Welcome to the MacNN Forums.

If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below.

You are here: MacNN Forums > Software - Troubleshooting and Discussion > Applications > I just don't *get* Quicksilver

I just don't *get* Quicksilver (Page 3)
Thread Tools
Mac Enthusiast
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: hamburg, germany
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Oct 13, 2007, 12:40 PM
 
Hmmm ... I installed Quicksilver two years ago and never used it to date.
This thread is very helpful as I was unaware of how it could be put to use.

Thanks a ton!
     
Baninated
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: In yer threads
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Oct 13, 2007, 01:42 PM
 
Originally Posted by Faust View Post
Hmmm ... I installed Quicksilver two years ago and never used it to date.
This thread is very helpful as I was unaware of how it could be put to use.

Thanks a ton!
Shill - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia



But seriously, if you are into launchers like QS, this is a good thread to get info about them. I wouldn't say I would send anyone you are trying to get to buy QS this link... but to those that already have.
     
Mac Elite
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: Newport News, VA USA
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Oct 13, 2007, 02:56 PM
 
Originally Posted by Kevin View Post
Oh software fanboys. They just can't STAND it when someone doesn't like the software they have feelings for. EVERYONE MUST SEE THE GREATNESS IN IT, OR ELSE!1
I have no emotional attachment to QS. It's a tool. Someone claimed "QS had no benefit over Spotlight. Period." I countered with an example of how that is not true. Sorry if you interpret that as fanboyism, but that's your problem, not mine.

Originally Posted by Kevin View Post
Again, Quicksilver is for certain people. It benefits them. Quicksilver with another group of people just isn't as impressive.
I don't think anyone here is debating that point.

Originally Posted by Kevin View Post
And the small amount of time it MAY save, it takes up in system resources and $$ of the application.
Ermmm...
Quicksilver is free.
     
Baninated
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: In yer threads
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Oct 13, 2007, 03:03 PM
 
Originally Posted by cybergoober View Post
I have no emotional attachment to QS. It's a tool. Someone claimed "QS had no benefit over Spotlight. Period." I countered with an example of how that is not true. Sorry if you interpret that as fanboyism, but that's your problem, not mine.
I don't think I even mentioned your name. And I think erik was speaking about strictly app launching. And it's true, the new spotlight is just as fast as QS. You basically took his comment about the launching having no benefit over Spotlight as QS having no benefit at all. IMHO. I could be wrong. Only erik knows.
I don't think anyone here is debating that point.
I think you need to re-read the thread. I even made a post where it quoted were people were claiming that if you don't benefit from it or whatever that you aren't a "power user" or "don't get it" Now by saying that, I am not saying YOU are one of these people. Dig?
Ermmm...
Quicksilver is free.
Really? Well that's a major plus for it. (I never used it long enough to find out)

And I am not slamming the application or it's author at all. Thumbs up on it/him/her/

Some of it's users however, are a bit zealous in nature. But you'll have that with any product. Not just QuickSilver.

I even said I could see how it would help someone that rarely used the mouse. Or didn't want to. But not everyone is that type of person. And to some of us, QS is just worthless.

That doesn't mean the application doesn't have it's use, or that it's crap. Obviously it's doing well. It has a dedicated following.

I just can't put it to any use in a way that it would benefit me. The features in it that WOULD benefit me, I either have a solution that is already built into the OS, or a third party one like PTH pasteboard that takes up less resources. But if PTH ever goes under, I might give it a look again. I know I'll never use Shadowclipboard again.
     
Clinically Insane
Join Date: Oct 2001
Location: San Diego, CA, USA
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Oct 13, 2007, 07:27 PM
 
Originally Posted by Horsepoo!!! View Post
No but the alternative is having TextMate in the Dock...where you only have to displace your mouse cursor towards the TextMate icon and click said icon. WOW!
Look, maybe you're just not a good typist, maybe I'm not an agile clicker — I don't know. All I know is that even with things that are permanently in my Dock, I can strike two keys faster than I can track down a moving icon in the Dock and click it.
Chuck
___
"Instead of either 'multi-talented' or 'multitalented' use 'bisexual'."
     
Banned
Join Date: Jun 2003
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Oct 13, 2007, 07:36 PM
 
Originally Posted by Chuckit View Post
Look, maybe you're just not a good typist, maybe I'm not an agile clicker — I don't know. All I know is that even with things that are permanently in my Dock, I can strike two keys faster than I can track down a moving icon in the Dock and click it.
I've refrained myself a long time from asking this question but...do you *really* have your hands on they keyboard *all* the time? 'cuz you make it sound like your hands are always on the keyboard and in perfect position to strike a few keys.

This is a serious question...I'm more of a mouse person...I am using a GUI after all and its name is Aqua. In general, it's much easier to navigate a GUI with a mouse than with a keyboard. I don't know what kind of work you do on your Mac or if it involves typing a lot but I spend almost 90% of my time with a hand on the mouse unless I'm actually typing something in a forum or in a word processor.

Do you navigate the web with keys too? When you replied to my post, did you option-tab your way to the 'quote' button within my post? Are you using Lynx? I find it very hard to believe that your hands are glued to the keyboard.
     
Clinically Insane
Join Date: Oct 2001
Location: San Diego, CA, USA
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Oct 13, 2007, 08:05 PM
 
Originally Posted by Horsepoo!!! View Post
I've refrained myself a long time from asking this question but...do you *really* have your hands on they keyboard *all* the time? 'cuz you make it sound like your hands are always on the keyboard and in perfect position to strike a few keys.
Well, I have one hand on the keyboard at all times. And when I'm using my PowerBook trackpad rather than a mouse, the keyboard is about an inch away from the other hand anyway. So I guess you could say I'm always at the keyboard.

Originally Posted by Horsepoo!!! View Post
This is a serious question...I'm more of a mouse person...I am using a GUI after all and its name is Aqua. In general, it's much easier to navigate a GUI with a mouse than with a keyboard.
That's true. But when there's an optimized route, the keyboard can make things faster. For instance, one of the things I do all the time is apply badges to things in Quark. Now, this should be easy, but in practice it basically means mousing from one end of the screen to the other like a damn ping-pong ball. But if I use the keyboard shortcut for switching tools, suddenly 80% of that travel time disappears. I hadn't even realized how much time I was wasting until it occurred to me to use that shortcut.
Chuck
___
"Instead of either 'multi-talented' or 'multitalented' use 'bisexual'."
     
Banned
Join Date: Jun 2003
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Oct 13, 2007, 08:27 PM
 
Originally Posted by Chuckit View Post
Well, I have one hand on the keyboard at all times. And when I'm using my PowerBook trackpad rather than a mouse, the keyboard is about an inch away from the other hand anyway. So I guess you could say I'm always at the keyboard.
Fair enough. I'd be on the keyboard more often too if I had to use a trackpad.

That's true. But when there's an optimized route, the keyboard can make things faster. For instance, one of the things I do all the time is apply badges to things in Quark. Now, this should be easy, but in practice it basically means mousing from one end of the screen to the other like a damn ping-pong ball. But if I use the keyboard shortcut for switching tools, suddenly 80% of that travel time disappears. I hadn't even realized how much time I was wasting until it occurred to me to use that shortcut.
I agree...things that require a lot of repetition almost undoubtedly require keyboard shortcuts.
     
Baninated
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: In yer threads
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Oct 14, 2007, 08:28 AM
 
Yeah ... um I could see how this application would be great for a laptop user... I'd not want to use the trackpad all that much either. Then again I'd just buy a mouse for it. But yeah I can see how it could come in handy with a powerbook.
     
Senior User
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: Vancouver, BC
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Oct 14, 2007, 05:26 PM
 
Originally Posted by Kevin View Post
Oh software fanboys. They just can't STAND it when someone doesn't like the software they have feelings for. EVERYONE MUST SEE THE GREATNESS IN IT, OR ELSE!1
I haven't seen hardly any "fanboys" in this thread at all. It's a tool. Some people like it, some people don't.

If someone says something as a fact, and that statement is not fact (whether in full or in part), someone else will probably correct the statement. That's what happens on uh... discussion forums. The people that will most likely end up bringing the true facts to the discussion are also most likely to be those same people that have the most experience using the app in discussion. The people with the most experience using the app in discussion most likely use the app so much because it improves or aids their workflow in some way. If the app in discussion improves or aids their workflow in some way, they most likely like the app. I'm not sure why this is such an obtuse concept for some people to grasp.

Originally Posted by Kevin View Post
I've debunked EVERY statement anyone has made to me as to how QS would make MY computer using experience faster. I've just downloaded it again for the 4th time to again try it out.
Why would you do that? If you don't like it, don't use it. Why anyone would care about your computer using experience is beyond me.

Originally Posted by Kevin View Post
And the small amount of time it MAY save, it takes up in ... $$ of the application.
Ignorance is no excuse for idiocy.

Originally Posted by Kevin View Post
To those that have an emotional attachment to this application, It will ALWAYS constantly and forever be faster than spotlight.
That's a pretty dumb statement.

Originally Posted by Kevin View Post
Regardless that most of the people that say it is, probably haven't even used Leopard. And if it IS faster, it's in the .000039th of a second times here.
I've been on Leopard as my main OS for almost 3 months. During that three months I've had plenty of opportunity to extensively test many "launcher" apps. For "app launching" alone, Quicksilver is faster at finding the correct result and launching the app than Spotlight is, both through the menubar and the Finder. That has nothing to do with emotional attachment for anyone, its just a fact. You can scream all day long about how the ocean is red, but really, it just makes you look like a moron.

