Submit Hint Search The Forums LinksStatsPollsHeadlinesRSS
14,000 hints and counting!

Quickeys and Fast User Switiching Apps
I was using a Classic filemaker application that required a lot of tedious mouse clicks, so decided to automate this using QuicKeys X2. After much configuration I got the macro to work. Unfortunately this long running macro hogged my Mac while it worked, given that it replayed my mouse clicks and kept grabbing the pointer and switching the application in use.

I started to wonder how QuicKeys would behave when running from another user that I had switched away from. I figured that it would behave like iTunes or iChat and stop while switched away or would run the macro in the current user space. So, I set my macro running and switched to a new user. Nothing odd seemed to be happening in the new user I was working with. The mouse behaved itself. I then switched back and found my macro had been working all the time.

This is an excellent way of pushing a QuicKeys user actions macro into the background while you get on with something else. This tip was done in 10.3.3
    •    
  • Currently 2.00 / 5
  You rated: 4 / 5 (4 votes cast)
 
[4,604 views]  

Quickeys and Fast User Switiching | 7 comments | Create New Account
Click here to return to the 'Quickeys and Fast User Switiching' hint
The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. This site is not responsible for what they say.
"nice"ness
Authored by: jspivack on Apr 20, '04 11:44:45AM

couldn't you just change the "nice"ness of QuicKeys?



[ Reply to This | # ]
"nice"ness
Authored by: pascalpp on Apr 20, '04 02:21:07PM

no you can't just renice quickeys, because (some) quickeys macros take over the whole gui, moving the mouse around, clicking menus and buttons. if you try to do anything with the mouse while such a macro is running, it will likely fail, and even if it still works, it makes doing ANY other task pretty much impossible until the macro is done.



[ Reply to This | # ]
"nice"ness
Authored by: wheeles on Apr 20, '04 03:24:31PM

That's right. If I tried to do anything else when running this macro in the current user space even when reniced, then I would have ended up with neither task being particularly successful.

One thing I have found out is that although the macro does work in the backgrounded user space, if you hold down various modifier keys too long while working in the current user space, it can effect the backgrounded macro. I'm not sure whether this was a problem caused by Quickeys or my Classic application, but worth noting nonetheless.



[ Reply to This | # ]
Quickeys and Fast User Switiching
Authored by: zadig on Apr 20, '04 04:15:43PM

Wouldn't this be more of a bug than a feature? It seems to me that Quickeys doesn't handle fast user switching very well (OK, at all).



[ Reply to This | # ]
Huh?
Authored by: mm2270 on Apr 20, '04 04:29:19PM

I'm not sure what you're saying.
He's stating that he was able to set his QK macro into action and successfully switch to another user account so he could regain control of his mouse to do other work, and all the while the macro was continuing to run under the now switched out of account. If anything, it's remarkable that QK would continue at all.



[ Reply to This | # ]
Huh?
Authored by: zadig on Apr 22, '04 01:11:09PM

The problem is that instead of passing the Quickey keystroke to the current user's space (as that user might reasonably expect), the macro "disappears" from that user's point of view (a bug, if that user wanted something to happen). The fact that it's operating in another user's space is a bug or a feature, depending on what Quickeys' developers say.



[ Reply to This | # ]
Quickeys and Fast User Switiching
Authored by: wheeles on Apr 21, '04 10:05:43AM

Whether a bug or feature is surely a question of semantics.

I think it comes down to how QuicKeys passes mouse commands to the windowing system and how OS X manages the switched out users. QuicKeys appears to pass the mouse commands to the specific user space rather than the current user space. Whether this was intentional or an accident of programming is hard to say.



[ Reply to This | # ]