I would also pay for QS, but agree with the others that I don't really see that as a viable solution. For those that have worked on it a bit, every now and then I go to the source and see some issues listed and enhancements requested. Is there any active dev work going on, even if it's minor or is dev work just for when Apple does a major OS update or something that breaks QS?
I, for one, would love to see Quick Look integration. The ability to use quick look before selecting something is one of the few Launchbar features that I really liked that is not in QS. Speed improvements would also be welcome as, every now and then, QS hesitates or seems stuck when I'm typing something new. I'm assuming full Spotlight integration (like QSB) was pretty much dropped and that the Spotlight module is the only QS - Spotlight integration planned. On Jun 11, 2:05 pm, Patrick Robertson <[email protected]> wrote: > I think Rob is right in saying that, unfortunately money won't bring any of > the current 'voluntary' developers out to develop and maintain the app > outright. > > The only alternative is to find someone new who may be willing to take up > the app for the money - but then this is no easy task. > > The biggest problem with Quicksilver is its complexity and lack of > documentation. Those of us who've been trying to develop it recently now all > have a fair idea of what going on (most probably each in a different area) > but getting someone new to figure it out is going to take a great deal of > time anyway. > > Probably the best solution I could make is to learn Cocoa and help out > yourself - Quicksilver was probably the first 'real' application I started > developing for and I've been learning the whole way. There's no reason why > anyone else can't do it and help out as well :) > > Patrick > > On 11 June 2010 19:39, Tim <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > > Yep - I'd certainly pay. This app is not a luxury item. > > > On 11 Jun 2010, at 19:25, Ajay Goel wrote: > > > > I am just a die hard fan of this application. But yes, I would be > > willing to pay for it if it wasn't free. > > > > On Jun 11, 2010, at 2:17 PM, danewb wrote: > > > >> Well, I'm only one small voice. I've used QS since it first came out > > >> and still use it more than any other software I own on a regular > > >> basis. I have tried LaunchBar and Google and have always come back > > >> home to QS. I have put up with and am still willing to put up with > > >> things that no longer work... it's still one of the most valuable > > >> tools I own. I would be willing to pay for it if it came to that. For > > >> what my humble opinion is worth. > > > >> On Jun 11, 3:43 pm, Eris <[email protected]> wrote: > > >>>> Based on years of comments, I think a vast majority of users would > > support this idea > > > >>> Saying "vast majority" here is a bit of a stretch. I think the users > > >>> who didn't support the idea didn't say anything. > > > >>> To the previous poster: > > > >>>> ... there are things broken w QS in snow leopard that's just crucial > > to me. > > > >>> File a bug report at GitHub; the developers can't fix something they > > >>> aren't aware of.
