Is art worthless on the Internet?
People will pay for some crazy things but cry foul over paying for artwork
Tuesday, February 20, 2007 by Frogboy | Discussion: WinCustomize News
Today Stardock Design released its first "Master" Dream to the Dream (animated wallpaper) gallery. It's the one Microsoft showed off at some of its events. As some know, Microsoft worked with Stardock to make some of the animated wallpapers for use with Windows DreamScene. Windows DreamScene (the software) is a feature for Windows Vista Ultimate users. Most of the content we created for Microsoft hasn't been released yet (it will be available from Microsoft). In the process of creating the animated wallpapers for Microsoft, we made a bunch of extra ones for WinCustomize.com which had nothing to do with our work with Microsoft.
So far, Stardock Design has released 6 free .Dreams and 1 premium .Dream. On top of that, Stardock has released DeskScapes as freeware and DreamMaker as freeware. And of course, we host the Dreams here on WiniCustomize which, on their own, used over 2 TERRABYTES of bandwidth. So from our vantage point, Stardock's been "the good guy". Providing lots of free stuff, lots of free software and providing a free site to get it on.
But Stardock's also a business. The costs of producing all this has to be made up somewhere or else we wouldn't be able to keep doing it. But some people seem to be very vocal in their outrage that artists won't work for free. They'll happily pay Microsoft $400 for Windows Vista Ultimate but cry bloody murder about paying third party artists $4.95 for content. My Xbox 360 cost quite a bit too but amazingly, the games aren't free. Those "greedy" game companies!
Here's some of the comments on Blissful Sunset:
"It's absolutely ridiculous that they're charging for this-- it's just wrong. But for people who own Vista Ultimate, just wait, I guarantee you that this will come w/ the final Dreamscene when it's released. "
According to this user, it's morally wrong for artists to be paid for their work. He's quite incorrect about Blissful Sunset coming with the final.
Another user wrote this:
"The implication (with MS showing it at official events) is that this development is work that was part of your contract with MS and therefore has already been subsidized and is in fact being paid for by all of us by our shelling out extra bucks for Ultimate edition."
This falls under the "no good deed goes unpunished" category. Microsoft was looking for high quality content to show off during their demos but didn't want to give away some of the stuff that will be coming in the final release so they asked us if they could show the extra content we made. We agreed to let them. After all, it's pretty cool to see your work up on stage. But this person (and others) have tried to argue that we should simply give away all the animated wallpaper for free that we've made because we made the ones that come with it. How does that make sense?
Over at Valve's Steam website, a user posted "Stardock sux" and writes:
"This is just unbelievable. Stardock is now charging us for what is supposed to be a FREE Vista Ultimate Extra"
This line of thinking is equivalent to saying that someone who bought say Half-Life 2 via Steam is somehow entitled to HL2: Episode 0 and HL2: Episode 1 and so forth. After all, they paid for Half-Life, why should they have to pay for additional content? In fact, that's been one of the trends in the "outrage" group. Sure, there's 18 dreams that are free. But they shouldn't have to pay for anything because they bought Windows Vista Ultimate. I just totally can't grasp that mindset. In what universe does someone buying a version of Windows entitle them to free software and content created by third parties? Heck, my cell phone tries to get me to pay money for additional ring tones!
So here's what's going to happen -- one of these 2 things are going to occur:
Possibility #1: Users decide animated wallpaper is worthless. In that case, Stardock Design won't be creating any more for consumers. Remember, Stardock Design currently has a 6 to 1 ratio in free to premium content. At that point, consumers would just have to hope that individual artists --who understand that there's no chance they'll ever be able to even make some extra side income from their efforts-- will take the time to create spectacular animated wallpapers that loop perfectly and are encoded in high quality at high-definition. Maybe that would happen but I wouldn't count on it.
In addition, since the bandwidth bill would still exist, users would have to buy WinCustomize subscriptions to download after awhile. So the "free beer" crowd would have to find their content elsewhere. But don't count on these being available on most sites. At 50+ megabytes a pop, it's a lot of bandwidth. Someone has to pay for it.
