Talk:Comparison of desktop application launchers

Katapult outdated

The new launchers for KDE are Krunner and … forgot the name, but there was a mouse oriented, too 87.157.6.246 (talk) 17:01, 3 January 2012 (UTC)

Poll ?

Does wikipedia somehow have support for polls ?

Premis: One thing is version number, license type and so forth, but a simple popularity overview might also be useful.

Ideas:

• If wiki does then add a little popularity meter as a column
• If wiki does not then integrate or embed a polldady poll

--Sakaa (talk) 16:41, 22 February 2010 (UTC)

Missing from the list

A few "missing" items:

  * FARR (Windows) http://www.donationcoder.com/Software/Mouser/findrun/
  * Executor (Windows) http://executor.dk/

--Mattrix007 (talk) 23:23, 16 April 2009 (UTC)

A few more:

 * Jump (Mac) http://www.app4mac.com/store/index.php?target=products&product_id=18
 * Sapiens (Mac) http://www.donelleschi.com/sapiens/
 * A-dock (Mac) http://jerome.foucher.free.fr/ADockX/ADockX.html

I'm too inept with tables to add them myself. --98.227.218.96 (talk) 07:32, 24 May 2009 (UTC)

In fact, here's a pretty good list: http://www.usingmac.com/2008/10/25/mac-application-launchers --98.227.218.96 (talk) 08:12, 24 May 2009 (UTC)

*K Menu (KDE SC)
*K Menu traditional (KDE SC)
*Homerun (KDE SC)
*Take off Launcher (KDE SC)
*Lanzelot (KDE SC)
*QML Menu (KDE SC)
*Quick Menu (KDE SC)

All of these run on openIndiana, the BSD Family and the GNU/Linux one. Some of them may run on the KDE Versions for OS X and Windows. All of them are Plasma Widgets — Preceding unsigned comment added by ShalokShalom (talk • contribs) 20:37, 23 August 2013 (UTC)

Docks?

Shouldn't the various (Mac/Windows/*nix) docks be on the comparison table?

many of them are. if you notice one missing, feel free to add it. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 69.125.110.223 (talk) 19:57, 12 December 2007 (UTC)

Removing entries

I remember in some other software comparison pages, application/entries with no corresponding wiki page will be removed. Perhaps we should do the same here. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 64.186.168.133 (talk) 00:40, 20 October 2007 (UTC)

xterm?

Including xterm is actually funny. If we include that, however, we should also include mouse and keyboard drivers, not to mention BIOSes. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 76.19.196.140 (talk) 22:57, 24 October 2007 (UTC)

I wouldn't have said it exactly like that, but including xterm seems a bit bogus... Why not konsole and GNOME/XFCE terminal? Has xterm a special feature to launch easilly application after pressing some keys? (Or a console launched like in some First Person Shooter games?). I'm rather in favor of creating a new section under the array, explaining that virtual terminal are an easy way to launch application too (in particular with autocompetion). W7a (talk) 12:27, 9 December 2007 (UTC)

I'm not sure if this still applies, but there is a nice drop-down shell called yakuake that does have "a console launched like in some [FPS] games." panth0r (talk) 16:28, 23 June 2008 (UTC)

No, xterm does not (it can spawn additional copies of itself). konsole/gnome-terminal have a web-browser tie-in, but it's generally regarded as a nuisance (noting that there are of course enthusiasts who insist the feature is essential ;-). The application launcher is a broader topic than that. Deferring the issue to "virtual terminal" will probably devolve further to command-line shells leading to a different level of bias (citing "bash" as the only instance) Tedickey (talk) 14:09, 9 December 2007 (UTC)

Requested move

Support. I'm for it, some of the launchers listed here can be used to launch one app after another, but you have to use modifier keys, so clearly it's not their intended use. Besides, it sounds better and is more correct from a grammatical point of view. --Lashiec (talk) 20:21, 13 December 2007 (UTC)

Support for grammatical reasons --Lox (t,c) 16:51, 17 December 2007 (UTC)

Comment the page was moved to Comparison of application launchers --Lox (t,c) 10:06, 18 December 2007 (UTC)

Missing comparison points

The most important points are missing:

- Supports launching programs only or documents too?
- Shows multiple launch options at once or only one?
- Uses history? (i. e. if you have programs aaa and abb and acc and you have launched abb recently, then "a" will make abb appear as the first launch option) --Jan 89.14.144.9 (talk) 15:31, 18 March 2008 (UTC)

I agree. These are all important features. Let me help with gmrun (a. yes (if set in config file) b. no c. yes) and gnome-do (a.yes b.no c.?). 120.28.64.72 (talk) 02:14, 22 July 2009 (UTC)

I'd also like to add this point:

- Is it graphical? (i.e. something where you click to launch an app instead of typing the app name) Genshihebi (talk) 08:45, 7 August 2009 (UTC)

Good point. It should probably be noted whether it is keyboard-oriented or mouse-oriented. Some launchers support both the keyboard and mouse, but usually they are optimized for one or the other. Zpenguin (talk) 05:57, 17 February 2010 (UTC)

Would adding a few columns to each table be a good way to start? I use Launchy so I should be able to fill in some blanks. 03:38, 10 April 2010 (UTC) —Preceding unsigned comment added by Popol0707 (talk • contribs)

- written in which Language - this is important to some 89.204.137.106 (talk) 22:36, 6 July 2011 (UTC)

Link to Enso

The link to Enso (Windows) redirects somewhere else. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.7.38.131 (talk) 08:18, 10 November 2008 (UTC)

Please, make the text larger...

