top | item 47155282

(no title)

Looks nice! You have a good foundation in modal input order. How’s your file indexing and search compared to Alfred’s? RayCast struggles with this. Alfred’s is solid, especially stands out with `in` search.

Custom search query strings/results is important, too. I couldn’t tell how you support that from the marketing site.

discuss

mikker|4 days ago

Love that you're calling it a "marketing site" Indexing is meant to be as fast as possible. It's good enough for my needs. You can add custom folders and/or their contents to the global index. Which I think would be the equivalent of "in" search?

1123581321|4 days ago

Sorry, marketing site is reflexive use on my part. Not meant as a putdown in any way. :)

Alfred has three main search prefixes, find, open and in. Find does titles, in does in-document search. It's pretty fast and live-updates as you type. Find/open is the weird part relative to Tuna, as you'd rather decide which action to take after filtering down search results.

Anyway, now that I'm on my Mac, I was able to compare them. Alfred's search seems to be several times faster than Tuna's search (based on when Tuna shows the UI with search results.)

Tuna also chokes on adding too many folders to search; the settings pane beachballs and the app can't be used, even after force quitting and restarted. If that's due to heavy indexing, maybe that could be decoupled from the UI so it could search the partial index in the meantime. Or back the user out of folder depth they selected if it's not going to perform.

Tuna also has some of the same missing items that Raycast has, that Alfred finds; I know Alfred also makes use of Spotlight's index, but they do something in addition to that.