I was able to greatly improve the performance under Leopard by
replacing the Bezel interface with this one:

http://www.mygnu.com/julius/proj_silverflow.html

Although beta, it is much snappier in Leopard than the built-in bezel
theme. Looks nice, and seems stable.

On Apr 26, 1:46 pm, Luhmann <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> 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?

Reply via email to