Jump to content

Switch back to "Please Wait..." subtext if script is executed again.


Recommended Posts

The new "Please wait..." subtext option is terrific, but I think it'd be even better if it displayed just before each time script was executed. My iTunes Store workflow is still a little slow, for example, so if you type "Beyonce" it does a search for "B" or "Be," then keeps displaying those results while it searches for the completed query. So it looks to the user as though the workflow is malfunctioning, returning useless data for the complete query, when in fact it's just running a new and somewhat time-consuming search.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I agree; when I use Wolfram|Alpha's API in a workflow, it is slower than Alfred, so as I type "steve jobs" I get results for "s  (character)", then "ste" gets processed, then I finally get "Steve Jobs".

 

The first time I saw this, I wondered if it was my fault or my slow internet.  ;)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Really and truly you guys SHOULD set a minimum string length before performing a search. In other words, don't execute a web based search after 1 character. I typically don't execute a search until at least a 3rd character is typed.

 

Oy, with the reasonable and intelligent solutions! Keep that up and you might find yourself completely indispensable. (Which is to say, "Thanks, good point!")

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The new "Please wait..." subtext option is terrific, but I think it'd be even better if it displayed just before each time script was executed. My iTunes Store workflow is still a little slow, for example, so if you type "Beyonce" it does a search for "B" or "Be," then keeps displaying those results while it searches for the completed query. So it looks to the user as though the workflow is malfunctioning, returning useless data for the complete query, when in fact it's just running a new and somewhat time-consuming search.

 

Just wanted to officially withdraw this request. Of the workflows I've been working on, it'd minimally solve a problem in two and create much greater problems in like four. David's solution is the best one.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
 Share

×
×
  • Create New...