Comments on: The Light Side http://www.ficml.org/jemimap/wordpress/2005/03/01/the-light-side/ Cheating on the Kobayashi Maru since 2001 Thu, 14 May 2026 11:05:07 +0000 http://wordpress.org/?v=2.0.11 by: Jemima http://www.ficml.org/jemimap/wordpress/2005/03/01/the-light-side/#comment-5426 Thu, 03 Mar 2005 05:54:25 +0000 http://www.ficml.org/jemimap/wordpress/2005/03/01/the-light-side/#comment-5426 Yes, I've tried ActiveWords and I still use it on my PC at work. AW may be more powerful in some areas, but I find that QS does more of what I want it to do: QS navigates the filesystem intuitively; AW either doesn't do it at all, or does it so non-intuitively that I haven't figured it out in over two months (even though Windows needs navigation aid much more than the Mac does). QS learns keyboard shortcuts on its own; AW expects me to create every shortcut. QS is seamlessly integrated into the OS; AW is as clunky as any other Windows program (not its fault). QS is a launcher that does what it does extremely well; AW is a whole layer of input monitoring on top of a swiss army knife of things to do with those stolen keystrokes. Whether it does them all well I can't say, since the majority of them are things I don't want to do. Nevertheless, I don't think of them as competing products. AW lacks QS's core functionality (file system navigation), and QS lacks AW's core functionality (input monitoring). I still wish I could have QS on the PC as much as your users wish for AW on the Mac. Yes, I’ve tried ActiveWords and I still use it on my PC at work. AW may be more powerful in some areas, but I find that QS does more of what I want it to do: QS navigates the filesystem intuitively; AW either doesn’t do it at all, or does it so non-intuitively that I haven’t figured it out in over two months (even though Windows needs navigation aid much more than the Mac does). QS learns keyboard shortcuts on its own; AW expects me to create every shortcut. QS is seamlessly integrated into the OS; AW is as clunky as any other Windows program (not its fault). QS is a launcher that does what it does extremely well; AW is a whole layer of input monitoring on top of a swiss army knife of things to do with those stolen keystrokes. Whether it does them all well I can’t say, since the majority of them are things I don’t want to do.

Nevertheless, I don’t think of them as competing products. AW lacks QS’s core functionality (file system navigation), and QS lacks AW’s core functionality (input monitoring). I still wish I could have QS on the PC as much as your users wish for AW on the Mac.

]]> by: Buzz Bruggeman http://www.ficml.org/jemimap/wordpress/2005/03/01/the-light-side/#comment-5425 Wed, 02 Mar 2005 21:55:51 +0000 http://www.ficml.org/jemimap/wordpress/2005/03/01/the-light-side/#comment-5425 I think that we, i.e. ActiveWords, do a lot more than QS, and do it better and more intuitively. Have you tried our stuff? Find a PC, try it, and I will unlock a copy for you. I would love to find someone who was a smart Mac programmer who would port out stuff to the Mac. We get requests daily for a Mac version! I think that we, i.e. ActiveWords, do a lot more than QS, and do it better and more intuitively. Have you tried our stuff? Find a PC, try it, and I will unlock a copy for you. I would love to find someone who was a smart Mac programmer who would port out stuff to the Mac. We get requests daily for a Mac version!

]]>