Re: I hate OTN now (and Metalink's searches)

pagesflames_at_usa.net (Dusan Bolek) wrote in message news:<1e8276d6.0403260008.1fc0f08f_at_posting.google.com>...
> Brian Peasland <dba_at_remove_spam.peasland.com> wrote in message news:<40634C73.1EB9807E_at_remove_spam.peasland.com>...
> > {rant on}
> >
> > Why oh why did OTN decide to bury the links to the docs way down in the
> > lower right hand corner of the page? It was hard enough to get people to
> > access the docs when it was an easy click from the top of the page. Now
> > I have to scroll down to the bottom, pull down a menu, and select an
> > item.
> >
> > {rant off}
> >
> > {rant on 2}
> >
> > Why oh why did Metalink decide to "improve" my searching by getting rid
> > of the quick search ability from the home page? Now I have to click on a
> > button to get to advanced searching.
> >
> > {rant off 2}

I was holding off until I was certain that I had gone through any learning curve, but since so many others are echoing my initial thoughts, "me too."

I'm wondering if they lost in transition a whole bunch of AI regarding what docs should be bought up by what queries. Did they even have such a thing? I always just assumed that's what the "did this article help solve your problem?" submission was for. And almost never submitted it.

>
> And another rant. Are others here satisfied with Metalink search
> engine? I would prefer Google search instead of Oracle's. In all cases
> when I try to find something in the beginning are useless docs,
> usually some patches for VMS or for Oracle Application. Strange is
> that when I looked into them from curiosity, there was not a single
> occurence of any of my words used in the search. :-(

My preference would be for regexp. I thought that was part of Oracle these days. It's predictable enough it can have front-ends for other styles if necessary. Google is written for the non-techie, not that there's anything wrong with that. I think google is at its peak and will decline with MS entering the space.

jg

--
@home.com is bogus.
When did google start allowing searches for SQL*Plus?  Dang, it didn't
used to.