TOADLING Quicksilver is good at many things, thanks to its plugin architecture and development community. It can do some things that LaunchBar simply cannot. However, for performing common launcher-type operations like locating and executing scripts and applications, basic file browsing and manipulation, and web searches, I think LaunchBar is better. Here's why: 1) LaunchBar's UI is very simple, unobtrusive, and more flexible than many of Quicksilver's interface plugins. It lacks some of the pizzaz of Quicksilver, which is sometimes borderline gaudy, but LaunchBar gets the job done with minimal fuss - exactly what I want in a launcher utility. 2) While both utilities may find items at similar speeds, LaunchBar feels faster because things can be accomplished in fewer steps. For example, to open a file with something other than the default application, Quicksilver requires 5 steps: 1. type filename, 2. tab to action field, 3. type "open with", 4. tab to object field, 5. type name of application. LaunchBar, on the other hand, requires only 3 steps: 1. type filename, 2. hit tab, 3. type application name. LaunchBar also supports common Finder key combinations. So rather than having to tab to the action field in Quicksilver and type "Copy" or "Get Info", I can just hit command-C or command-I in LaunchBar, which is faster and more intuitive because I'm already used to doing this in the Finder. 3) LaunchBar remembers the last input string for each operation requiring some kind of text input, while Quicksilver shares the same text input for all operations. For example, in LaunchBar I can do a complex mathematical calculation and then track a FedEx package on the web with some other string input. Later, I can go back to the calculation or the FedEx package tracking entry and modify it or run it again without having to retype the text input each time. Quicksilver, on the other hand, reuses a single text field for *all* inputs (and sometimes outputs). So I'd have to retype that equation and FedEx tracking number every time I do a different operation in between. 4) LaunchBar automatically creates Smart Groups for items of the same kind in its index. This makes it very quick to search or browse only among related items, like all volumes (hard drives, optical discs, disk images, thumb drives), or only OmniOutliner documents, or all ZIP archives. As far as I know, Quicksilver does not do this. 5) LaunchBar seems to have a more intelligent search algorithm and requires less "training". It's better at guessing what I want when I ask for something. Quicksilver can be trained to find all those things, but it requires more work. 6) LaunchBar has more flexible options for controlling what files are indexed. For example, you can use simple shell wild cards (* and ?) to exclude specific files. Quicksilver's File/Folder catalog scanner plugin has no exclude options at all. Plus, LaunchBar can perform full content searches on text, rich text, and HTML files. Selecting a match from the resulting list opens the appropriate file with the matching line selected. 7) In my experience, LaunchBar is more stable and more reliable. I have never seen it so much as hiccup in over a year of heavy use. Quicksilver, on the other hand, sometimes seems a little flakey. I've seen occasional crashes and unresponsiveness, icons sometimes don't show up for certain items, it's sometimes very slow at reading large directories when file browsing, several interface plugins have drawing errors, etc. I have never seen these types of things with LaunchBar. Phew, this post got a little too long. If you're still here, sorry for the rant.
(Version 4.1.1) | 
Main
