Is it possible to do a paid model for QS ? (some people is not going to like this)
I have switched to Launchbar but as sclough puts it, its awkward (counter intuitive) to use, but there are things broken w QS in snow leopard that's just crucial to me. perhaps hiring a proper dev (or pay a freelance developer in the QS community) to do this would be e best way to sustain QS. On Jun 8, 7:00 am, Patrick Robertson <[email protected]> wrote: > I've thought long and hard about it, and my thoughts at the moment are: > > I'm gonna try and keep QS going as long as I can (hopefully with the help of > the other few who've worked on QS in the past few months - it's seemed to > work pretty well). > > I've been watching QSB closely, and was thinking that I'd try and help > maintain QS until QSB overtakes it. Alfred doesn't really look that good to > me - just an app launcher. > > As selfish as it may sound, I'm probably going to try and keep QS updated > and working for me. As everyone knows with QS - YMMV, and if it doesn't work > 100% for other people I don't think I'm gonna be able to have the time to > help out too much (it's time more than anything. There's plenty of QS <3) > > So all in all - I hope to use QS indefinitely until something better turns > up, or Apple decide to do a major rewrite of Mac OS (e.g. move to a DOS > system or something... :P) > > On 7 June 2010 23:53, sclough <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > > First, I want to offer a great big thanks to those who have kept > > Quicksilver alive and well on SL and even improving the speed in the > > process. I'm not a dev, but I greatly appreciate it. Those thanks > > being offered, I wondered if there was any sort of roadmap or future > > plans for QS. QSB seemed to be the successor of sorts, but it seems > > like development and activity on QSB is stalled somewhat, though > > several people use it. Alfred is getting some momentum, but it doesn't > > show any signs of incorporating near the functionality that QS can > > offer but seems focused around just search. Launchbar is fast, stable, > > and has a lot of functionality though it is awkward to use in my > > opinion when compared with QS. > > > All that leads me to wonder if QS has a long term future. I'm not > > trying to be negative, I'm just wondering what's in the heads of the > > developers or if anyone is putting any thought into QS's long term > > future. Obviously a lot of the plugins are aging though the majority > > still work well, and I wonder if QS will keep up with other solutions > > in the long term. > > > Again, this is a post for curiousity's sake for someone that is very > > grateful for the work that has been done. I'm just wondering if I need > > to prepare my mind that this brilliant piece of software that I still > > depend on every day won't be around forever :^)...
