[justsomehnguy]

> Like the search system falls apart if you have more than a few thousand messages in a folder

I'm in the inbox, I see an email with 'word' in the Subject in some of the most recent emails.

I type 'word' in the search box and TB finds some emails from the years ago.

It's even worse if it is 'word and some another word', in this case it doesn't even find anything.

It's like the developers... aren't dogfooding their own product?

Oh, yeah, we do now have TWO search boxes. Because that makes sense. And if you disable the topmost one, there is now 30px of wasted space you cannot reclaim. Because you definitely NEED that hamburger menu on the RIGHT side. On the desktop. On the 4k+ monitor. Riiight.

[dreamcompiler]

The two search boxes is bizarre. It feels like two rival programmers each wrote a half-baked search feature and rather than management telling them "Unify your two approaches", instead they said "Just throw them both in there and let the user figure out which one they want."

[1718627440]

There aren't two search boxes. There is a search box in/below the titlebar and a filter for the current folder.

[justsomehnguy]

And if there were two driving wheels in your car, a one for turning right and an other one for turning left you would say there is no two driving wheels in your car.

[1718627440]

A filter is different from searching. It only works on the current directory, it alters the view after it has been generated. You can also use it on a search.

Don't know about others, but I find the functionality useful and use them for different purposes. Searching is when I want to find random messages, where I don't know where or from when there are, the filter is for bulk processing and narrowing the current working set, beside the conversation level.

It is more like the steering wheel and choosing forward/reverse, sure both are for choosing the driving direction, but they operate at different levels and are used in different situations. I mean you could use the steering wheel for forward/backward if you want to. Using the gear to change the direction less than 180° is quite difficult, but not impossible.

[justsomehnguy]

You are just trying to confirm your beliefs.

Thing is, the 'filter' box can work as a filter and as a search box. It's even a simple heuristic if it should behave as a filter or switch to the search - if there is no result for the text entered in the textbox then switch to the search.

There is zero need to have two search boxes, it's just Mozilla wanted to copy-paste the idiotic solution of MS Office with a top-most search function. That's all.

[1718627440]

Ok?

Do you ever only use one of find and grep? I think they are very similar as the search and the filter bar. I mean you can replace find with tree | grep, not sure about the other way around, but it's probably also possible.

> There is zero need

I do, so it is not exactly zero and I would be annoyed to have them gone, because it is a huge time saver when handling thousands of messages.

> if there is no result for the text entered in the textbox then switch to the search

If the filter starts to draw in messages from other directories, that would be stupid and kind of defeats the point of having a filter in a first place. If you want that why don't you use the search?

> it's just Mozilla wanted to copy-paste the idiotic solution of MS Office with a top-most search function

I don't care where the search bar is placed and I think that functionality did already exist before the current UI, either via ^K or in a menu. I (maybe) do agree with you, in that I don't like putting widgets in window frames (that's for the WM) and prefer classical (CUA-like) menubars.

Can you please criticize the functionality itself? I can't comprehend why you don't see the point of a separate filter. Do you mostly keep messages in the INBOX?

Maybe my original word choice wasn't optimal, because you can consider filtering a subset of searching, but I do consider them to be different. If you rather you use a different terminology, that's fine, but I don't think it will change my point.