(76)
Your rating: Now say why...
Find Any File searches your local disks for files by name, creation or modification date, size, or type and creator code (not by content, though).
As there are other tools with a similar search operation, here are the special features unique to Find Any File:
Unlike Spotlight (i.e. the
As there are other tools with a similar search operation, here are the special features unique to Find Any File:
- Has a new hierarchical view of the found items, making it much easier to browse 100s of items (see the screenshot).
- Can run as root user, finding really any file on your disk, even those that are hidden from normal users.
- Can save queries and run them again later.
Unlike Spotlight (i.e. the
What's New
Version 1.8.3:
- Restores columns in Results window if they got misaligned.
- Corrected French text "Traitement des données".
Requirements
PPC / Intel, Mac OS X 10.4.1 or later
PPC / Intel, Mac OS X 10.4.1 or later
Find Any File User Discussion (Write a Review)
Overall:
(76)
(76)
| Downloads:49,700 |
| Version Downloads:1,882 |
| Type:Utilities : File Management |
| License:Shareware |
| Date:26 Apr 2012 |
| Platform:PPC / Intel |
| Price: $6.00 |
Overall (Version 1.x):  |
Features: |
| Ease of Use: |
| Value: |
| Stability: |
Displaying 1-10 of 93
Displaying 1-10 of 18
-
-
-
Find Any File searches your local disks for files by name, creation or modification date, size, or type and creator code (not by content, though).
As there are other tools with a similar search operation, here are the special features unique to Find Any File:
Unlike Spotlight (i.e. the Finder's Find command), it does not access a pre-built database but searches the chosen volume directly. This allows you to find any file, even those inside packages and others excluded from Spotlight search. Hence it is great for finding system files, for example.
On the other hand, it may take a little longer than Spotlight, and it is only fast on HFS(+) volumes. But even on mounted network volumes of a Mac OS X server it can still be surprisingly fast.
Hence, this is not an entire replacement for Spotlight but it can come handy in certain, if not many, situations.
As there are other tools with a similar search operation, here are the special features unique to Find Any File:
- Has a new hierarchical view of the found items, making it much easier to browse 100s of items (see the screenshot).
- Can run as root user, finding really any file on your disk, even those that are hidden from normal users.
- Can save queries and run them again later.
Unlike Spotlight (i.e. the Finder's Find command), it does not access a pre-built database but searches the chosen volume directly. This allows you to find any file, even those inside packages and others excluded from Spotlight search. Hence it is great for finding system files, for example.
On the other hand, it may take a little longer than Spotlight, and it is only fast on HFS(+) volumes. But even on mounted network volumes of a Mac OS X server it can still be surprisingly fast.
Hence, this is not an entire replacement for Spotlight but it can come handy in certain, if not many, situations.
Copyright © 2012 MacUpdate LLC
- -
+12
If you find something faster, it would help if you told me what kind of server you're accessing: A NAS (usually running Linux) or a Mac OS X server (which should perform better than most NAS systems) or even something else?
I'm planning an optimization for 1.9 where at least searching for names should perform better.
Also note: If you search a disk on a network, avoid getting into the "(slow)" mode, e.g. by making sure you search the entire volume, not just single folders on it, because only then the search can be done on the server side, avoiding lots of the slow network traffic.
+12
+1
However, that won't help you. I realize now that I've never pointed this issue with Windows network volumes out in my documentation. I'll add that now.
I am sorry for that. You can get a refund, just send me an e-mail.
+123
Eric-Woehler reviewed on 26 Apr 2012
Both IFileX and Find Any File have the option of lists or hierarchical views, EasyFind just presents a list of files located.
I guess it's a case of finding the app that suits you, but for me, IFileX works best for me, and it's free. Perhaps the best way to see is to try all 3 and see which works best for your needs.
+1
1. iFileX doesn't have the rich set of search choices of FAF - it is basically what FAF was at version 1.7.
2. FAF performs better over networks.
3. iFileX's features won't be extended, for the very reason that, being free, the developer (I know him personally because I helped him with iFileX) has little incentive and rather takes on jobs that pay for his living.
But if you think that iFileX or EasyFind are all you need, be my guest! They're good programs.
Note, though, that both EasyFind and iFileX both learned from FAF to be fast - EasyFind, before FAF, was very slow when you searched the entire disk, and only after I contacted the EasyFind author, they added the fast search ability in 2008 - same for iFileX, which basically copied all features from FAF and wouldn't have seen the light of day without FAF either.
I can afford to constantly improve FAF only because I get some money for it.
And I keep doing it as long as there are those who want the extra bit more, who want to rely on quick bug fixes, fast support and the occasional special feature just for them :)
-10
Allowing this kind of operation would lead to an unexpectedly slow search, especially on a network, where this could end up taking hours.
FAF is made to make the best of the fast search options Mac OSX offers. And, sadly, OSX's search that's used by FAF does not support the kind of alternative search you (and believe me, me too) likes to have.
The only thing that I could do, with keeping the search fairly fast, would be to perform several search, one for each of the alternatives. The advantage over you having to perform several searches with FAF yourself would be that all results would end u pin a single results window. I am not sure if people really need that, though. If you can convince me why that would be useful, I'd consider this option.
If you searched only for "abc", it would perform one search on the entire disk, taking, for example, 10 seconds.
Now, if you wanted to search for any matches for "abc" or "123", FAF would have to perform one search for abc, then one for 123, then merging the results in one window. This kind of search would then take 20 seconds. There's no way to perform them synchronously, for technical reasons.
However, if you searched for all that contain "xyz" AND either "abc" or "123", then FAF could perform a single search on "xyz" and then filter down on the other criteria, all in a single go.
So, as you see, depending on the combinations, FAF could be fast or slow, and users might not comprehend this quickly, leading to frustration. What you're looking for might be considered a power user feature, but I'm curious what others think.
Everyone, feel free to comment on this. Thanks.
+30
Ronl reviewed on 31 Mar 2012
Love the hierarchical view.
Reminds me of UltraFind (for OS Classic) which was waaaaaaay ahead of its time. All it needed was reindexing like Spotlight has.
For the price this is a MUST HAVE!
+1
+80
On top it is free.
+2
+26
Orytek reviewed on 26 Mar 2012
Didn't expect it could get much better but it has.
+118
+118
1. Using English language.
2. It doesn't fix itself when the window is resized.
3. There's nothing I have to do to make it recur. Just open the app and there you have it.
4. OS is 10.6.8
5. Have sent you a screen grab of the window.
+19
1.) should include metadata/tags as search criteria field to make it more useful (at least to me).
2.) should 'hide', rather than 'show', default search results for invisibles, package contents and trash.
2 - I could remember your last choice and restore that next time you use these options. Would that work for you?
+449
+19
+1
+449
+16
+16
+2
+2
shangrla reviewed on 19 Mar 2012
+21
+4
1.7 is available in the App Store. I had submitted 1.7.1 a few days ago to the Store but it's still not reviewed. And now there's already 1.7.2 which I can't even submit before 1.7.1 is reviewed.
And while Apple happily takes 30% of our sales, they appear unable or unwilling to employ enough people to reduce this delay.
And in March FAF may even get kicked out because of the new restrictive rules Apple thinks we all need. Pleas to Apple about fixing this are left unanswered.
No, the App Store isn't my favorite topic...
+2
+21
+294
As I've said before, I have the utmost respect for developers who have the balls to keep everything in-house.
You're a first rate developer, one of the good guys; you deserve a lot better than what the MacCrapStore has to offer.
+2
MAS still gets me some sales which I believe I would not make otherwise. And since FAF is a small side project for me, every dollar counts (I sell a few copies a few, usually 2-5, and usually half of it comes from MAS). Not enough to live by, though.
In fact, most of the recent improvements I only made to make users happy who write me, so it's a hobby and something to "feel good" about. And reaching out to a few MAS users, who've never even heard of MacUpdate, and making them happy with FAF, is a fulfilling goal for me.
So yes, Apple's near-sighted MAS rules are frustrating, but seeing another single sale a day in the MAS makes my day and pays at least for a coffee or a beer. What more can I expect in live ;)
And a happy new year to everyone!
+1
+1
+1
-2
Guess i'll have to wait till/if it goes live again...
+1
Download links should be up and running again.
+19
Cjbolland rated on 25 May 2012
+2
Chealion rated on 23 May 2012
+15
neeklamy rated on 30 Mar 2012
+17
Plotzenhots rated on 26 Feb 2012
mobass rated on 23 Jul 2011
RodolphoT rated on 17 Jun 2011
+40
Myka rated on 11 May 2011
+7
Dochoz rated on 11 Apr 2011
+7
Dochoz rated on 01 Apr 2011
Roro01 rated on 14 Jan 2011