Please note that I'm only referring to the application, not the user using the application. Whether a user, or a user's workflow, is faster or not using Spotlight over Quicksilver or vice-versa is a substantially personal and unique comparison, and one that's probably more conducive to a poll, not a argument.

For the OP, if you don't "get" Quicksilver, then don't use it. If you're moved by the following it has and how many people claim it improves their workflow, enough so that it pushes you to question why it doesn't for you, then take some time learning it, investigating it, reading how others use it and trying it out. But in the end, its still personal preference. If it doesn't work for you, then it doesn't work for you. That's ok, it doesn't make you a bad computer user or anything.
     
Posting Junkie
Join Date: May 2001
Location: Brisbane, Australia
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Oct 14, 2007, 08:19 PM
 
Originally Posted by Fusion View Post
Leopard spotlight is still quite a bit slower than Quicksilver.
Not true. Spotlight in Leopard is instantaneous on all my macs.

[ fb ] [ flickr ] [] [scl] [ last ] [ plaxo ]
     
Moderator Emeritus
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: Copenhagen
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Oct 14, 2007, 09:21 PM
 
Originally Posted by - - e r i k - - View Post
Slightly better meaning instantaneous?

QS has no benefits over Leopard Spotlight. Period.
I haven’t tried Leopard, so I can’t comment on the relative speeds of Spotlight vs. Quicksilver. For me, though, in Tiger, Quicksilver is aeons faster, for the simple reason that I have an external hard drive always plugged in. If that hard drive has gone to sleep and I search for something in Spotlight, the external hard drive has to wake up before any search results (including apps, though they’re all on the internal drive) appear. If this has been changed in Leopard, great. If not, Quicksilver will still be faster for me.

Plus, unless they’ve drastically changed the layout of Spotlight, I’m not able to open several apps at the same time with it, am I? If I want to open, say, Photoshop, Illustrator, and Thunderbird at the same time, I type “Command - PH - comma - IL - comma - TH - enter”. Takes about four seconds all in all. I can’t do that faster in Spotlight, and I can’t do it faster by using the mouse, either.

I've refrained myself a long time from asking this question but...do you *really* have your hands on they keyboard *all* the time? 'cuz you make it sound like your hands are always on the keyboard and in perfect position to strike a few keys.
Yup, I do. I only use the mouse when I really have to (like for scrolling—and even then, I find myself occasionally just using the arrow keys or page-up and page-down keys—or navigating to links, though I tab my way whenever possible/feasible). I’m used to working on a laptop after having been without a desktop machine for six years, so I’m used to being able to scroll by moving my hand only an inch or two downwards; now I have to move my entire arm a foot to the right to get to the mouse and the scrolling, and it annoys me.

Using keystroke combos is just so much faster for me, in all instances I can think of.

Quicksilver also handles items with more than one word in the name better. For example, if I have a bunch of OS X created screenshots (Picture 1, Picture 2, etc.) in a folder buried somewhere on my drive, I can get to them with Quicksilver by invoking QS then typing "P1", "P2", etc. The same is just not true for Spotlight.
Very good point. Quicksilver searches the entire name for combinations of letters—in Spotlight, if you misspell something in the beginning of the word, it just doesn’t find anything.

You see, Spotlight and Quicksilver work exactly the same way...they have the same key-combo to invoke the utility (cmd-spacebar) and then you can start typing the name of the app and hit return. There's no clicking involved at all if you don't feel like clicking.
That’s not entirely true (again, in Tiger): doing a Spotlight search and hitting return will open the ‘Show all results’ window; you have to hit Cmd-Enter for the first result on the list. Small difference, but still half a second used in moving your hand that little bit. (And just because I’m a pedant )

And—completely off-topic—the Cmd-Space thing is retarded. That combo’s supposed to be reserved for switching to last used keyboard layout, not invoking Spotlight. The fact that they couldn’t come up with a different one to be default is just dumb. I’ve had my Spotlight hotkey set to F1, which works fine, for ages now.

Look, maybe you're just not a good typist, maybe I'm not an agile clicker — I don't know. All I know is that even with things that are permanently in my Dock, I can strike two keys faster than I can track down a moving icon in the Dock and click it.
Didn’t you kill your Dock properly before putting it on the screen? My Dock icons tend to stay relatively still—they certainly don’t go to tea-parties with each other or anything like that!
     
Posting Junkie
Join Date: May 2001
Location: Brisbane, Australia
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Oct 14, 2007, 10:34 PM
 
Originally Posted by Oisín View Post
I haven’t tried Leopard, so I can’t comment on the relative speeds of Spotlight vs. Quicksilver. For me, though, in Tiger, Quicksilver is aeons faster, for the simple reason that I have an external hard drive always plugged in. If that hard drive has gone to sleep and I search for something in Spotlight, the external hard drive has to wake up before any search results (including apps, though they’re all on the internal drive) appear. If this has been changed in Leopard, great. If not, Quicksilver will still be faster for me.
Yes. I have two internal harddrives, three external and one network drive shared over AirPort. That is about 5.5TB of data, and search is still instantaneous.

Originally Posted by Oisín View Post
Plus, unless they’ve drastically changed the layout of Spotlight, I’m not able to open several apps at the same time with it, am I? If I want to open, say, Photoshop, Illustrator, and Thunderbird at the same time, I type “Command - PH - comma - IL - comma - TH - enter”. Takes about four seconds all in all. I can’t do that faster in Spotlight, and I can’t do it faster by using the mouse, either.
OK, so that's admittedly faster to DO in QS than Spotlight. The question however is why you would do that. Launching three applications at once will slow down opening of all of them. Plus you can't really use more than one of them at the time either

But even still that would be faster just clicking the icons in the dock. I keep my commonly used applications grouped together. So if I want to launch the CS apps together, say Illustrator and Indesign they are right next to each other. Same with the Final Cut Studio apps.

Originally Posted by Oisín View Post
That’s not entirely true (again, in Tiger): doing a Spotlight search and hitting return will open the ‘Show all results’ window; you have to hit Cmd-Enter for the first result on the list. Small difference, but still half a second used in moving your hand that little bit. (And just because I’m a pedant )

And—completely off-topic—the Cmd-Space thing is retarded. That combo’s supposed to be reserved for switching to last used keyboard layout, not invoking Spotlight. The fact that they couldn’t come up with a different one to be default is just dumb. I’ve had my Spotlight hotkey set to F1, which works fine, for ages now.
In Leopard the default keyboard combination changed to ctrl-space. However, I changed it back to cmd-space straight away, because that's what I am used to. Even being a Norwegian in Australia and sharing my computer with my Australian fiancé I don't need to change keyboard layouts that often to let it hog the easiest keyboard command there is.

And yes, enter alone will give you the first result in Leopard.

[ fb ] [ flickr ] [] [scl] [ last ] [ plaxo ]
     
Baninated
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: In yer threads
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Oct 14, 2007, 11:34 PM
 
Originally Posted by Fusion View Post
I haven't seen hardly any "fanboys" in this thread at all.
Hardly meaning there are some. So basically you are agreeing with me.
It's a tool. Some people like it, some people don't.
Agreed. Some people find it useful, others it does nothing for.
If someone says something as a fact, and that statement is not fact (whether in full or in part), someone else will probably correct the statement. That's what happens on uh... discussion forums. The people that will most likely end up bringing the true facts to the discussion are also most likely to be those same people that have the most experience using the app in discussion.
When these people tell me that QS will make my production and take up less time etc, they aren't stating facts. They are stating opinion. Esp when I've debunked every instance of them showing me how it will make my life easier. How I already have a solution for what QS does. Or if I don't, I don't need it.
The people with the most experience using the app in discussion most likely use the app so much because it improves or aids their workflow in some way. If the app in discussion improves or aids their workflow in some way, they most likely like the app. I'm not sure why this is such an obtuse concept for some people to grasp.
No one here I don't believe, at least not me, who you are replying to has ever said it didn't help some people. As a matter of fact I just got through saying I could see how a laptop user would LOVE it. I've just stated it does nothing for ME. Why that is such an obtuse concept for some people to grasp is beyond me.
Why would you do that? If you don't like it, don't use it.
Well with each update it just might have something useful in it for me. I am open minded. Just because I don't like a version of the application so far, doesn't mean I wont like any update that follows it.
Why anyone would care about your computer using experience is beyond me.
Again, we are in an agreement here. Why does anyone care I don't like QS?
Ignorance is no excuse for idiocy.
You are a little behind in the conversation. That has already been cleared up. And the ad-hominem silliness isn't needed. Why would an application make someone react to someone post in such a hostile way?
That's a pretty dumb statement.
No, no it's not. This forum is FULL of people that have emotional attachments to software. And anyone that says anything negative about it, get the overly defensive treatment like you just said something about their mother. Like you are doing now. You say why does anyone care about my computer using experience, yet you replied to a post about that very same thing. So ask yourself. Why do you care? Why do you go out of your way to make personal jabs at people that say they have no use for a piece of software?
I've been on Leopard as my main OS for almost 3 months. During that three months I've had plenty of opportunity to extensively test many "launcher" apps. For "app launching" alone, Quicksilver is faster at finding the correct result and launching the app than Spotlight is, both through the menubar and the Finder. That has nothing to do with emotional attachment for anyone, its just a fact. You can scream all day long about how the ocean is red, but really, it just makes you look like a moron.
You've not read any of my posts if this is how you are replying to me. I've said that most of the apps I use are 24/7 constantly loaded at work. I don't do much app launching at all. And the apps I do launch are in my doc. And since I have my hand on my mouse most of the time clicking on the dock icon is in no way any slower than going up and launching an app in QS. And even if it WAS slower it would be like .00039 of a second. Not enough to make that big of a difference. Though fanboys want to act like it does. BTW I only use spotlight to FIND stuff. Not launch applications. Again, my applications usually stay open 24/7. I use all of them constantly. I maybe launch them once a day tops.
Please note that I'm only referring to the application, not the user using the application. Whether a user, or a user's workflow, is faster or not using Spotlight over Quicksilver or vice-versa is a substantially personal and unique comparison, and one that's probably more conducive to a poll, not a argument.
I think the user was referring to Leopard's spotlight too BTW.
For the OP, if you don't "get" Quicksilver, then don't use it. If you're moved by the following it has and how many people claim it improves their workflow, enough so that it pushes you to question why it doesn't for you, then take some time learning it, investigating it, reading how others use it and trying it out. But in the end, its still personal preference. If it doesn't work for you, then it doesn't work for you. That's ok, it doesn't make you a bad computer user or anything.
And that is exactly what I am saying. It helps some people with the way they work. While others it wont do diddly for. Except take up needed resources. Esp for graphics extensive jobs.

