docs(readme): add a competitor comparison section#44
Merged
Conversation
Add a Comparison section to the README benchmarking LockIME against the two most widely-used alternatives — Input Source Pro and KeyboardHolder — with a feature table, a short list of other tools (SwitchKey, Kawa, InputSwitcher, macism), and an honest "where LockIME fits" note. It gives prospective users a fair side-by-side and records where LockIME genuinely differs: a continuous re-lock, per-rule lock-or-switch, an address-bar rule, richer `lockime://` automation, the broadest localization, and a sub-3 MB download. Competitor facts — download sizes, URL match types, settings backup, permission model, localization — were gathered and cross-checked against each project's current release, so the table reflects Input Source Pro 2.11.0 and KeyboardHolder 1.14.10 rather than stale figures. Per the README i18n rule, the section ships in every SupportedLanguage: the authoritative English at the repo root and the translations under docs/README/, kept row-for-row in sync. Signed-off-by: Kevin Cui <bh@bugs.cc>
|
No actionable comments were generated in the recent review. 🎉 ℹ️ Recent review info⚙️ Run configurationConfiguration used: Organization UI Review profile: CHILL Plan: Pro Run ID: 📒 Files selected for processing (9)
Summary by CodeRabbit
WalkthroughA new Comparison section is added to 🚥 Pre-merge checks | ✅ 4✅ Passed checks (4 passed)
✨ Finishing Touches✨ Simplify code
Comment |
This was referenced Jun 30, 2026
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
1 participant
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
Adds a Comparison section to the README that benchmarks LockIME against the two most widely-used alternatives — Input Source Pro (~3.3k★) and KeyboardHolder (~1.6k★) — with a feature table, a short note on the smaller open-source/CLI tools (SwitchKey, Kawa, InputSwitcher, macism), and an honest "where LockIME fits" paragraph that recommends the competitors for their real strengths.
The competitor facts weren't guessed: download sizes, URL match types, settings backup, the permission model, and localization were gathered from each project and cross-checked against its current release, so the table reflects Input Source Pro 2.11.0 and KeyboardHolder 1.14.10. The framing is deliberately fair — it shows where LockIME loses (higher macOS floor, no on-screen input hints) as well as where it genuinely differs (continuous re-lock, per-rule lock-or-switch, an address-bar rule, richer
lockime://automation, the broadest localization, and a sub-3 MB download).Per the README i18n rule, the section ships in every
SupportedLanguage: the authoritative English at the repo root plus the eight translations underdocs/README/, kept row-for-row in sync — same table structure, with brand names, symbols, code, and URLs identical across languages.Reviewer note: the only fact not directly documented by the vendors is that Input Source Pro's core (global/per-app) works without Accessibility — a reasonable inference from how the feature works, presented in the table as parity with LockIME rather than a LockIME advantage.