God, this is about the dumbest counter-argument I can possibly imagine.
Google is solving a completely different problem, but if you must go there, it frequently doesn’t work on a variety of subjects. Because you don’t know the right search terms, or because the appropriate search terms are too common and bring up everything but what you want. While Google frequently works, everyone encounters cases where it doesn’t “work fine” every day.
What’s more, you know what everyone uses once they finally do find a page? Bookmarks. Because no one likes having to search for a page unless they have to. Search is for cases where you have no other option. Search issues are why people ask for links.
Really?
First of all, “where to look for it” has rarely been a problem unless it’s an obscure program they have never used or rarely use.
Second, if it is something that don’t use frequently, they may not know the precise name. Program names are like brand names, they usually aren’t subject names like google search terms. The issue is most obvious when you’re looking at secondary files, like the utilities that ship with Windows, which the user may not know even exist. I’ve never used the “math input panel” under Accessories, for example. Without a visible folder system, I suspect that most users will never, ever be aware of it under Windows 8.
This is true of lots of commercial software. The Canon camera disk includes PhotoStitch, a utility for creating panoramas from multiple photos. Installing doesn’t create a desktop icon for it, and new camera owners are probably completely unaware of it. If you search for “panorama” it’s not going to show up.
This is the real bullshit. I’ve used search, it’s a simple name search, not a subject search, and it can’t be. This isn’t even theoretically possible without subject tags, and programs do not have those in our world.
Windows 7 and earlier had the search box, the feature isn’t new. Yet most users have never used it, and there’s a reason for that.
You guys sound exactly like the dweebs arguing for command-line interfaces 30 years ago. Because it’s worked so far for you and you can’t imagine that everyone isn’t exactly like you.