Searching forums

Hide behind me, I'm a big boy and provide good cover (and will duck fast if something comes flying in my direction :)

How about providing the members a choice of search engine alternatives on the search Page in addition to the selector boxes for forums and usernames?

I'd rather deal with advertising clutter and be able to get the search results I need. I know not everyone does, and I know there's not a lot of control over the ads Google displays;I can see where it would be mess if businesses banned from DG ads or rated very low in GWD came up as context-sensitive ads.

If you have an Ad blocker, there are no ads to see on Google.

I changed away from the google search because a got a lot of complaints about that. Therefore, I developed what we have now.

I'm not going to make any changes to search for a while. When I do make a change, it'll be to go back to the original search that we had (I'll have to program it again, of course, to make it snappy)

Dave

Allll-right!!! ::smilen!!::
Big XXXX!!
JenG

Hah see what complaining gets you!

Awesome! Can't wait Dave. Thanks bunches :-)

I just read the latest posts in the last few days and was going to post that I too use Google rather than the new Yahoo search on DG. Like, Candy, I have an ad blocker that's pretty effective for Firefox.

I'll be glad when Dave has the time to bring back the old search. I miss it. I also miss the old PlantFiles search where I could sort the results list by clicking on the column heading (e.g. alphabetically by cultivar name). Dave - will the revamped search also include taking the PlantFiles search back to the old way?

Ads on Google - I've never seen any. Are they pop-ups, or what?

Oh yeah, and the PF search - I'm with langbr. If that generalized search (the one with the single data-input field) could be brought back and put on the PF main page like it used to be, that would be great - it was so convenient!

Shannon

Oh boy...I can't wait until it gets changed back. Thanks :))

The new PF search takes you straight and directly to what you are looking for.
The old system would, more often than not, give you a zillion answers to weed through. Who likes to weed???

I think what langbr is asking for is to add a feature from the general search (which is still available - only one more click than before) - not necessarily to bring back the old search box on the PF homepage.

I know the new search takes some getting used to. A simple text search box is simple for the user, but unfortunately no system is a mind reader (not until Dave finishes the Davex operating system, that is ;o)

Every time we search PlantFiles, we're asking the system to wade through nearly 100,000 entries - most of which contain a minimum of four and up to 18 fields (common, family, genus, species, cultivar, additional cultivar, hybridizer, year of intro and as many as five synonyms.)

We all want the system to be able to instantly pluck out the one plant we're trying to find, whether the word(s) we search with are the common, genus, species, cultivar, hybridizer or synonym. If you can specify what field(s) to search on, you're giving the system a fighting chance to return valid results efficiently and promptly.

Ulrich, Terry,

The single-field entry box really is more convenient some of the time. It's not that the advanced search "confuses" me - I find that statement on the PF site so patronizing. Sometimes you just want to find a particular word - without having to first determine whether it's a common name or cultivar, for example. It worked really well for me, for those types of cases. What harm would it do, to return the single-field input box, and have it available alongside the advanced search so we can choose for ourselves according to our circumstances at the time?

Shannon

I don't do many searches on DG, but my search engine is "Ask Gardenwife"!
(Bowing to a superior being)
Pati

lol!

Maybe I'm missing something, but if I put in the cultivar name I usually get the exact plant I'm looking for (in fact cannot think of an instance where I didn't get what I was looking for). However, if I key in "daylily" in the common name field or "hemerocallis" in the genus field then I get 20+ pages. If I remember correctly, the old search would bring up the 20+ pages of results but you could click in the Cultivar field to sort it alphabetically.

Now I realize that Daylilies are a bad example of this because I can always use the other search we still have of the Popular Genus and sort by alpha letter of the cultivar name, but for other plants not with a specific search this would be nice to be able to do.

Pati, you goofball! LOL

There are two different questions in this thread - one is about searching the forums and one is about searching in PlantFiles. I would encourage those with questions about PlantFiles searching to start a new thread here or (preferably) in the PlantFiles forum ;o)

Good point, Terry - I think I'm the guilty party for having added on my comment about the PF Search. Mea culpa.

There's already a thread about this topic in the PF forum.... I think we were still waiting for a response over there. I'm guilty too, langbr. Thanks for the reminder, though, Terry!. :-)