I was thinking one search criteria that could be useful in filtering one's results is a size criteria. It would have a max & min size options. The default for each would be zero & unlimited (or unspecified.) Any thoughts dev's? If you can do the others it surely wouldn't be so hard to add this one. It should help to get more accurate results when a person has an idea of what they want & want to use the search energy concentrating upon that. I suppose it might also help to reduce net traffic.

that would be very good and it'd make limewire much easier to use. i'd probly be using that feature all the time that's a great ideas LOTR

__________________
You get what you give
(this goes for downloading two)

I just recently answered a post where someone was looking at being able to filter out results to obtain album size. With a size filter, they could filter out all those below say 30 MB.
If looking for movie material anything less than say 200 MB could be filtered out. For images, anything 'above' 500 KB filtered out, & documents also 'above' say 200 KB cut out, etc.

That feature would really do LimeWire good (and an also that, if I search for movies, the movie filter gets activated by default).

Acquisition has a minsize-slider. which works quite well.

__________________

-> put this banner into your own signature! <-
--
Erst im Spiel lebt der Mensch.
Nur ludantaj homoj vivas.
GnuFU.net - Gnutella For Users
Draketo.de - Shortstories, Poems, Music and strange Ideas.

Hi, how come it's not possible to search anything over or under a certain filesize?

Thanks

Matt

Because the users you are connected to don't share these kinds of files. I dld files averaging 3Gigs these days (albeit, not in LW, sorry), but can you imagine waiting for that kind of file to come?
... What if you have a modem (or a modem user at the other end)? That wouldn't just take ages...
Anyway, what I wanna say is that if anyone puts up a file larger that 1G and they are close (or connected) to you, then you should see that file in the search results (provided you searched for that, of course, duh)

__________________
iMac G4 OSX 10.3.9
RAM 256MB
LW 4.10.5 Basic
ADSL anything from 3 to 8Mbps/around 1024kbps

"Raise your can of Beer on high
And seal your fate forever
Our best years have passed us by
The Golden Age Of Leather"
-Blue Öyster Cult-

No, I mean like... show only files under 300kb or only files larger than 8mb

Aaaah, file-size filters!

__________________
iMac G4 OSX 10.3.9
RAM 256MB
LW 4.10.5 Basic
ADSL anything from 3 to 8Mbps/around 1024kbps

"Raise your can of Beer on high
And seal your fate forever
Our best years have passed us by
The Golden Age Of Leather"
-Blue Öyster Cult-

I put in a request for one a month/2 ago. My request can be seen here Why don't you post a request in the New Feature Requests The more the sound we make the more they'll listen with any luck!

For those who think that this thread doesn't make any sense know that I merged two threads (kept LOTR's as the original)

__________________
iMac G4 OSX 10.3.9
RAM 256MB
LW 4.10.5 Basic
ADSL anything from 3 to 8Mbps/around 1024kbps

"Raise your can of Beer on high
And seal your fate forever
Our best years have passed us by
The Golden Age Of Leather"
-Blue Öyster Cult-

Thanks Murasame b/c I think you agree with the logic as do a lot of other users. And to its practicality & applicability for many purposes.

I've been thinking this issue could be approached with a double-edged sword programming. ie: 1. in the same way that searches are categorised by Audio/Programs/Audio/Docs, etc. this can also be applied the same way. 2. But also, if there could be a filter applied to filter out what inconsistent results do come in. This would result in ideal search results.

For the positive point of GN & the personal user: 1. size search category/type/xtra condition 'would' reduce traffic. 2. Ideal results! Certainly more accurate than the present categories try to promise (so to speak!)

Don't tell us it's on the agenda for 5 yrs time or version 6.x or something. I believe this would not be so hard to implement. Even as a 'double-edged sword' with a search condition & filter as well. There's other p2p apps that have similar functionality. LW could potentially improve upon it in such a way it's actually good for the network. Jeeez it's been tooo many yrs since I've done programming, but this ... dare I say it ..... Why should it get given a low priority?

I selected one at random HERE (Click on link) out of the herd than runs roughly over the same terrain. Time to round them all up! lol

(hmm it seems my links has been corrupted. It now points to a now obsolete forum section & gnutella p2p program.)