AdiumX as a background process

An instant messenger which can connect to AIM, GTalk, Jabber, ICQ, and more.
Post Reply
cshbell
Harmless
Posts: 11
Joined: Wed Jun 22, 2005 2:24 pm

AdiumX as a background process

Post by cshbell »

Is there a way, or could a future version of AdiumX include the option to run AdiumX as a background or invisible process, removing it from the list of applications that show up when Cmd-Tab is pressed? It's quite annoying to accidentally switch into the IM client when I have 5 or 6 other applications running.

The dock icon and/or the menubar icon (remember the menubar?) would still contain an AdiumX icon, or AdiumX could be activated via a hotkey sequence.
User avatar
The_Tick
Cocoaforge Admin
Posts: 4642
Joined: Thu Dec 02, 2004 6:06 am
Contact:

Post by The_Tick »

Adium is a gui app, why in the world would removing it from the cmd+tab selection need to be an option?
Wengero
Crema
Posts: 373
Joined: Fri Mar 18, 2005 3:37 am
Contact:

Re: AdiumX as a background process

Post by Wengero »

cshbell wrote:the menubar icon (remember the menubar?)
the menubar icon is still there...
User avatar
noleli
Latté
Posts: 80
Joined: Sun Dec 19, 2004 7:14 pm
Location: UMich

Post by noleli »

If you want to lose access to the menus, you could add the key NSUIElement with string value 1 to the Info.plist. Then move it out and back in of your applications folder, because the Finder caches some Info.plist stuff. It just doesn't seem very useful that way.
User avatar
jstamos
Growl Team
Posts: 334
Joined: Sun Dec 05, 2004 1:39 am
Contact:

Post by jstamos »

I think we can safely say this will be a personal modification and not something that would ever, in a million years, be a standard feature of Adium.

You've been pointed in the right directions by everyone above, so if you'd like to do it, good luck to you.
Son of a Preacher Man
Crema
Posts: 499
Joined: Sat Dec 04, 2004 12:05 am
Location: Derby/York, UK
Contact:

Post by Son of a Preacher Man »

I assume the idea is iChat-style functionality, where you can still be signed in without the actual app open? I love that feature, but I know it's a route you can't and don't want to go down.
Image
User avatar
zaudragon
Growl Team
Posts: 1852
Joined: Sat Dec 04, 2004 5:05 am
Location: Kensington, CA, USA
Contact:

Post by zaudragon »

noleli wrote:If you want to lose access to the menus, you could add the key NSUIElement with string value 1 to the Info.plist. Then move it out and back in of your applications folder, because the Finder caches some Info.plist stuff. It just doesn't seem very useful that way.
LSUIElement with a Boolean value of True/Yes is the preferred method now.
Blog | X(tras)
Communists code without classes.
cshbell
Harmless
Posts: 11
Joined: Wed Jun 22, 2005 2:24 pm

Post by cshbell »

Son of a Preacher Man wrote:I assume the idea is iChat-style functionality, where you can still be signed in without the actual app open? I love that feature, but I know it's a route you can't and don't want to go down.
The idea here is the correct one: to mimic iChat functionality to where it is not necessary to have the GUI window present to be signed in. I don't see what that's "a router [we] can't and don't want to go down." I'd much prefer having a menubar icon than yet another omnipresent application window.

BTW developers, don't shoot, I'm just asking questions. Sheesh.
User avatar
ofri
Growl Team
Posts: 303
Joined: Sat Dec 04, 2004 12:00 pm
Location: Kiryat Ono, Israel
Contact:

Post by ofri »

The problem with your request is that in order to do this, a complete redesign and rewrite of adium will be required. It simply doesn't worth the effort...
Gravitation is not responsible for people falling in love.
--Albert Einstein

http://www.dpompa.com
User avatar
The_Tick
Cocoaforge Admin
Posts: 4642
Joined: Thu Dec 02, 2004 6:06 am
Contact:

Post by The_Tick »

cshbell wrote:
Son of a Preacher Man wrote:I assume the idea is iChat-style functionality, where you can still be signed in without the actual app open? I love that feature, but I know it's a route you can't and don't want to go down.
The idea here is the correct one: to mimic iChat functionality to where it is not necessary to have the GUI window present to be signed in. I don't see what that's "a router [we] can't and don't want to go down." I'd much prefer having a menubar icon than yet another omnipresent application window.
It's simply something we don't see as useful.
cshbell wrote: BTW developers, don't shoot, I'm just asking questions. Sheesh.
And we were answering..
Post Reply