In the past I've been guilty of making more macros than I ever use
How do you decide when not to make a macro, and vice-versa?
A few ideas I've had are
The effort of remembering and activating the macro should probably be less than just doing in it – like when it's only a couple of clicks
This depends on how often you do it – a couple of clicks become worth automating when you're doing them hundreds of times in a row, but not once every two months
Longer macros can take a long time to make and debug, so tend to be better for things you're already sure you do regularly (rather than a one-off project)
Obviously, there's many exceptions to these. I'm just curious how people personally think about it.
Generally, I don't save macros. I write them when I need them. And when I get a new Mac, I don't copy over my many macros to the new Mac (typically 1000 macros every year or two.) By frequently deleting them, I become better at writing them. That's my 2 cents.
I see making macros as a pass-time that's occasionally very helpful in my daily life. The only way to learn how to make good macros is to practice, so you did use every single one of them, in order to get better at a new skill.
I don't think I'm the only one here who gets a gentle thrill whenever they discover another annoyingly repetitive task that can be sped up with some automation, even if that task is only required for a single project.
"Yes! I can give my brain a rest from doing what I've just been doing for the past hour and make a macro!".
Then you go back and use it to complete the task in slightly less time than it would have taken manually. But you gave your brain a change of scene for a few minutes and that's worth something.
For me it's like doing a sudoku or a crossword and I find it very relaxing and satisfying, so that's an end in itself.
As a pass-time is a great point. Among the other benefits, it's rewarding and fun to build a little piece of tech and watch it work if you're wired a certain way
I think this might be correct—most of the values are the same as shown in the XKCD chart, but a few are not. I have no idea whose version is wrong, but I'd guess it's mine. However, as I've already spent more time than allowed on this :), I'm not going any further with it.
I know my thoughts are similar to others, but here's my criteria:
If it's something I do a lot and hate to have to do it over and over. I mean, that's one of the best perks of being a programmer - I want it to work the way I want it to work.
Automating apps, like Final Cut.
Because it's fun and/or a challenge.
Because it's something other KM users might like to use.
Here's just a couple of examples of palettes I use all the time:
In addition to the overpowering desire to solve the puzzle of a given problem, I try to make a macro for nearly everything I have to do more than once. Your first point is why I attempt fully automated macros absolutely when- and wherever possible — I don't want to have to think about about my macros, I just want them to do the work. And those that can't be fully automated are designed to fit the natural flow of where my hands usually are on the keyboard at the times I most want to trigger them. I would also say that time-saving aspect is secondary to not having to think about whatever it is. Of course saving time is also very important to me, it's just that freeing my mind from being bogged down by so much minutiae is the more valuable proposition. So not to macro is only ever the answer when it's actually impossible for me to make it.
I used to use basic macros (long before KM) for work (80s and 90s). My rule of thumb was, if the time spent making the macro would be more than the time saved, I wouldn’t bother. (Obvious!).
However, if I felt I could break even or even save time, especially if I could use the same macro again in the future, I would build it.
One thing people might not realize, is the consistency one gains by using the macro. Manual typos and mis queues go away. Also, once implemented, one can sometimes walk away while it runs. Candidly, back in the day, I had to wipe out a field in a database for over 106,000 records manually, so I built a simple macro and let it run all night. It took about 36 hours to complete. (Scary, I know.)
When I discovered Keyboard Maestro , I was so happy. I used it for our Little League, for work, and now that I’m retired, just for personal use. I don’t do Visual Basic or code, I just use basic keyboard commands. I still think it’s great.
The second thing you stated here is some things I have argued why I will actually spend more time making a macro than I have saved. It allows me to do something that would take a while and I couldn't walk away from or just wouldn't do if I was low energy. Times when I need to be faster and can't be slow. I will spend hours when I have the time to build those kind of things so that when I am with clients I can be much faster and stay in flow.
This is an opening for a discussion that could be powerful to have.
While time and effort savings are tranquilizing in their obviousness as reasons to use Keyboard Maestro, "Gentle thrill” point to something beyond simple utility or efficiency. It's a different class of purpose for engaging with technology.
Also points to something other than strict practicality. There is an enthusiasm, a kind of joyful self-expression or at least a playful dancing with in the act of writing the macro and seeing it come to life.
So I'll suggest, not as an answer to wrap up or end the discussion, but as a further inquiring, that perhaps engaging with Keyboard Maestro and the forum here can be a way to express leadership on the court (when a macro works) rather than as a commentary about efficiency or utility by someone in the stands talking about a mundane tool.
