Yeah. I still use it every day, so it works OK for me - but performance seems less reliable since Leopard ...
On Apr 24, 11:11 am, Howard Melman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > That seems about right. I'll add that QS has always been in beta and > some things have, as near as I can tell, never worked right. Saying > QS is "unstable" is probably a bit strong. Some plugins aren't > working that used to work (I tried to start a thread to track them but > got very little feedback) and some (like iTunes) work better. If a > plugin you use regularly is broken, then it's unstable for you, but > given that everyone uses different plugins, it might be just fine for > someone else. When things have broken badly (like the site going > down) Alcor did fix things reasonably quickly, so unsupported is too > strong a term too. > > Howard > > On Apr 23, 2008, at 9:14 PM, Luhmann wrote: > > > Having read the FAQ and this thread, I *still* feel confused about the > > state of Quicksilver. If I understand correctly, this is the current > > situation: > > > 1. The developer, Alcor decided that the original code base was too > > messed up, so announced he would no longer be developing that > > particular version of QS. > > > 2. This was widely misinterpreted as meaning that QS is dead - but > > that is incorrect. In fact, Alcor is simply working on a new version > > of QS which will be even better than the old one. > > > 3. Meanwhile, a lot of Leopard users are frustrated by the performance > > of the current version of QS, and Ankur Kothari has taken it upon > > himself to make improvements to the current code base. Those can be > > found here: > > >http://lipidity.com/software/quicksilver/ > > > However, while some people have been able to make it work, it is not > > recommended for the average user, and breaks some features of QS. > > > 4. So the end result is that current QS users have a choice between > > the official unstable version and an unofficial unstable version, but > > at some unspecified distant time in the future Alcor will release a > > new and improved version which he is working on when he isn't at his > > day job with Google. Money will not speed this process along, nor will > > complaining on the forums. So ... patience. > > > Is this correct?