Lets hope when you reply to this, if you do that is, you come to it in a different way than you did the last time. Because if you were trying to prove that QS fans don't act fanboyish or don't get hostile, you didn't do a very good job of it.

Again, it's just a piece of software. Me not having any use for it doesn't make me any less of a person. I never once said the software was crap. Or that people didn't have a use for it.
     
Grizzled Veteran
Join Date: Mar 2004
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Oct 15, 2007, 01:51 AM
 
AppleInsider [p]review of Leopard saw fit to mention QuickSilver:
(3rd paragraph) Road to Leopard: The Dock :: Application Stack.

I've no dog in this fight. QuickSilver is excellent, but I don't use it.

[yet?]
-HI-
     
Senior User
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: Vancouver, BC
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Oct 15, 2007, 02:25 AM
 
Originally Posted by Kevin View Post
When these people tell me that QS will make my production and take up less time etc, they aren't stating facts. They are stating opinion. Esp when I've debunked every instance of them showing me how it will make my life easier. How I already have a solution for what QS does. Or if I don't, I don't need it.
I guess, if that's the way your read the thread. I read it differently.

Originally Posted by Kevin View Post
You are a little behind in the conversation. That has already been cleared up. And the ad-hominem silliness isn't needed. Why would an application make someone react to someone post in such a hostile way?
I'm not behind in the conversation. And I'm not hostile. You have almost the most (if not the most) posts in this thread and you haven't even used the app enough to know its free. That's fairly idiotic.

Originally Posted by Kevin View Post
No, no it's not.
Yes it is. If you truly believe that nonsense, then have the fortitude or at least the sense to put effort forward and back it up. Find a so called "Quicksilver fanboy" who has replied in this thread who is willing to state that if someone scientifically proved to them that Spotlight returned results faster than Quicksilver, they would still wholeheartedly believe Quicksilver was faster.

Originally Posted by Kevin View Post
This forum is FULL of people that have emotional attachments to software. And anyone that says anything negative about it, get the overly defensive treatment like you just said something about their mother.
I've never seen anyone react that way to a negative statement about software. I've seen some strange reactions, but never synonymous with a reaction as if someone had insulted their mother. I'm sure it has happened before, but as far as the "forum being FULL of it" - sounds like quite the exaggeration.

Originally Posted by Kevin View Post
Like you are doing now.
No. If someone said something about my mother, I'd most likely PM them and inform them that she's dead and they must have me confused with someone else. Nevertheless, it'd be a different reaction.

Originally Posted by Kevin View Post
You say why does anyone care about my computer using experience, yet you replied to a post about that very same thing. So ask yourself. Why do you care? Why do you go out of your way to make personal jabs at people that say they have no use for a piece of software?
I don't care about your computer using experience. My reply had nothing to do with a preference of whether you use Quicksilver or not... because I don't have one.

The "personal jabs" have nothing to do with whether you use Quicksilver or not. They have to do with your idiotic statements. You could be a faithful Quicksilver user, make the same statements, and I'd still declare them moronic.

Originally Posted by Kevin View Post
You've not read any of my posts
Unfortunately I have. By in large, they were a waste of time.

Originally Posted by Kevin View Post
I think the user was referring to Leopard's spotlight too BTW.
I don't really understand what you are saying here. I also don't understand how it has any relevance to the quoted section.

Originally Posted by Kevin View Post
Lets hope when you reply to this, if you do that is, you come to it in a different way than you did the last time. Because if you were trying to prove that QS fans don't act fanboyish or don't get hostile, you didn't do a very good job of it.
I wasn't trying to prove anything. Proving usually includes evidence of which I have provided none (nor have you) and wouldn't take the time to do so. I was simply stating my observations and opinions... the kind of thing you do on a discussion forum.

Originally Posted by Kevin View Post
Again, it's just a piece of software. Me not having any use for it doesn't make me any less of a person.
     
Baninated
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: In yer threads
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Oct 15, 2007, 06:40 AM
 
Originally Posted by Fusion View Post
I guess, if that's the way your read the thread. I read it differently.
The difference? I gave examples of such a thing happening. More than once.
I'm not behind in the conversation. And I'm not hostile.
If you aren't behind on the conversation you'd have never posted that ad-hominem "Ignorance is no excuse for idiocy." When the price has already been discussed with me since before you made that post. So you either 1. Were behind in the covo. or 2. Knew I knew what was going on, and decided to be pretentiously condescending anyhow.
You have almost the most (if not the most) posts in this thread and you haven't even used the app enough to know its free. That's fairly idiotic.
No, that would what I would call a straw-man argument. "SInce you didn't know it was free, your take on it couldn't be substantial !!!" One has nothing to do with each other. And if you'd have read my posts before, and it's becoming obvious you have not, you'd see that I didn't USE IT for more than a few days each time. And since I wasn't going to buy it I had no reason to check the cost of the product. Dig? Thats the second time I've mentioned that. And if you'd have read the first time I said it, you'd not have to repeat what has already been discussed. Unless of course that's all you have...
Yes it is. If you truly believe that nonsense, then have the fortitude or at least the sense to put effort forward and back it up. Find a so called "Quicksilver fanboy" who has replied in this thread who is willing to state that if someone scientifically proved to them that Spotlight returned results faster than Quicksilver, they would still wholeheartedly believe Quicksilver was faster.
Do you read anything I said? (obviously you just snipped my quote out of context, so I can only think thats the only part you read. 1. I said people were referring to Spotlight for Leopard. Prove to me QS is faster than Spotlight in Leopard. 2. I wasn't the one that was saying it was. Others that have used BOTH were. 3. I don't use Spotlight to launch ANY apps. And I have already showed in my posts above when someone asked me basically the same question. Again, you are not following along.
I've never seen anyone react that way to a negative statement about software. I've seen some strange reactions, but never synonymous with a reaction as if someone had insulted their mother. I'm sure it has happened before, but as far as the "forum being FULL of it" - sounds like quite the exaggeration.
Nope it's not. All one has to do is create a thread bashing software and you'll get a slew of em. Try it if you don't believe me. This thread is a good example.
No. If someone said something about my mother, I'd most likely PM them and inform them that she's dead and they must have me confused with someone else. Nevertheless, it'd be a different reaction.
I wasn't referring to yours specifically.
I don't care about your computer using experience. My reply had nothing to do with a preference of whether you use Quicksilver or not... because I don't have one.
Well then you are arguing with me about something I am simply not arguing about. I am speaking about MY experiences with it. So if you are replying to me you are either 1. Just replying to be replying or 2. Care
The "personal jabs" have nothing to do with whether you use Quicksilver or not. They have to do with your idiotic statements. You could be a faithful Quicksilver user, make the same statements, and I'd still declare them moronic.
I've made no untruthful or idiotic statements. I suggest in the future that instead of making baseless accusations and character assassinations like you have, that you instead back your accusations up. And this I am going to love to watch. But instead what you will probably do, is keep quoting what I say out of context and keep replying to it as if that is all I said on the matter. Again, I suggest you go read-read the thread again.
Unfortunately I have. By in large, they were a waste of time.
Let me rephrase that. You might have read them. But by viewing your questions to me, you've clearly let it go in one ear and out the other. Because you've boughten up things I've already answered/debunked as if I haven't.
I don't really understand what you are saying here. I also don't understand how it has any relevance to the quoted section.
You keep mentioning just Spotlight in general. Those that were saying, for the most part that Spotlight was just as fast, were referring to Leopard. Now, thats the 3rd time I've said this.
I wasn't trying to prove anything.
Then what are you doing by making these posts?
Proving usually includes evidence of which I have provided none
Which we agree here.
and wouldn't take the time to do so. I was simply stating my observations and opinions... the kind of thing you do on a discussion forum.
Cept you treat your thoughts and opinions as personal facts without backing them up.

See look, I've replied to everything you've said. Not just select bits that I thought I could reply to, and ignore the other bits like you did to me. Again, the rants you are ranting about are NOT, I repeat NOT my argument.

So when you continue to act as if it were, it makes people think you didn't spend enough time doing your homework.

