It would only have to run for 2 weeks in my case ... if I havent used it by then I dont want it on my lean, mean LC bar. If I wanted EVERY bit of software to show in 1 place, I'd let the start menu grow like topsy and keep wading thru that.
Being able to dispense with the monitoring is why I suggested separating 2 functions - an initial getting set up function from the ongoing "doing what its designed for" function.
Is monitoring what program starts and comparing it with a list somewhere such a cpu/resource intensive thing anyway (at least short term)?
Then you would run a command called "Find and link all"
It's the "all" which worries me heaps - could you change it to "find and link all the ones you know I really want on the bar and leave out the 1000 other "just in case I ever want it" ones"
And then it would scour your hard disk for installed programs that match the items in that hierarchical predefined menu.
Yes it would take a long time to do the first scan.
Guess you know by now that scouring is the last thing I want
But afterwards the result would be a very nicely organized hierarchical toolbar/launcher with nice organized submenus, etc.
And at least in my case would be so humungously big I'd be quicker using start/run/....
I may have it all wrong (thats usually how it is with me) but I thought the best feature of a launch bar was to cut down on the clutter inherent in the start menu ... else why not use that? Usually I just want the <10 most frequently used programs for each category I set up (graphics,internet,system, file type stuff, etc etc)