the documents that lie around all over the drive and puts them in neat directory structures with a topical organisation... Hmm.. where's that tracker source!

Native! (1)

Zebedeu (739988) | about 7 years ago | (#19674643)

So they have engineers with knowledge of (and working with) Linux interfaces!

Good, would it be such a stretch to shift some of those guys to make a decent port of Picasa for Linux? Because the current emulated one tends to suck a little bit.

It's strange that after moving from Windows to Linux, Picasa is the one software that I miss the most, after MS Office (and, of course, the ability to play any game).

How Droll... (1)

xipietotec (1100869) | about 7 years ago | (#19674845)

Not only is this a day late and a dollar short, it doesn't really even match up in functionality. Deskbar + Tracker == Win. Tracker is super small, super fast, deskbar is highly extensible. With a few extra deskbar plugins, I can search google, gmail, use it as a calculator, launch programs from it, search flickr, man pages, parse things right into yubnub (well, in firefox at least), search all my bookmarks, delicious, etc.

This is something that the open source desktop has *lightyears* ahead of the competition.

Woo hoo! (2, Insightful)

sportster (711011) | about 7 years ago | (#19674975)

Great now we can have beta versions of malware running on our linux desktops too!

Don't Google Me So Close (1, Troll)

Doc Ruby (173196) | about 7 years ago | (#19674985)

Although Google has released other projects as open-source software, where it can be freely modified and redistributed by anyone, Google Desktop for Linux is proprietary. The software was developed by Google's Beijing engineering team

So not only will Google get the index to what's on my local disks, and probably also every keystroke/mouse/click/URL, but it'll get Cc'ed to China's mafia Communist government. Google has a huge evil deal [google.com] with those evil bastards, and there's no way to know that their Desktop isn't part of it. It wouldn't be the only serious privacy risk [wikipedia.org] Google "mitigates" with only PR, not security.

I'll just wait for Beagle [wikipedia.org] to copy all Google Desktop's features, but in open source that people examine for spyware.
Load More Comments
Slashdot Account

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?

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>
Create a Slashdot Account

Loading...