For the last time. I rarely even launch any apps more than once a day. When I do, all the apps I launch are in my doc. That one time of day isn't going to help or make my production any faster.

As far as the other features in QS, I either have a built into the OS replacement, or another 3rd party utility that does it with less footprint. So I have no need for QS.


I put that last part in bold hoping you'd REALLY read it.
     
Baninated
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: In yer threads
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Oct 15, 2007, 06:47 AM
 
Originally Posted by Hal Itosis View Post
AppleInsider [p]review of Leopard saw fit to mention QuickSilver:
(3rd paragraph) Road to Leopard: The Dock :: Application Stack.

I've no dog in this fight. QuickSilver is excellent, but I don't use it.

[yet?]

Indeed it did.

"Spotlight is now a Quicksilver-like, fast app launcher as well."

Just like those have been saying. Just like Fusion keeps denying.
     
Senior User
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: Vancouver, BC
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Oct 15, 2007, 08:52 PM
 
Originally Posted by Kevin View Post
The difference? I gave examples of such a thing happening. More than once.
Let me clarify... I read "your examples" differently.

Originally Posted by Kevin View Post
If you aren't behind on the conversation you'd have never posted that ad-hominem "Ignorance is no excuse for idiocy."
But I wasn't... and I still posted it... wow, that must make you either really angry or confused?

Originally Posted by Kevin View Post
When the price has already been discussed with me since before you made that post. So you either 1. Were behind in the covo. or 2. Knew I knew what was going on, and decided to be pretentiously condescending anyhow.
Or how about "3. Decided to bring attention to the fact that the most 'vocal' user in this thread that's so upset about 'software fanboys' hasn't even tried it long enough to know obvious characteristics of the app

Originally Posted by Kevin View Post
No, that would what I would call a straw-man argument. "SInce you didn't know it was free, your take on it couldn't be substantial !!!" One has nothing to do with each other.
Again, we see things differently. I see them as very linked. In my opinion, this is just about the same as someone going off about how much they hate Apple computers because they are so expensive ... only later to find that individual has neither priced a comparable machine that's cheaper nor tried a Mac for longer than 10 minutes at the Apple Store.

Originally Posted by Kevin View Post
And if you'd have read my posts before, and it's becoming obvious you have not, you'd see that I didn't USE IT for more than a few days each time.
That... would be my point.

Originally Posted by Kevin View Post
And since I wasn't going to buy it I had no reason to check the cost of the product. Dig?
Again... my point.

Originally Posted by Kevin View Post
Thats the second time I've mentioned that. And if you'd have read the first time I said it, you'd not have to repeat what has already been discussed.
But I did, and it appears to have turned your world upside down. Are you going to be okay?

Originally Posted by Kevin View Post
Unless of course that's all you have...

Do you read anything I said? (obviously you just snipped my quote out of context, so I can only think thats the only part you read.
You keep bringing this up. I guess that's your way out of looking like an idiot maybe? Paraphrased:

1. Someone said QS is faster than Spotlight.
2. Someone else claimed its not, their performance is identical (both instantaneous).
3. You claimed "It doesn't matter which one's really faster, the QS fanboys will always believe QS is faster even if its not"
4. I said "That's a dumb statement"
5. You said its not.
6. I said it is, but I'd be more than happy to retract that if you could show me some proof of these mystical fanboy people who disregard scientific evidence and go around believing lies based on their predisposition for a certain title of software.

Originally Posted by Kevin View Post
1. I said people were referring to Spotlight for Leopard. Prove to me QS is faster than Spotlight in Leopard.
I don't have the time nor resources to divulge into a full-out benchmarking test. If I did, I'm not sure I'd care enough to do it. They are both fairly accessible tools and anyone who is interested can just do it themselves and see the results. Although a discussion on that topic would make this entire thread more intelligent.

Regardless, that's not the point you were making. The point you were making was that "no matter which one as faster, the QS fanboys will always believe that QS is faster."

Originally Posted by Kevin View Post
2. I wasn't the one that was saying it was. Others that have used BOTH were.
I see that. IIRC I was one of those "others."

Originally Posted by Kevin View Post
3. I don't use Spotlight to launch ANY apps. And I have already showed in my posts above when someone asked me basically the same question. Again, you are not following along.
Okay, let me try to make this clear... I don't care about your personal experience with QS. I'm pretty sure nobody does since you admitted that you've never used it more than a few days and only a few times. I'm not responding to your personal experience with the app. I'm responding to your idiotic statements about software fanboys.

Originally Posted by Kevin View Post
Nope it's not. All one has to do is create a thread bashing software and you'll get a slew of em. Try it if you don't believe me. This thread is a good example.
I guess this is another example of where we read the thread differently. I still haven't seen any fanboys raging on as if you've insulted their mother in this thread... especially not a "slew" of them.

Originally Posted by Kevin View Post
I wasn't referring to yours specifically.
Ok, I guess I wasn't following you on this one. I (incorrectly I guess) assumed that when you said:

"And anyone that says anything negative about it, get the overly defensive treatment like you just said something about their mother. Like you are doing now."

You were referring to me. Since a) you were quoting me and b) you used the pronoun "you." Who was the "you" pronoun specifically pointing to?

Originally Posted by Kevin View Post
Well then you are arguing with me about something I am simply not arguing about.
That's fine.

Originally Posted by Kevin View Post
I am speaking about MY experiences with it.
But you're not just speaking about your experiences with it. You are speaking about your experiences with it and speaking some nonsense about software fanboys, blah blah blah. Unless you truly believe that the only thing you've discussed in this thread is your own personal experience with QS, then maybe you're the one that hasn't been reading your posts?

Originally Posted by Kevin View Post
So if you are replying to me you are either 1. Just replying to be replying
Bingo

Originally Posted by Kevin View Post
or 2. Care
Nope.

Originally Posted by Kevin View Post
I've made no untruthful or idiotic statements.
Again, we disagree here. I've seen quite a few of them. Here is one example:

"To those that have an emotional attachment to this application, It will ALWAYS constantly and forever be faster than spotlight."

Originally Posted by Kevin View Post
I suggest in the future that instead of making baseless accusations and character assassinations like you have, that you instead back your accusations up.
From seeing your other posts around this forum I personally wouldn't take *any* advice from you on conversation, social interaction, intelligent arguments or any other related subject.

Originally Posted by Kevin View Post
And this I am going to love to watch. But instead what you will probably do, is keep quoting what I say out of context and keep replying to it as if that is all I said on the matter.
Do I really need to quote every post you've made on this thread when replying to something you've said? When people are having a conversation with you, are they only allowed to address everything you've said in one fell swoop and not reply to individual statements? If that's the case, you may not be very happy with the way discussion forum conversations go, as that is common practice.

As far as context, I'm not sure how I could give it any more... this is all in the same thread.

Originally Posted by Kevin View Post
Again, I suggest you go read-read the thread again.
Okay, what if I read it 62 times and still disagree with almost everything you say and still find your posts nonsense? Will I need to read it again... until I agree with you? You know, like those people that "EVERYONE MUST ..., OR ELSE!1"

Originally Posted by Kevin View Post
Let me rephrase that. You might have read them.
Wait, first you are so sure that I haven't, but now I "might" have. I'll save you the suspense... I did.

Originally Posted by Kevin View Post
But by viewing your questions to me, you've clearly let it go in one ear and out the other.
Clear to you, I see. Be careful, that's starting to sound like that "fanboy" talk that you are so against. You know the, "you must agree with me, and if you don't, you obviously didn't read or didn't understand what I was saying." You're leaving out the option of "you read everything I said, understood it completely an still disagreed with it."

Originally Posted by Kevin View Post
Because you've boughten up things I've already answered/debunked as if I haven't.
I haven't stated that you haven't answered/debunked something.

Originally Posted by Kevin View Post
You keep mentioning just Spotlight in general. Those that were saying, for the most part that Spotlight was just as fast, were referring to Leopard. Now, thats the 3rd time I've said this.
This is a great example of why I find your posts so unintelligent. Paraphrased:

1. Me: "On Tiger, the difference is ridiculous. On Leopard..."
2. Me: "Leopard spotlight is..."
3. You: "You keep mentioning just Spotlight in general ... referring to Leopard, thats the 3rd time..."

I'm not sure how much clearer I can be. Let me try...

Tiger's version of Spotlight, specifically the menu bar extra, is slow. In fact it's so much slower than QS at launching apps, discussing which one is faster seems silly. It also will be outdated in less than a month. Leopard's version of Spotlight, specifically the menu extra and specifically in the last 4 developer builds of the beta, is much much faster than Tiger's version. It is still however, slower than Quicksilver for "app launching."

Originally Posted by Kevin View Post
Then what are you doing by making these posts?
I think I've already covered that.

Originally Posted by Kevin View Post
Which we agree here.

Cept you treat your thoughts and opinions as personal facts without backing them up.
Something you do as well. That's the nature of a discussion forum; People discuss things informally.

Originally Posted by Kevin View Post
See look, I've replied to everything you've said. Not just select bits that I thought I could reply to, and ignore the other bits like you did to me.
Okay, I'm sorry if I hurt your feelings by ignoring bits. The "bits" I didn't reply to in the previous post were "bits" I had nothing to say about. I've made sure to quote every single letter of text in this post for you.

Again, the rants you are ranting about are NOT, I repeat NOT my argument.

Again paraphrasing:

1. You: "QS fanboys will..."
2. Me: "Who? No they won't..."
3. You: "I never said that..."

Originally Posted by Kevin View Post
So when you continue to act as if it were, it makes people think you didn't spend enough time doing your homework.
I haven't done homework for a very very long time. I'll freely admit that. That's something I earned I think by getting a degree and I'm not so sure its relevant in any way to this discussion.

I continue to "act as if it were" because it was. You are now saying you never said what you said... huh?

Originally Posted by Kevin View Post
For the last time. I rarely even launch any apps more than once a day. When I do, all the apps I launch are in my doc. That one time of day isn't going to help or make my production any faster.

As far as the other features in QS, I either have a built into the OS replacement, or another 3rd party utility that does it with less footprint. So I have no need for QS.
Okay, I'm starting to think that you feel I don't understand your personal experience of QS. For the record, being as clear as I can be, this is what I wholeheartidly believe is your personal experience with QS:

You rarely launch any apps more than once a day. When you do, all the apps you launch are in your doc. That one time of day isn't gong to help or make your production any faster.

As far as other features in QS, you either have a built into the OS replacement, or another 3rd party utility that does it with less footprint. So you have no need for QS.

Originally Posted by Kevin View Post
I put that last part in bold hoping you'd REALLY read it.
I REALLY did, just as I did all the other times you mentioned it. I'm not sure why you'd keep going on and on about your personal experience with it replying to me when I've stated already I don't care... but ok.

Let me try to some up everything:

1. Leopard's Spotlight is slower at "app launching" than Quicksilver is.
2. You've posted your personal experience with Quicksilver, but it's not terribly relevant to anyone trying to "get Quicksilver" as you've not used it very long since you have no need for it.
3. Your statements about QS fanboys are false, exaggerated, unintelligent and nonsensical.

Originally Posted by Kevin View Post
Indeed it did.
"Spotlight is now a Quicksilver-like, fast app launcher as well."
Just like those have been saying. Just like Fusion keeps denying.
I've never denied that. Again with your moronic statements, you just can't help it can you?

What I've denied: Leopard's Spotlight menu extra is the same speed or faster than Quicksilver.

What I haven't denied: Leopard's Spotlight has had some major speed improvements, so much so that people previously frustrated with the speed of Tiger's version should reconsider using it again. It makes a fantastic, well executed, elegant and fast app launcher.
( Last edited by Fusion; Oct 15, 2007 at 09:12 PM. Reason: Replying to more nonsense.)
     
cgc
Professional Poster
Join Date: Mar 2003
Location: Down by the river
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Oct 15, 2007, 09:35 PM
 
Wow...this thread reminds me of the discussions of command-line versus GUI way back in the 80's/90's. I personally use LaunchBar which is very similar to QuickSilver but I don't care what anyone else uses. I use LB so I don't have to think or navigate to find a program I want to use; I press the hotkey and type the first two or three characters of the program and it opens. I like it, you may not, that's ok.
     
Clinically Insane
Join Date: Oct 2001
Location: San Diego, CA, USA
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Oct 15, 2007, 09:42 PM
 
Originally Posted by cgc View Post
Wow...this thread reminds me of the discussions of command-line versus GUI way back in the 80's/90's.
That's what I was thinking. But personally, I view QuickSilver as much much more reminiscent of keyboard shortcuts (which have been a Mac staple all along) than a command line. It's a supplement to the GUI that makes certain things faster and doesn't require you to shift modes to use it.
Chuck
___
"Instead of either 'multi-talented' or 'multitalented' use 'bisexual'."
     
Baninated
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: In yer threads
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Oct 16, 2007, 07:57 AM
 
Ok no more post to post verbal masturbation.

This is what started it.

You said

Originally Posted by Fusion View Post
Leopard spotlight is still quite a bit slower than Quicksilver.
To which erik said.
Originally Posted by - - e r i k - - View Post
Not true. Spotlight in Leopard is instantaneous on all my macs.
He refuted your statement. So did Apple insider. "Quicksilver like fast" means just as fast as quicksilver. Not slower than. And it's not even the final version. (you acting defensive about this is the emotional attachment you have in QS coming out, you feel you need to defend it. IMHO)

I said that the fanboys would never agree to this.

So what do you do? Say no fanboys in here exist, while denying just what I said a fanboy would deny. Saying it's not true. Say that QS IS faster. Did you not see that?

AS far as your claim that you don't care about what I think about QS or if it's right for me, that's a load of crap too. Look at the following statements.

This first one is a funny one cause you contradict yourself in the same paragraph. First you say

Okay, let me try to make this clear... I don't care about your personal experience with QS.
Then you go on to try to debunk my experience by saying I didn't spend enough time using it to make an accurate judgement.

I'm pretty sure nobody does since you admitted that you've never used it more than a few days and only a few times.
But then you repeat again.
I'm not responding to your personal experience with the app.
Well you just did a sentence before.. If you didn't care or don't care about what I said as far as my experience it, why did you go as far as to try to debunk it with the silly "you didn't spend enough time" argument?

Onto the next one. Which you pretty much do the same thing.

You've posted your personal experience with Quicksilver, but it's not terribly relevant to anyone trying to "get Quicksilver" as you've not used it very long since you have no need for it.
Again attempting to belittling my statements about QS with the "haven't used it long enough" If what I said about my experience didn't bother you, or you claim you didn't care about, why do you keep making statements like you do? I only need to use an application long enough to know I don't have any use for it. No longer. No shorter. There is no standardized span in which you have to use software to make a judgement based on it. The fact that you are acting so is fanboyisms coming out. You know most applications that get used in magazines when they are rating them only get a day or so usage? I guess all those are worthless too!

If you are trying to prove there isn't any fanboys in here that wont deny that Spotlight for Leopard is as fast as QS, or that you don't care about my personal experience, you aren't doing a good job of it.

I've just shown a few examples of you doing both. As far as the rest of your post. It was mostly chest beating and verbal masturbation. And general all out fanboyism.

Let the spin begin.
( Last edited by Kevin; Oct 16, 2007 at 12:55 PM. )
     
Senior User
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: Vancouver, BC
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Oct 16, 2007, 03:07 PM
 
Originally Posted by Kevin View Post
Ok no more post to post verbal masturbation.
First you complained that I wasn't quoting enough, because I didn't quote your entire post. Now you're complaining that it was quoting too much and now you're not quoting the entire post? That's inconsistent.

Originally Posted by Kevin View Post
This is what started it.

You said

To which erik said.

He refuted your statement. So did Apple insider. "Quicksilver like fast" means just as fast as quicksilver. Not slower than. And it's not even the final version. (you acting defensive about this is the emotional attachment you have in QS coming out, you feel you need to defend it. IMHO)
I'm not sure how I would have an emotional attachment to software I don't use.

Originally Posted by Kevin View Post
I said that the fanboys would never agree to this.
You said fanboys would never agree that Spotlight is faster than Quicksilver, even if in reality it was. Again, that's ignorance and stupidity.

Originally Posted by Kevin View Post
So what do you do? Say no fanboys in here exist, while denying just what I said a fanboy would deny. Saying it's not true. Say that QS IS faster. Did you not see that?
1. I said fanboys don't exist in this thread (or that if they do, not to the extent that you are claiming).
2. You said they do, in fact, you can see they do by the fact that if Spotlight was faster than Quicksilver, they would still claim that Quicksilver is faster.
3. Appleinsider and a couple other people have reported that Spotlight is as fast or almost as fast as Quicksilver.
4. Others (including me) have stated that Quicksilver is still faster than Spotlight in Leopard for app launching.

You obviously see 4 as a contradiction of 1 and proof of 2. I think it will be quite clear to others (read: non-idiots) in this thread that that's not the case.

Originally Posted by Kevin View Post
AS far as your claim that you don't care about what I think about QS or if it's right for me, that's a load of crap too. Look at the following statements.

This first one is a funny one cause you contradict yourself in the same paragraph. First you say

Then you go on to try to debunk my experience by saying I didn't spend enough time using it to make an accurate judgement.
I've given up hope that you posses the power to read items the way they were stated. Did reading that really draw you to the conclusion that I care about your personal experience? Let me try saying this another way:

You've stated that you have only used Quicksilver only a couple of times and not very long each time ... therefore ... I don't care about your opinion or personal experience with Quicksilver. The fact that you have not used it very much is precisely the reason why I don't care about your experience with it. If you were an experienced user, who had used it full time for months at a time and had spent a ton of effort with the app, and then shared some opinions of the app, whether positive or negative, then I would care and find them at least half intelligent... but you have not.

Originally Posted by Kevin View Post
But then you repeat again.

Well you just did a sentence before.. If you didn't care or don't care about what I said as far as my experience it, why did you go as far as to try to debunk it with the silly "you didn't spend enough time" argument?
This is where you are getting confused. I'm not trying to "debunk" your personal experience with the app. I stated it clearly in my last post, I understand your personal experience... and its very valid. You tried QS, didn't like it or need it, so didn't use it. That's fine. But that doesn't make you an expert on QS, in fact, it makes you ignorant about this particular subject.

I see lots of debates over Logic vs Cubase. The debate is endless and there seem to be many good arguments on both sides. I, however, have not used either of them long enough to form a valid intelligent opinion on which I prefer over the other. I therefore wouldn't call proponents of either one "fanboys" and claim that even if Logic allowed 10,000 tracks and Cubase allowed 100,000, Logic users would still say Logic allows for more tracks.

