From the Windows help dialog:
Why did I get a message saying that a location can’t be included because it’s not indexed?
It means that the folder is stored on a network location that hasn’t been indexed. A network folder can only be included in a library if the content of the folder has been added to the search index. If the folder is already indexed on the device where it’s stored, you should be able to include it directly in the library.

If the network folder is not indexed, an easy way to index it is to make the folder available offline. This will create offline versions of the files in the folder and add these files to the search index on your computer. After you make a folder available offline, you can include it in a library.

When you make a network folder available offline, copies of all the files in that folder will be stored on your computer’s hard disk. Take this into consideration if the network folder contains a large number of files.

This was a much needed update, imho. I stopped using My Documents years ago because it stopped being useful, for reasons which MS seems to have finally addressed.

Your default folders are used. You’ll need to add any others you’re after.

Jim

I’m not aware of a good free option, unfortunately. Anyone have any ideas?

Looks like, for your NAS, the library’s not the best plan, unless you can spare the sync space.

nice explanation, thanks for review of the new Windows 7 feature.

I have additional question to you – which software do you use to tags your photos?

Thanks,
Peter

Each folder is named such as “Rio Dec 09″ “Paris July 05″ and other such names.

I like the “tag” feature of WIN7. In the example given by the author above, utilising the tag feature allows me to easilt find photos of my wife, whether the phot be in Rio or in Paris.

This is a feature that professionals will love.

However, most photos takes by the average person are quite bad. They cannot even be bothered to remove the bad photos from any album.

It means they cannot be bothered to tag phots in WIN 7.

Its a great feature but most people will not use it.
-

I’m not sure they compete exactly, but I wouldn’t be surprised to see some packages begin to take advantage of the Windows Libraries next time they have a major release… but only time will tell.

As for generic tagging… sadly no. There’s no capability for adding tags as such. The Libraries just take advantage of whatever tagging is there, and then only do that where standards for the tags exist within the files themselves.

BTW, does Win7 support generic tagging (for other files types not just photos and music)?

I have developed a software called LabelTop some time ago which lets you apply labels to your files (data and executable programs) and folders. Letting you view your data and programs (wherever it exists) in one location. It is available as a free download. Hope you enjoy using it

Regards

a)It delivers a stellar experience and amazing interface. The experience is amazing, while giving powerful tools to the end-users

b)Picasa delivers all photos (and video) from multiple locations without actually moving the media (much like Libraries) but this function/feature is only through Picasa, not through Explorer (which people use daily). Instead of having to navigate to Libraries>Pictures>Photos of “X” event, you simply power on Picasa and check out your masterpiece in the manner it deserves- a photo being viewed in a photo app, not some bland window. Instant access to what you want, when you want it- where you want it, and not in your way when you dont want it.

The concept of tagging isn’t new either. Vista’s photo managing software, while offering limited editing tools, did a decent job of organizing and managing photos through tags and dates. Just because they “can”, doesn’t mean Microsoft should take tags and management and shove it into Explorer. The end result is an abomination of usability. (Think trying to download a song through an explorer pane instead of using WMP..)

I love your comment Bob, Thanks!

Now Microsoft, in their attempt to be more Mac-like (either through fear or losing users to Apple, or their desire to be more user-friendly like Apple) are adopting this change to Libraries. Why? Does Microsoft really think that millions of users will be using external hard drives as their main storage medium? Most documents and media (at least, user favorites and regularly used media…) will be stored within Windows in designate folders. In their attempt to create live-updating SHORTCUTS (because that’s all it really is, an over hyped shortcut) and to pull multiple folders into even more links, they’ve lost the main point of making an enjoying experience. Personally, I would have all the pictures or “memories” as MSFT calls them, already in my Photos folder, erm, Library. Why then, would I (a regular user- like most other Windows users) want to use this “feature”.

Considering that Microsoft should be focusing on Live, they need to create some kind of amazing tie-in to online services to easily, and quickly tag and store photos online. Instead of having a Library contain “multiple locations”, it could include something infinitely better, think Mac OS iDisk like interface inside each individual Library. Now THAT makes sense for nearly all users, instead of photo-nuts that cant keep track of their folders.

This company cant seem to make things better for their users. They need to focus on online integration and better experiences. The average Windows user that doesn’t subscribe to Windows Blogs, the average Joe-six pack, won’t understand the true “power” of libraries, and will think this feature is cumbersome and annoying. Goodwill is something Microsoft cannot afford to lose with its base of users, and changing something like this is sure to erode an already stale experience.

One thing. If you just leave the libraries as they are, and don’t add any additional folders to any of them, they are almost identical to the folders in XP. Each library has a single default folder, and it behaves just like you just used that folder.