[–] mcrittenden 14y ago ↗ Doesn't Chrome already store full-text history? [–] _grrr 14y ago ↗ It does, but it also has bookmarks and there are a number of bookmarking services that all improve on the basic browser offering in some way.When I first started Recawl Chrome's history search was somewhat unreliable/buggy although it has improved since then.I also find Chrome's history search hard to use.For example:You cann't constrain a search by time period and you cann't block sites from appearing in the results.Recawl suggests keywords related to your current search and it also learns to re-order results for search terms based on your previous click history.Your Recawl history is available to search remotely whereas Chrome's history is only local.
[–] _grrr 14y ago ↗ It does, but it also has bookmarks and there are a number of bookmarking services that all improve on the basic browser offering in some way.When I first started Recawl Chrome's history search was somewhat unreliable/buggy although it has improved since then.I also find Chrome's history search hard to use.For example:You cann't constrain a search by time period and you cann't block sites from appearing in the results.Recawl suggests keywords related to your current search and it also learns to re-order results for search terms based on your previous click history.Your Recawl history is available to search remotely whereas Chrome's history is only local.
2 comments
[ 6.8 ms ] story [ 19.1 ms ] threadWhen I first started Recawl Chrome's history search was somewhat unreliable/buggy although it has improved since then.
I also find Chrome's history search hard to use.
For example:
You cann't constrain a search by time period and you cann't block sites from appearing in the results.
Recawl suggests keywords related to your current search and it also learns to re-order results for search terms based on your previous click history.
Your Recawl history is available to search remotely whereas Chrome's history is only local.