Originally Posted by Kevin View Post
Onto the next one. Which you pretty much do the same thing.
No, its a fairly clear statement. If someone out there is trying to "get" QS, in other words, understand some of the more advanced features of the app and some of the more in-depth ways of using it beyond just an app launcher... your opinion of the app isn't going to be relevant to them since you've not tried it very long at all and don't use it. They, as I, would not care about your personal experience with it...

Originally Posted by Kevin View Post
Again attempting to belittling my statements about QS with the "haven't used it long enough"
That's not belittling your statements. Its just a fact... that you yourself stated. Not using QS long does not make you less of a person... it does however make you a non-expert on the app.

Originally Posted by Kevin View Post
If what I said about my experience didn't bother you, or you claim you didn't care about, why do you keep making statements like you do?
I never said your statements didn't bother me. I said that I don't care about your personal experience with QS. I do care about your dumbass statements on this thread. As I mentioned earlier, they are completely nonsensical and moronic. Watching you attempt to defend them is even further, entering into the realm of humorous. I'm beyond the point of believing it would even be remotely possible for you to realize your own ignorance, understand how your comments were stupid and begin approaching the subject from a discerning and knowledgeable corner, I'm just hoping that some non-idiot reads all this and gets smarter in the crossfire.

Originally Posted by Kevin View Post
I only need to use an application long enough to know I don't have any use for it. No longer. No shorter.
I don't think any of us do.

Originally Posted by Kevin View Post
There is no standardized span in which you have to use software to make a judgement based on it.
No one's claiming you're wrong for passing judgement on the app. In fact, no one really cares that you did. Again, the issue isn't that you don't use QS, the issue is that you call QS users "fanboys" and claim they would go beyond rationalism and claim lies about other technology.

Originally Posted by Kevin View Post
The fact that you are acting so is fanboyisms coming out.
I don't use Quicksilver, lol. I used to use it full time awhile ago while I was on Tiger and spent many hours learning the app and ingraining it into my workflow. It had become such a part of my workflow however, that I would get annoyed when the app was unstable and would interrupt my workflow. It began taking up more time than it saved. On top of that, I also around the same time realized the developer was not committed to the app as a priority and had since moved his time to other things. The combination of instability and lack of support led me to search for an alternative. When I moved to Leopard, I found that Spotlight did almost everything I needed Quicksilver for, and as a bonus, it did some other things a thousand times better and more consistent than Quicksilver did, so I deleted Quicksilver and switched full-time to Spotlight.

As such, I'd recommend to every Mac user I know doing the same thing, unless they have a specific feature of Quicksilver they need that Spotlight doesn't offer. The advantage of having the app built into the OS, maintained and updated by apple is quite large. If the decision is only a matter of "which one is faster," I'd argue that the slight speed decrease of Spotlight for most is not noticeable and for others that do notice, the advantage of stability would save more time than being slightly faster at typing response.

I'm not quite sure how that makes me irrational and a "fanboy."

Originally Posted by Kevin View Post
You know most applications that get used in magazines when they are rating them only get a day or so usage? I guess all those are worthless too!
This is about the most rational and intelligent thing you've said yet in any of your posts.

I wouldn't go so far as to call them useless, but I would advise users to take them with a grain of salt. I find software reviews in magazines extremely helpful since even though they only use it for a day, they take the time to fully investigate the app and its capabilities - something that a normal user wouldn't do. They are a great place to get in depth information regarding an app, it's features, bugs, quirks and workflows.

However, since they haven't spent a good amount of time with the app, I wouldn't necessarily "trust" their immediate opinion of it in full. Being that they are software experts and have researched the app in full gives them credibility. But I'd also appreciate the opinion of users who have used the app for a longer period of time ingrained in their daily workflows as to whether they like it or not. There are some aspects of an app that can only be experienced by constant use.

Originally Posted by Kevin View Post
If you are trying to prove there isn't any fanboys in here that wont deny that Spotlight for Leopard is as fast as QS, or that you don't care about my personal experience, you aren't doing a good job of it.
As I mentioned earlier, I'm not trying to prove anything. If I was, I'd go through the trouble of finding examples, backing it up, etc... I don't need to prove that I don't care about your personal experience with QS, as by merely stating it I've already proved it the first time I mentioned it... since you know... its my own mind. The only thing I've even come close to attempting to prove is that your comments on fanboys were incoherent, inconsistent, idiotic and just plain false. You've done a much better job at proving that than I have though.

Originally Posted by Kevin View Post
I've just shown a few examples of you doing both.
I see that it's clear to you that you think that's what you've done.

Originally Posted by Kevin View Post
As far as the rest of your post. It was mostly chest beating and verbal masturbation. And general all out fanboyism.
That's an interesting perspective.

Originally Posted by Kevin View Post
Let the spin begin.
You just can't help it can you?
     
Moderator Emeritus
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: Copenhagen
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Oct 16, 2007, 03:37 PM
 
Originally Posted by - - e r i k - - View Post
Yes. I have two internal harddrives, three external and one network drive shared over AirPort. That is about 5.5TB of data, and search is still instantaneous.
So search results now show up without having to wake up the drive beforehand? Great—that’s been my major annoyance about Spotlight.

OK, so that's admittedly faster to DO in QS than Spotlight. The question however is why you would do that. Launching three applications at once will slow down opening of all of them. Plus you can't really use more than one of them at the time either
I actually find myself doing this relatively often (usually just two apps, though, not three). But I can appreciate that I’m probably in the minority on that.

But even still that would be faster just clicking the icons in the dock.
Not to me. But that’s going back to the whole ‘mouse vs. keyboard person’. I use the mouse as little as possible, and just moving my hand over to the mouse, figuring out where on the screen the mouse cursor is, and moving it down to the Dock takes longer—for me—than launching two apps in Quicksilver.

If you’re used to using mouse/keypad/tablet for navigation in general, rather than just where you can’t avoid it, your story’s probably quite different.

In Leopard the default keyboard combination changed to ctrl-space. However, I changed it back to cmd-space straight away, because that's what I am used to. Even being a Norwegian in Australia and sharing my computer with my Australian fiancé I don't need to change keyboard layouts that often to let it hog the easiest keyboard command there is.
Ctrl-space for Spotlight? Or for changing keyboards? Sounds like you mean Spotlight. Well, I use F1 for that, anyway, so that doesn’t really make any difference to me.

Changing keyboard layouts, however, is probably one of the shortcuts I use the most. I’d say on average, I probably change keyboard layouts about once every five minutes or so. But then again, I’m probably more language-obsessed than you are

On a side note (yet another one): does Leopard finally have proper keyboard layout management via shortcuts, like Windows has had for ages? Like the ability to attach specific shortcuts to specific keyboard layouts? I change back and forth between four or five different keyboard layouts on a regular basis, and only being able to choose ‘last used’ or ‘next in list’ (list containing about 25 layouts, most of which I only use occasionally) is really, really, really annoying in the long run, compared to Windows where I can assign up to 20 different keyboard layout shortcuts.

And yes, enter alone will give you the first result in Leopard.
Awesome! That’s been my second-biggest annoyance with Spotlight.
     
Moderator Emeritus
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: Copenhagen
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Oct 16, 2007, 03:38 PM
 
Also, the posts in this thread are way too long.

(That includes my own, but that’s always the case, so I don’t count.)
     
Baninated
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: In yer threads
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Oct 16, 2007, 04:53 PM
 
Fusion can stack it pretty high can't he. I got him in the last post, and he is still spinning from it.

Sorry Fusion, put the sit and spin away. You are just proving me right with each reply.

You can't say one thing, then do another and not expect to get busted for it. Then reply doing the same exact thing. It's too late.
( Last edited by Kevin; Oct 16, 2007 at 05:18 PM. )
     
Senior User
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: Vancouver, BC
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Oct 16, 2007, 05:11 PM
 
Originally Posted by Kevin View Post
Yes they are. It's the sound of Fusion spinning. I got him in the last post, and he is still spinning from it.

I am still laughing over it. Yeah no fanboy there!
You consider people who don't use and don't recommend a certain software title a fanboy of said title? You're right, I am spinning... from how someone can be such a dumbass. Are your parents siblings?
     
Baninated
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: In yer threads
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Oct 16, 2007, 05:23 PM
 
Originally Posted by Fusion View Post
You consider people who don't use and don't recommend a certain software title a fanboy of said title?
If you don't use why did you post about you using it in Leopard? And how much faster it is? And if you are really now admitting you didn't use it, ALL your posts before have been fraudulent. Esp with your pretentious condescending bit about me not spending enough time with the application... Something is fishy here. You can't be an expert at the application and say the things you said to me, and also not ever use it. Contradictions galore with you. It sounds like you are saying anything you can to wiggle.
You're right, I am spinning... from how someone can be such a dumbass.
Well at least you are being honest now.

You either have a fanboy obsession with me, or the program. This is apparent. Someone that doesn't wouldn't have spent the obsessive amounts of time you did replying.

Your actions speak louder than your words. Now reply to this and make further silly posts and prove me even more right.

None of your posts. NONE of them debunked anything I said. Or anyone else said.
     
Senior User
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: Vancouver, BC
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Oct 16, 2007, 05:51 PM
 
Originally Posted by Kevin View Post
If you don't use why did you post about you using it in Leopard? And how much faster it is?
The speed of an application, especially at one specific task, is only one aspect of the entire application. To consider the use of said application based on only one specific aspect would be quite stupid.

