On Windows Vista and every subsequent version of Windows, if I search for a file and include the entire C:\ drive, I might very well have time to make tea or a sandwich while the search results come in. On Windows XP, using the search dialog with the animated dog, I can search the entire C:\ drive and expect it to be done in a minute or two, if not in seconds.
It can’t just be nostalgia; I can replicate these results on period-accurate hardware today. What changed with Vista to make file searching so much slower, even with indexing enabled?
You mean the physical actuator moving a read/write head over a spinning platter? Which limits its traversal speed over its physical media? Which severely hampers its ability to read data from random locations?
You mean that kind of limitation? The kind of limitation that is A core part of how a hard drive works?
That?
I would highly recommend that you learn what a hard drive is before you start commenting about its its performance characteristics. 🤦🤦🤦
For everyone else in the thread, remember that arguing with an idiot is always a losing battle because they will drag you down to their level and win with experience.
Again - there’s no significant real world difference between an SSD and a HDD in the scenario I’m describing. Neither drive types are the limiting factor in speed of the operation. You act like HDDs take a long time to seek data lol.
I can pretty much guarantee you I’ve got more experience with data and drives than you do. Theoretical speeds and performance are just that - theoretical. The only way you ever get close to them are transferring a single huge file.
Your last little pot shot is ironic and hilarious.