Here at Mac Gems HQ , we ’re big fans of Proteron ’s $ 15LiteSwitch X , which replaces Mac OS X ’s Command - Tab software switcher with a more operative rendering . Like the ramp up - in covering whipper , LiteSwitch X bulge up an onscreen list of currently - run software and lease you quickly interchange to one by bid the Tab key until the desired software program is highlighted . However , LiteSwitch X amend on several of the built - in switcher ’s features and adds a lot of its own .
Unfortunately , ever since Apple switch to Intel processor , we ’ve been stick using our new Macs without LiteSwitch X , which did n’t work on Intel Macs . But late last week , Proteron released the farseeing - awaitedLiteSwitch X 2.6 ( ) , a Universal Binary — and my MacBook Pro at long last feels right . ( In addition to Intel - Mac compatibility , version 2.6 also adds integrating with Cocoatech ’s Path Finder — if Path Finder , a Finder renewal , is running , LiteSwitch X will use Path Finder instead of the Finder . )
Now , I generally do n’t devote an integral column to a piece of softwarejustbecause it ’s now a Universal Binary . But I ’m make an exception for LiteSwitch X for two reasons : First , because I consider it to be one of my personal “ must establish right away ” Mac OS X utilities . But second , because I ’ve go out a figure of questions recently — both in e-mail and on Mac - centric blogs — wonder why someone would expend $ 15 for “ functionality already build into Mac OS X. ”
In fact , it was read such a sentimentover on our own MacUser blogthat inspire me to lastly sit down down and say , “ Here ’s why . ” That and arecent Mac OS X Hints pollthat show that of the closely 1300 respondent who claimed to apply some method of keyboard switching — OS X ’s built - in Command - Tab switcher , LiteSwitch X , Keyboard Maestro , or Witch — as the method acting they most often use to switch between applications , only 3 percentage ( 39 respondent ) use LiteSwitch X. Clearly , there ’s a lot of “ Why would I need that ? ” going around . ( In fairness to LiteSwitch X ’s poll numeral , Mac OS ecstasy Hints reader lean to be early adopter — I’m sure that more than a few LiteSwitch X fans with Intel Macs were likely using other method acting at the time of the crown plainly because LiteSwitch X was n’t yet compatible . )
Since my job as Macworld ’s house physician Gemologist is not only tofindGems , but also to explain why I think they ’re so cool , here are the cause I find LiteSwitch X to be an essential utility :
Whew ! convert yet ? OK , concede , LiteSwitch X ’s appeal is likely limit to OS X geeks , productivity freaks , and those who enjoy power - substance abuser tweaks . ( I know plenty of people who would n’t even notice , let alone take advantage of , the above improvement over OS X ’s own switcher . ) And even among the object audience , each of LiteSwitch X ’s feature film , by itself , may seem minor . But once they ’ve collectively become part of your everyday workflow , LiteSwitch X becomes a major productiveness booster station ( or , at the very least , make OS X more pleasant to use)—and it does so without making you study an entirely new way of interacting with your Mac . In fact , I think the best standard of LiteSwitch ’s utility is is that when you first begin to habituate it , you scarcely notice the difference between it and OS X ’s built - in functionality ; but after using it for a while , if LiteSwitch is short call for away — say , for object lesson , when Apple release Macs with novel processors inside and LiteSwitch is n’t yet compatible — OS X just does n’t palpate right . LiteSwitch X is one of the first things I set up when I get a Modern Mac — and now that includes Intel - free-base Macs .
UPDATED 7/24/06 , 5:15PM to add verbal description of LiteSwitch X ’s positioning option .
LiteSwitch X 2.6 is a Universal Binary and work out with Mac OS X 10.4 ( Tiger ) and later .