Originally Posted by Kevin View Post
And if you are really now admitting you didn't use it, ALL your posts before have been fraudulent. Esp with your pretentious condescending bit about me not spending enough time with the application... Something is fishy here. You can't be an expert at the application and say the things you said to me, and also not ever use it. Contradictions galore with you. It sounds like you are saying anything you can to wiggle.
I'm not "now" admitting it, I did earlier in this thread. I think you missed the post completely maybe? Here's a link in case your ineptitude prevents you from finding it. I already addressed all that in its entirety. There are no contradictions.

Originally Posted by Kevin View Post
Well at least you are being honest now.
I've been honest the entire time, but yes, I honestly do consider you a dumbass, and yes the thickness of said dumbass-ery does honestly make my head spin.

Originally Posted by Kevin View Post
You either have a fanboy obsession with me, or the program. This is apparent. Someone that doesn't wouldn't have spent the obsessive amounts of time you did replying.
I think its been fairly clear in this thread that what's apparent to you is false to me. We obviously disagree on many things. As I mentioned already in my previous post (the one I think you didn't read), I've given up hope that its possible for you to have a conversation on an intelligent level and understand your own ignorance and immaturity regarding this subject.

Originally Posted by Kevin View Post
Your actions speak louder than your words.
What? My words are my actions in this case. I don't know why I continue to be surprised at just how deep your idiocy goes, but I am.

Originally Posted by Kevin View Post
Now reply to this and make further silly posts and prove me even more right.
No one, including yourself, has proved you right about anything. The reason being is that you're wrong so by definition it would be impossible.

Originally Posted by Kevin View Post
None of your posts. NONE of them debunked anything I said. Or anyone else said.
I'm not sure anything you said needed debunking, it was all so exaggerated and fatuous, it all speaks for itself. It has been fun to draw attention to it and watch you squirm in your own narrow pool of lunacy.
     
Baninated
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: In yer threads
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Oct 16, 2007, 05:58 PM
 
Proving what I said yet again. Keep em coming.

You keep treating personal opinions as if they were the gospel truth, doesn't make it so.

They are still just baseless accusations.

That is why 99% of what you post is verbal mastubartion. It adds nothing, and does nothing for anyone else. But YOU think you did something.

Things you haven't proved.

1. I was exaggerating.
2. That QS is faster than spotlight in Leopard.

Until you can PROVE.. and I said PROVE.. not "Just because I said so" like you've been doing this whole thread, it's all just going to be chest pounding and verbal masturbation.

I can sit around all day and make definite statements as if they were fact, spin and act pretentiously (and it is pretentious) condescending too. But that wont get me anywhere. Just like it got you nowhere.

Those "games" may work with other people. But not me. I'll just call you out for them and move on.
     
Senior User
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: Vancouver, BC
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Oct 16, 2007, 06:12 PM
 
Originally Posted by Kevin View Post
Proving what I said yet again. Keep em coming.
Okay.

Originally Posted by Kevin View Post
You keep treating personal opinions as if they were the gospel truth, doesn't make it so.
I'm seeing you do the same thing, in fact, getting down to a "gospel truth" and entering into a discussion of relativity is not something I'd entertain, especially with someone who I'm 99% sure wouldn't understand a word or concept of it.

Originally Posted by Kevin View Post
They are still just baseless accusations.
Kinda like, "QS users will always for eternity say QS is faster than Spotlight even if it really isn't?

Originally Posted by Kevin View Post
That is why 99% of what you post is verbal mastubartion. It adds nothing, and does nothing for anyone else. But YOU think you did something.
My favorite thing about you is that you accuse other's of doing exactly what you yourself do. You're so good at it in fact I wonder if you practice it or if it just comes naturally. And then you pretend to know what everyone else is thinking.

Originally Posted by Kevin View Post
Things you haven't proved.

1. I was exaggerating.
You already proved that yourself by saying what you said. By mere definition, your statement is an exaggeration since you personally can't possibly know to the full extent what every Quicksilver user or "fanboy" thinks or does.

Originally Posted by Kevin View Post
2. That QS is faster than spotlight in Leopard.
Correct. As I mentioned, I do not have the resources to do benchmarks on this. My original post was simply based on the fact that I can out-type Spotlight on every test machine I've used and cannot out-type Quicksilver unless I seriously modify its default configuration, by say telling it to catalog 8 network volumes at an infinity depth.

Originally Posted by Kevin View Post
Until you can PROVE.. and I said PROVE.. not "Just because I said so" like you've been doing this whole thread, it's all just going to be chest pounding and verbal masturbation.
I see this is where you keep running when you have nothing left to say. As I mentioned earlier, its fun to watch.

Originally Posted by Kevin View Post
I can sit around all day and make definite statements as if they were fact, spin and act pretentiously (and it is pretentious) condescending too. But that wont get me anywhere. Just like it got you nowhere.
I'm not sure how you could possibly know that, given that would be a highly personal decision, but it did get me somewhere. Your an idiot; I've had fun drawing attention to that. That's somewhere to me.

Originally Posted by Kevin View Post
Those "games" may work with other people. But not me. I'll just call you out for them and move on.
I would bet most regulars on this board are fairly aware already that what works with other people, like say rational discussion, does not work with you. We already know.
( Last edited by Fusion; Oct 16, 2007 at 06:23 PM. Reason: To include quotes of edited post.)
     
Baninated
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: In yer threads
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Oct 16, 2007, 07:17 PM
 
And you are still doing it fusion. Now I think it's gone beyond fanboyism.

It's gotten kinda creepy. In a sad type of way.

You win. Everything you said was fact. I totally know nothing about SS at all.

You are #1.
     
Moderator Emeritus
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: Copenhagen
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Oct 16, 2007, 07:21 PM
 
Originally Posted by Kevin View Post
Fusion can stack it pretty high can't he. I got him in the last post, and he is still spinning from it.
I wasn’t just referring to Fusion, you’re just as bad. And posts like that one (and others like it in this thread) are prime examples of that special kind of taunting several people have pointed out that you often employ, resulting often in long and pointless arguments. It takes two to argue, naturally; but you know how to push people’s buttons like few others I know.

You consider people who don't use and don't recommend a certain software title a fanboy of said title? You're right, I am spinning... from how someone can be such a dumbass. Are your parents siblings?
That was out of line, whatever your feelings or views about Kevin might be.

Before this thread is locked (for which it is more than ripe), could someone using Leopard give me a quick answer to my last little question? :
On a side note (yet another one): does Leopard finally have proper keyboard layout management via shortcuts, like Windows has had for ages? Like the ability to attach specific shortcuts to specific keyboard layouts? I change back and forth between four or five different keyboard layouts on a regular basis, and only being able to choose ‘last used’ or ‘next in list’ (list containing about 25 layouts, most of which I only use occasionally) is really, really, really annoying in the long run, compared to Windows where I can assign up to 20 different keyboard layout shortcuts.
(Yeah, I know it belongs in the Leopard thread more than here, but that thread’s impossibly long and clunky, and I already asked here )
( Last edited by Oisín; Oct 16, 2007 at 07:28 PM. )
     
Baninated
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: In yer threads
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Oct 16, 2007, 07:40 PM
 
Naw I've given up on Fusion's bait. I told him he "won" the thread can go on. He can continue to argue with himself if he'd like. It's all he's really been doing anyhow.
     
Senior User
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: Vancouver, BC
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Oct 16, 2007, 08:44 PM
 
Originally Posted by Kevin View Post
And you are still doing it fusion. Now I think it's gone beyond fanboyism.

It's gotten kinda creepy. In a sad type of way.
Again, as I mentioned earlier, we all see this is where you go.

Originally Posted by Kevin View Post
You win. Everything you said was fact. I totally know nothing about SS at all.
I'm not sure what SS is.

Originally Posted by Kevin View Post
You are #1.
Thanks... I think.

Originally Posted by Kevin View Post
Naw I've given up on Fusion's bait. I told him he "won" the thread can go on. He can continue to argue with himself if he'd like. It's all he's really been doing anyhow.
I believe its fairly clear to everyone who reads this thread, including someone who already mentioned so that I've been arguing with you. Again, as I said before, the level of you idiocy amazes me every time. Its gotten so bad that you believe you weren't even responding to me now. That lives on so many levels of insanity its nuts. For me to "continue arguing with myself" would require you to stop posting, so there would be nothing left to argue with, something which I'd bet you won't do. Watch..... Of course then you'll probably just turn around and say you didn't post.

Originally Posted by Oisín View Post
Before this thread is locked (for which it is more than ripe), could someone using Leopard give me a quick answer to my last little question?
That's something I've never done on a Mac, but if you'd like to PM me the details on how to test this, I'd be more than happy to try it for you. Also know though that I'm currently using a beta, so even if it hasn't been changed by my tests, it still might be in the final build. There are quite a few bugs still persistent in the build I'm using (9a599).
     
Baninated
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: In yer threads
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Oct 16, 2007, 08:56 PM
 
Originally Posted by Fusion View Post
Can't argue with that.

I told you. You won. Yet you still keep coming back like a wild foaming at the mouth dog.

Seek counseling.
     