And of course, that would mean the software would have to start charging for extra features. Want to pay 3D dynamic content? The user would have to get the "Pro" version. The point being, the costs of producing, supporting, and developing this stuff has to come from somewhere. Personally, I think a system which nearly everything is free but a handful of premium content isn't free is a pretty good arrangement for everyone.
Possibility #2: Enough users decide that there's value to animated wallpaper. If something comes along that is of exceptional quality happens to ask for a few bucks, then it's worth buying. In that event, what would happen is that it would attract more and more talented people who would submit lots of free ones in the hope of eventually being able to occasionally release premium ones to help recoup their time and costs. It's worth mentioning one more time - Stardock Design's free to non-free ratio so far is 6 to 1. If other studios and independent artists of great skill start to do the same, that sounds like a win-win.
So far, the results have been good. In the first 4 hours of "Blissful Sunset" we sold over 200 copies of it. Whether that trend continues remains to be seen. There's always a big bump at the beginning. The typical WindowBlinds Master skin has an initial bump and then eventually trends to around 5 per day after awhile. But even 5 per day, put over time, is worth it. The author's share of that ends up being around $3,500 per year per skin (not counting the initial bump) -- enough to buy a new computer. But skins are different because it's an established thing. Animated wallpapers are brand-new. How things progress with animated wallpaper remains to be seen.
Reply #162 Saturday, February 24, 2007 2:16 AM
I actually looked it up.... my first guess ended in 'drivel' - I'll let you guess on the FU part (man was I off)
Reply #163 Saturday, February 24, 2007 2:28 AM
No, you got 'FUD' correctly...
A lot of leeway needs to be given regarding what was expected vs what is actually meant/given as so many people who now raise the questions are very new to this whole graphical GUI manipulation idea and its community.
Vista's recent release has simply added a new gateway here, as did XP some years ago....then visual styles [anything to hide the Fisher-Price look] and now animated walls [Dreams].
The new influx of people/interest means we all will be explaining all sorts of things we take for granted...
Reply #164 Saturday, February 24, 2007 7:41 AM
Vista's recent release has simply added a new gateway here, as did XP some years ago....then visual styles [anything to hide the Fisher-Price look] and now animated walls [Dreams].
The new influx of people/interest means we all will be explaining all sorts of things we take for granted.
And after 163 threads in just this post we have not changed 1 opinion
Nor do we need to
A simple statement of fact and explaining the reasons for charging are all that is needed. It bothers me to see the name calling etc. When we understand that it only makes someone more close minded & determined to prove *their point maybe we won't resort to insulting & name calling & to make ours.
So every one has an opinion
and everyone believes that they are 100 % right
So they insult us,
Are we not more mature and able to let it run off our backs? And as representatives of this community we are simply proving ourselves to be as obnoxious as they can be. These forums are based on letting others voice their opinion, let them show themselves for who they are
Be reasonable in any responses and then let the threads like these die. It will become a waste of *Their time to continue to post
Now if someone is talking about pirating...none of the above applies..
They need to be shut up & put in their place.
But lets not give them the satisfaction of getting repeated responses form us
Starve them of the attention they so desperately crave
It's My Secret
Reply #165 Saturday, February 24, 2007 7:56 AM
Reply #166 Saturday, February 24, 2007 8:02 AM
To add to that, the Artist(s) that made Blissful Sunset should be extremely proud to have so many people wanting it bad enough to make a stink.
Reply #167 Saturday, February 24, 2007 9:27 AM
Why would anyone assume that the contents shown on a vista demo be actually included in the retail version of the OS? If they keep showing windows flip, the new gadgets and aero in their demos then I can only assume that it will be included in the retail version of the OS. Which they were. So, I can see why people assumed that the dream would be included in the Ultimate Extra dreamscene package.
With that said, I purchased sunset bliss. Not because I thought it was going to blow all of the other dreams away and be something that I can impress my friends. There's a really nice high def wmv I got from Microsoft's site that I use for that very purpose. The underwater scenes and the swimming dolphins is enough to drop jaws. I purchased the dream to support this site. I downloaded so many free one's I thought I'd drop $5 to show the guys/gals here some love.
But in the end I prefer getting my own vids to show off my desktop. Personally, I feel that trailers make the best wallpapers. I have one of Sincity that looks great. Now if I can only find the one for TMNT or Spiderman 3.