Geez, the text for the charts is 6 point or something... I don't know how to make it any bigger, so can someone do that for me? I don't have bad vision, but I can barely read the text in the charts. The rest of the article is fine, but those charts display ridiculously small on my computer... Fishdert 19:09, 22 December 2008 (UTC)

That's the 65% for font-size in the head of each table. Tedickey (talk) 20:16, 22 December 2008 (UTC)

I increased the font-size to 95% of the normal size, since 100% looked a bit weird to me. Hope it's OK now (it should be) --Lashiec (talk) 18:05, 24 December 2008 (UTC)

It looks fine to me. It was 85% before the previous set of edits, and looking at the older version now, that was a little too small Tedickey (talk) 18:22, 24 December 2008 (UTC)

Licensing

The licensing column of this article has some problems. "Donationware", "Shareware", etc. are not licenses. These products are generally licensed under EULAs, i.e. proprietary. I also do not see how it is possible for the program "Enso" to be under the GPL but *not "open source". The Enso link doesn't go to the right page, it goes to an article about the japanese word "Enso" —Preceding unsigned comment added by 72.54.164.58 (talk) 14:51, 6 February 2009 (UTC)

I fixed everything you commented adding references where appropiate. Remember that the Wikipedia is editable by anyone ;) --Lashiec (talk) 17:35, 8 February 2009 (UTC)

Inconsistent "free for FSF" / Open Source columns filling-up.

I make many changes wherever I am confident it was wrong : GPL is free and open source ; proprietary cannot be free, even though it may or may not be open-source. --MarmotteiNoZ 23:45, 27 October 2013 (UTC)

Needs expansion

Please specify what features are supported by which program if you know. Some hints on the necessary information are already listed at #Missing_comparison_points --kAtremer (talk) 18:26, 2 August 2009 (UTC)

There's more to application launchers than quicksilver-like apps

What about graphical application launchers like that circular menu in windows, and as said above, docks? (I forgot what that round menu was called, sry)Genshihebi (talk) 08:43, 7 August 2009 (UTC)

Google Desktop?

Could Google Desktop be considered an application launcher? It's not purely for that purpose but I find it does work reliably well for that purpose. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Ljcrabs (talk • contribs) 01:33, 26 February 2010 (UTC)

Portable?

would be nice if you added a comparison column for "Portability" 66.87.0.78 (talk) 02:42, 3 January 2011 (UTC)

Removal of programs with no article and no 3rd party independent sources

There are several programs that have no article (they are red-linked, and which have no 3rd party independent reliable sources (books, reviews in magazines, articles in magazines, etc). I am removing them. Please don't re-add them without providing proper sources or without writing an article on them. --Enric Naval (talk) 16:31, 26 April 2011 (UTC)

Another removal done by me on 2011-07-30. --Koolabsol (talk) 01:56, 31 July 2011 (UTC)

And one by me on 2012-2-23. Removed CAL, WinLaunch, Kupfer, and Synapse, which violate Enric's inclusion policy and were added since Koolabsol's removal. This is the second (or third?) time that Kupfer has been removed. Although Synapse had two citations, one was to the developer's website, the other was a dubious third-party "review" that consists largely of an interview with the developer and reads like a press release or high-pressure advertisement. 12.233.146.130 (talk) 23:52, 23 February 2012 (UTC)

Adding Cecil/YourLaunchBar to this List?

This is an application that has been around for about one year and a half. It started as "YourLaunchBar" and has recently been re-branded into "Cecil". It is a generic launcher encompassing desktop applications launching, so maybe it should get on this list too. The project home page is here: http://www.cecil.is Claudius Iacob (talk) 05:33, 9 October 2012 (UTC)

Ok, this article is pretty much a joke.

What a ridiculous article. All what it's comparing is stuff that the average user doesn't give a squat about, like software licenses and programming languages. What most users care about are features and functionality, which aren't even touched upon. This leads me to believe that it was written by and for FOSS fanboys who don't realize how niche their interests are. 190.31.74.185 (talk) 15:04, 9 April 2013 (UTC)

Well, you can improve this article adding this kind of information if it is what you want... --PaliGol (talk) 19:40, 25 August 2013 (UTC)

Keybreeze

Keybreeze is missing OS: Windows, Licence: GPLv3, Programming Language: C# http://www.keybreeze.com/ http://sourceforge.net/projects/keybreeze — Preceding unsigned comment added by 217.233.177.35 (talk) 23:56, 2 November 2013 (UTC)

ByteCheleby

Not notable, non-free but hosted on SF.net, data/configuration placement not identifiable, and contains a chiptune on the credits panel - apparently malware. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Yura87 (talk • contribs) 05:04, 13 November 2013 (UTC)