Moderator Emeritus
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: Copenhagen
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Oct 16, 2007, 10:10 PM
 
That's something I've never done on a Mac, but if you'd like to PM me the details on how to test this, I'd be more than happy to try it for you. Also know though that I'm currently using a beta, so even if it hasn't been changed by my tests, it still might be in the final build. There are quite a few bugs still persistent in the build I'm using (9a599).
I don’t know how they’d do it... I’d imagine there would be a new subsection in the System Preferences -> Keyboard & Mouse -> Shortcuts panel for keyboard layouts, but I don’t know. Perhaps they’d put it in the International panel, that would make sense, too. I’m not holding my breath for this feature, though it would be very, very nice if they happened to have implemented it. I’ll know soon enough, either way
     
Senior User
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: Vancouver, BC
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Oct 17, 2007, 06:41 AM
 
Originally Posted by Kevin View Post
Can't argue with that.

I told you. You won. Yet you still keep coming back like a wild foaming at the mouth dog.
Again, we've all seen this is the only place you have to go. I'm sorry you're such a sad excuse for human intelligence, but that's just what you've got to deal with I guess.

Originally Posted by Kevin View Post
Seek counseling.
I've already made it fairly clear that I don't respect anything you say, I'm not sure how much clearer I can make it. Then again, you wouldn't understand the clarity of water. Your replying when you've lost all conscience and have simply resorted to strange accessions and weird pictures of monkeys continues to exemplify your imbecile tendencies, ones that seem cannot be helped. It's rather odd that you go out of your way to prove me fallible and evidence my arguments all in the same thread. Bipolar maybe? You're so easy to manipulate I almost feel inhumane. Almost. Please take my bait once again, since you obviously haven't given up, and please reply to this thread again... You can't help it, it's like your stupid-filter won't allow it to stop. I'd love to see more examples of you sticking your head up your ass, not that I can't find plenty in other areas of this form, but they're especially humorous here in this context. I wonder if your incompetencies just lead you to this or if its simply a matter of natural mistake.
( Last edited by Fusion; Oct 17, 2007 at 06:48 AM. )
     
Senior User
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: Vancouver, BC
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Oct 17, 2007, 06:45 AM
 
Originally Posted by Oisín View Post
I don’t know how they’d do it... I’d imagine there would be a new subsection in the System Preferences -> Keyboard & Mouse -> Shortcuts panel for keyboard layouts, but I don’t know. Perhaps they’d put it in the International panel, that would make sense, too. I’m not holding my breath for this feature, though it would be very, very nice if they happened to have implemented it. I’ll know soon enough, either way
I'm not sure I see anything like that... sorry Have you searched for any third-party utilities to handle something like this? It sounds as if its something that your that frustrated with, others might be as well, and a developer out there might have addressed it? Also, have you submitted the feature request to Apple yet?
     
Baninated
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: In yer threads
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Oct 17, 2007, 06:46 AM
 
Originally Posted by Fusion View Post
bunch of foaming at the mouth zealousness and baseless accusations deleted
     
Senior User
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: Vancouver, BC
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Oct 17, 2007, 06:51 AM
 
Originally Posted by Kevin View Post
     
Professional Poster
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: Los Angeles of the East
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Oct 17, 2007, 01:49 PM
 
this thread hurt my head. i prefer quicksilver over spotlight or the dock in tiger, this might change with leopard but as of now quicksilver is installed in all my machines.
NOW YOU SEE ME! 2.4 MBP and 2.0 MBP (running ubuntu)
     
Baninated
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: In yer threads
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Oct 17, 2007, 02:04 PM
 
If I had a laptop I'd probably have it installed for when I didn't have a mouse handy. I would use the laptop differently than I do my production machines.

I could see how QS could have a benefit in that situation with me. But as a desktop solution. Even after downloading it over and over again WANTING to have a use for it I simply could find none. So instead of it just sitting there taking up resources I needed, I got rid of it.

I am however burning it to a disk as we speak for a friend of mine at work that mostly uses his PB only. He'll love it I am sure.

If your hands don't leave the keyboard very often, and you launch apps frequently (instead of just keeping them open.._) then QS would be handy. That is why it benefits laptop users so much. (not many carry around mice...)

Otherwise...
     
Senior User
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: Vancouver, BC
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Oct 17, 2007, 02:52 PM
 
Originally Posted by Kevin View Post
If I had a laptop I'd probably have it installed for when I didn't have a mouse handy. I would use the laptop differently than I do my production machines.
Wow... you'd use a different computer... differently. The awakening has begun. Maybe if you state your opinion of the app just 5 more times in this thread people will care?
     
Mac Enthusiast
Join Date: Nov 2002
Location: More Cowbell...
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Oct 17, 2007, 04:56 PM
 
Originally Posted by Kevin View Post
If your hands don't leave the keyboard very often, and you launch apps frequently (instead of just keeping them open.._) then QS would be handy. That is why it benefits laptop users so much. (not many carry around mice...)

Otherwise...
That is precisely the point. Some are point and click types, and some are do everything through the keyboard types.. while many are somewhere in between. I tend to use the mouse as little as possible. I write code for a living, and am constantly switching back and forth between windows- from my code, to a compiling window, to the running application. I'd say I touch the mouse 2 or 3 times per hour on average while coding. The rest of my window switching, application launching, debugging, etc.. is all done via the keyboard. For me, I don't do well without QS. That is because I find myself to be much more efficient via the keyboard, and avoid mouse use, and QS definitely fills this niche.

People who mouse a lot, or stay in one app, etc.. will have much less use for QS. Its just a matter of personal computing preference.
     
Grizzled Veteran
Join Date: Mar 2004
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Oct 17, 2007, 08:19 PM
 
Is this even about Quicksilver anymore?
Is there no "lounge" here for this act?
-HI-
     
Posting Junkie
Join Date: May 2001
Location: Brisbane, Australia
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Oct 17, 2007, 09:19 PM
 
Gosh. For all the flirting between Kevin and Fusion in this thread, it was hard picking out some relevant posts.

Originally Posted by Oisín View Post
On a side note (yet another one): does Leopard finally have proper keyboard layout management via shortcuts, like Windows has had for ages? Like the ability to attach specific shortcuts to specific keyboard layouts? I change back and forth between four or five different keyboard layouts on a regular basis, and only being able to choose ‘last used’ or ‘next in list’ (list containing about 25 layouts, most of which I only use occasionally) is really, really, really annoying in the long run, compared to Windows where I can assign up to 20 different keyboard layout shortcuts.
No. I haven't seen anything like that either. Language nuts are too much of a minority it would seem. I guess you are pretty happy with a built in Danish spellcheck now (especially with the state of the danish language ). If only us Norwegians were so lucky
( Last edited by - - e r i k - -; Oct 17, 2007 at 10:09 PM. )

[ fb ] [ flickr ] [] [scl] [ last ] [ plaxo ]
     
Baninated
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: In yer threads
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Oct 18, 2007, 11:08 AM
 
Originally Posted by MarkLT1 View Post
That is precisely the point. Some are point and click types, and some are do everything through the keyboard types.. while many are somewhere in between. I tend to use the mouse as little as possible. I write code for a living, and am constantly switching back and forth between windows- from my code, to a compiling window, to the running application. I'd say I touch the mouse 2 or 3 times per hour on average while coding. The rest of my window switching, application launching, debugging, etc.. is all done via the keyboard. For me, I don't do well without QS. That is because I find myself to be much more efficient via the keyboard, and avoid mouse use, and QS definitely fills this niche.
I can understand how QS would make your day easier indeed. Esp a coder. There is no doubt in my mind that it would. It simply make sense in that way.
People who mouse a lot, or stay in one app, etc.. will have much less use for QS. Its just a matter of personal computing preference.
Indeed. And that is basically all I have been saying in this thread. It will be useful to some, and useless to others. Regardless of their "power user" status.

It's about how ones interacts with their computer from day to day.

It just so happens that a lot of Mac users are into the graphics field. And in the graphics field designers use the mouse/pen tablet most of the time.

But QS definitely has it's niche. It's just not for everyone. But for those that do spend most of their time on the keyboard, I am sure it's a timesaver for them.

It's Just not for us that do not.
( Last edited by Kevin; Oct 18, 2007 at 11:43 AM. )
     
Administrator
Join Date: Apr 2001
Location: San Antonio TX USA
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Oct 18, 2007, 11:23 AM
 
Originally Posted by Fusion View Post
Wow... you'd use a different computer... differently. The awakening has begun. Maybe if you state your opinion of the app just 5 more times in this thread people will care?
And your flaming him about it will help? No, I don't think so. Can we please think about the thread's topic and not make comments about other users? Thank you.

Glenn -----OTR/L, MOT, Tx
     
Moderator Emeritus
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: Copenhagen
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Oct 18, 2007, 06:04 PM
 
Originally Posted by - - e r i k - - View Post
Gosh. For all the flirting between Kevin and Fusion in this thread, it was hard picking out some relevant posts.

No. I haven't seen anything like that either. Language nuts are too much of a minority it would seem. I guess you are pretty happy with a built in Danish spellcheck now (especially with the state of the danish language ). If only us Norwegians were so lucky
Somehow, I saw that link coming from approximately 15,651 km. away.

I didn’t realise there was built-in Danish spellcheck, though, since I haven’t used spellcheck for about a decade. They tend to annoy more than they help, I think.

A Norwegian spellchecker would be an oxymoron, though, since Norwegian is just Danish with spelling errors.
     
 
Thread Tools
Forum Links
Forum Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts
BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are On
Top
Privacy Policy
All times are GMT -4. The time now is 06:33 AM.
All contents of these forums © 1995-2015 MacNN. All rights reserved.
Branding + Design: www.gesamtbild.com
vBulletin v.3.8.8 © 2000-2015, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd., Content Relevant URLs by vBSEO 3.3.2