As far as animated wallpapers, if I were computer savvy I would try to make them compatible with myspace and open up shop. With 158 million users, that's where the money is.
Reply #168 Saturday, February 24, 2007 12:59 PM
are the heroes] Many Macs now come WITH iLife, which includes GarageBand, a pretty decent photo program, and other programs, such as a DVD viewer. When I upgraded my Millenium Edition to XP, I was shocked to find that DVDs no longer played! Turns out that I lost my third party DVD decoder in the process... such a huge pain! In order to make all features work, you need a thrid party software. Why can't Microsoft pay a third part to develop a basic version of features, such as a DVD decoder? It's not like people wouldn't pay to get other decoders... that's why there's so many on the market. Plus, if Microsoft ever offered anything as cool as GarageBand for Windows, we'd have to pay a bundle for it, and it would be feature rich and lacking in actual content.So this is my beef... Microsoft should have paid you guys a bundle for making it for you, that way you guys get paid and we get to enjoy it. Not offering it with Windows is almost like showing off a new Corvette with a convertable top and then saying, oh yeah, the convertable top is extra! You're not buying the car for the top, but you kind of expect them to tell you that the feature isn't standard! And this does not mean you guys shouldn't get paid... oh, no, you guys deserve every penny. As a contributor to your site, I know how nice it would be to be paid for my work [although I know that my work probably wouldn't get downloaded if I charged
]. But I just can't see why a billion dollar company like Microsoft can't shell out the big bucks to pay you to issue it with Windows... Showing it off in Vista promos and then not offering it with Windows makes you look like the bad guys. Makes me think Microsoft is usuing you guys! They show off your stuff to make themselves look good.
But, good work, I hope people pay for your excellent work, and I hope that in the future Microsoft doesn't take advantage of your wonderful designs and bring bad feelings towards you or your excellent work!Reply #169 Saturday, February 24, 2007 4:40 PM
They're a billion dollar company with billion dollar costs. I can't see why Walmart does a lot of the things they do but, they're not going to change operations tomorrow.
If Microsoft offered an iLife type package then many people would be screaming at the Justice Dept. with Steve Jobs leading the charge.
Reply #170 Saturday, February 24, 2007 7:34 PM
"bait and switch" is emotive language implying deliberate attempt to mislead for profit or gain.
The reality is MS wanted to show off what this Extra could do...and it just so happened Stardock had made one [for their own release] that appealed to MS as a NICE ONE TO SHOW.
The REAL, DEFINITIVE 'mistake/oversight' was Bill Gates didn't mention "oh, by the way, this specific .Dream is from a third party source and is not included with the Extras software package."
Now, except for a bunch of people with conspiracy theories it seems most have accepted it was a fair assumption that demonstrating an active wallpaper on an OS is no different to demonstrating a program functioning...or Media Player 'bopping the blues' to other content [music] not included.
Most seemingly did not actually need it spelled out in black and white 'this specific .Dream is not included in Extras as it is not MS content'.
The final bottom line is....none of it...exactly none of it is the fault of either Stardock OR Wincustomize.com.
If people perceive they have been deceived take it to your local version of the Trades Practices Commission and sue for restitution...but your target will need to be the PR branch of Microsoft for possibly omitting to mention content-sources and proprietorship in intimate detail [thus turning the launch speech into legalese - party-of-the-first-part, etc].
If you then re-evaluate your 'beef' think of the words 'petty', 'trivial', and 'absurd'.
They are apt....
Reply #171 Saturday, February 24, 2007 7:54 PM
Microsoft showed Xbox 360 games at CES too. And they don't come free with the system either.
Reply #172 Sunday, February 25, 2007 12:37 AM
Microsoft showed Xbox 360 games at CES too. And they don't come free with the system either.
You're comparing Apples to Oranges unfortunately.
When they did the demo for UE they stated that they were demoing content for DreamScene and that at launch there would be free content.
They therefore inferred that the content they were showing was said content.
They did not state that they were showing content for a 3rd party Add-On to DreamScene that would not run without said 3rd party Add-On.
So MS was deceitful in the way they handled it.
