Google Quick Search Box attempts to dethrone QuickSilver

by Milind Alvares on January 13, 2009

In their latest attempt to bring their web search to the Mac desktop (no one uses Google Desktop Search), Google has released what can only be called a QuickSilver clone. Google Quick Search Box is a small search utility that provides the lightning fast search that we’re used to with QuickSilver. Rumour has it, that the creator of Quicksilver, J. Nicholas Jitkoff, is actually behind this project as well. I can’t confirm it though. Of course, Google has made sure it uses a slightly different abbreviation “QSB” for this!

Note that the Quick Search box is an early preview, and cannot be considered for a full on shootout against QuickSilver. 

google-quicksearch-box

So how exactly does it work? You double tap your Command key upon which the search field fades into view. Typing anything will bring up the most probable item along with a list down below. So far we’re fairly on the same page as QuickSilver. QSB also integrates spotlight search so it will display any spotlight results along with the regular results (Thanks Jono!).

Of course, when it doesn’t find something, it drives you to do a google search online. Actually, coming to think of it, QS is a little too inclined that you create an online search. I searched for “Macworld”, and instead of giving me access to my keynotes or podcast, it tries to push me to do a Google search. Overall though the UI of the app is very intuitive and user friendly, and those finer things will be tuned in future releases. 

I’m really excited about the Google’s Quick Search. Blacktree has abandoned QuickSilver, and I don’t see any future for that. Google’s Quick Search is open source, has an active set of developers backing it, and will definitely improve beyond what QuickSilver ever offered. Add in a bunch of useful plugins and QSB can be the next big thing on the Mac. For more info and a link to download Quick Search Box visit the project page.

Reader Comments

Google Quick Search Box
January 14, 2009 at 6:02 am
Google Quick Search Box isn’t quite QuickSilver… at least not yet : Pixel Pushing Blogger
January 15, 2009 at 1:17 pm

Reader Comments

Joao Coutinho January 13, 2009 at 4:18 pm JoaoCoutinho.net

The quicksilver is great. Can google be so great?

   

David January 13, 2009 at 4:57 pm

Well, Google, no. But if the QS developer is continuing his work on this project, there is definitely a lot of potential for it.

   

Jono January 13, 2009 at 5:10 pm iconaholic.com

I found text within a file with it, but I’d turned on ‘Spotlight Results’ in Preferences first. Nicholas Jitkoff has been working on the next version of Quicksilver for a while. So now I’m wondering if this is it, or he’s still working on another version.

This looks promising. Looking forward to future updates.

   

Milind Alvares January 13, 2009 at 5:29 pm goobimama.blogspot.com

Updated the post. Thanks Jono!

   

Mark S. January 13, 2009 at 8:42 pm

Go to your own link and you’ll see “jnj” as the project owner. Obviously not a “rumor” just an observable fact…

   

Chris January 13, 2009 at 11:40 pm theweeklyreview.ca

It’s a bit contradictory to say that QS is dead because Blacktree abandoned it, but this QSB from Google will thrive because it’s open source. Blacktree did the same did they not?

And aside from that, you’re really comparing apples to oranges. Search is only one thing QS does. Add in image manipulation, ftp uploads and clipboard access are just a few features that make QS much more than just a desktop/web search tool.

   

Milind Alvares January 13, 2009 at 11:48 pm goobimama.blogspot.com

First of all this wasn’t a comparison in the real sense. I’m just saying, that I haven’t seen any updates for Quicksilver which leads me to believe that it is sort of abandoned.

Second, Google’s QSB is extremely new and cannot be even compared with Quicksilver (reason why I left that disclaimer). Besides the app itself being developed the community needs to create those awesome plugins. Only then will it be really usable. Besides, even UI-wise QS is more powerful (Quicksilver has the three pane UI against QSB’s two pane search-list UI). Maybe Google’s QSB will become the newbie’s Quicksilver? Who knows.

   

Chris January 13, 2009 at 11:53 pm theweeklyreview.ca

I hear what you’re saying. It’s just that the post title gives a different idea.

A lot of people never use QS because it’s complicated and has a bit of a learning curve. Maybe this tool from Google is a better fit for them.

   

Steve January 14, 2009 at 11:37 pm pixelpushingmonkey.com

I tried this on both my Macbook Pro and Mac Pro yesterday. Right now, the program is pretty unstable, it will hang & crash unexpectably, and doing so while eating up a huge amount of memory. On one crash, Google Quick Search Box was using up 360MB+ of memory, and it just kept on going up until I force quit the application.

Instability issues aside, there are a few things I like and dislike about it.

Likes:
It’s more robust if you want to do things outside of your desktop. Searching for anything in your browser is relatively fewer keystrokes away than Quicksilver (unless you set up some custom triggers).

Dislike:
For just accessing items within your own desktop, it doesn’t do it quite as well. It always mixes in Google searches in the results. For example, if I typed Adium in Quicksilver, it will always search through my desktop for relevance first. With Google Quick Search Box, inevitably there’s an option to search Adium on Google’s website. Eventually Adium will rise and become the #1 result, but I wish there was a prioritization system where web searches is the least prioritized by default.

Since it also searches from Spotlight (and most of the time you *have* to, because the first time you search for any result it may not familiar with, you will have to go through the Spotlight results for the correct ones), the performance for even mundane tasks can sometime be sluggish compared to Quicksilver.

Granted, “sluggish” means a few extra seconds, but on an older model Mac it would take a lot more time (my co-workers 12” PowerBook had a really rough time). Quicksilver was extremely fast & robust because it maintained its own index. Using Spotlight does give you more detailed results if you’re looking for some very obscure file, but even when you’re just typing in the name of an application in your “Applications” folder, Spotlight will slow down the responsiveness of Google Quick Search Box.

The advantage of being able to quickly get web search result is a bit offset by Quicksilver’s web search plugin, which can get you more than a dozen different search engine with a few extra keystrokes.

For now, I’m sticking with Quicksilver.

   

Leandro June 10, 2009 at 3:38 am dr-leech.com

Leave a Comment

Previous post:

Next post: