So, if I understand it correctly, using the Spotlight catalog sources rather than the normal QS catalog sources should cut down resources usage because QS no longer has to maintain the index, correct? I'm assuming the normal QS ranking, etc still works correctly. I use QS for both searches, in the sense of launching an app or document, but also for doing a lot of actions. I've pretty much ignored the Spotlight module, but after using QSB, I was just wondering if I could reduce some QS resource usage on finding things in the catalog by just pointing it to spotlight as it's catalog. It sounds like the answer is yes, so I guess I just need to install the spotlight module and play with it.
On May 16, 6:47 pm, "Jon Stovell (a.k.a. Sesquipedalian)" <[email protected]> wrote: > In my opinion, the Spotlight plugin is primarily useful for providing > Spotlight-based catalogue sources to QS. For example, instead of QS's > own Find All Applications catalogue entry, which has to actually > search through the entire file system looking for applications, I use > a Spotlight catalogue entry that searches using the string "kind:app" > for it's criteria. Instead of having to traverse the file system (and > consuming system resources to do so), QS now just asks Spotlight for > the info, and receives a nicely packaged list of file paths to add to > the catalogue. > > In my experience, the various Spotlight search actions are not very > useful. The existing Spotlight interface is already well adapted to > performing its task: search. Quicksilver's interface is geared towards > a different function: action. If all you need to do is run a search, > the existing Spotlight interface already does a good job of that, so > just press Cmd-Space to invoke it. On the other hand, If you want to > do something with your data, call up Quicksilver and tell it your > bidding. > > On May 16, 6:22 pm, sclough <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > > I'm just wondering if there's any reason to use the spotlight plugin > > rather than using QS's normal search. Is the spotlight plugin faster > > or better at listing results? I've always used the standard QS search, > > but after using QSB for a while, I'm wondering if it would make sense > > to take into spotlight.