Also if Brad and others at SD want to act like they weren't paid to do things for MS then you really should hide your coding tracks better. DreamScene was bought by MS from StarDock. They didn't create it either, so you really shouldn't act like you guys are doing your own thing entirely by creating these free tools I'm sure that was part of the licensing agreement when MS bought it. Just as I am sure that SD required MS to only allow video playback ability with the offical extra.
That way MS finally has that nice animated Desktop everyone has been wanting, while at the same time SD can guarantee that the Dynamic content is really only available through their releases to the community.
So please quit patting each other on your respective backs. Part of why I left the Extras testing group was because the only Extra that Microsoft actually developed was the one for BitLocker. DS was from Stardock, and Hold'Em Poker was from Oberon Games. I was sick of the hypocrisy of the team being pissy when we criticized "their" work.
Meh, but I'll probably get flamed for posting this by another member of the SD team or it will be deleted for being the truth. That or Brad will post what a drain on resources I am here at StarDock since I've actually downloaded some of the dreams on the site.
Then again he would know nothing on the contributions my wife has made to the community since she has a different username and I refuse to post it just to pander to the ego of being a good little soldier having someone in the family sharing their art.
Reply #173 Sunday, February 25, 2007 2:49 AM
A tylenol with a 19,000% markup?(not a typo)
Reply #174 Sunday, February 25, 2007 5:20 AM
People being 'sure' of things doesn't make them any more closely based in truth.
People once were 'sure' the earth was flat....and in fact there are people who STILL are sure it is....
Reply #175 Sunday, February 25, 2007 11:31 AM
They therefore inferred that the content they were showing was said content.
implied
But there was no implication the particular one in demo would be free.
ex:
Here is some content. There will be some free content at the launch.
end ex.
Not, here is some content that will be part of the available free content at launch.
Nowhere do I see MS implied the demo'd content would be free.
Why people inferred it would be, I don't know.
Reply #176 Sunday, February 25, 2007 11:40 AM
Im starting to think they whine and cry just to get you to defend yourself.
if I were you, I would state my position...move on...kill them with kindness.
"Thanks for the comments
"Reply #177 Sunday, February 25, 2007 7:53 PM
Why ask and ask when you are the answer SD is not MS, MS ask to SD to make a good dream to show the power of their news OS, SD make a dream, MS show it, that's all!
Now here you can find dreams for free AND masters skins for $5!
MS have never said that dreams make by SD are all free!
It's idiotic to think that! And if you can download/use 100 dreams for free and (if you want) buy one for $5 where is the mater; why cry!
Reply #178 Sunday, February 25, 2007 8:56 PM
People being 'sure' of things doesn't make them any more closely based in truth.
People once were 'sure' the earth was flat....and in fact there are people who STILL are sure it is....
I have to give you props jafo, that's a nice dodge.
You basically just said that while MS did indeed purchase your IP that you cannot comment on it, and that the terms of licensing agreement are confidential.
If only politicians were so transparent

Reply #179 Sunday, February 25, 2007 9:01 PM
They therefore inferred that the content they were showing was said content.
implied
But there was no implication the particular one in demo would be free.
ex:
Here is some content. There will be some free content at the launch.
end ex.
Not, here is some content that will be part of the available free content at launch.
Nowhere do I see MS implied the demo'd content would be free.
Why people inferred it would be, I don't know.
You're making a clear deliniation, they however did not.
Here's more of an example of how it was put.
Here is one of the animated desktop backgrounds for our DreamScene Ultimate Extra. DreamScene is one of the Ultimate Extras that comes as part of the package when you purchase Windows Vista Ultimate Edition.
Reply #180 Sunday, February 25, 2007 9:13 PM
No, I said what I said.
If you wish to interpret the sky is falling that's your prerogative, however it'd be indicative of poor reading comprehension.
I am dodging nothing, nor have I any reason to communicate what was or what was not contracted between MS and SD for two very good reasons.
1. It is none of my business, nor is it anyone else's.
2. Stardock has quite open communication with the Wincustomize.com members [and other Stardock Customers], probably more-so than many Co's I could think of....which is good....and there are a [very small] number of people in a position to enlighten further [or not], whatever the reason....and I am not one of them....
Please login to comment and/or vote for this skin.
Welcome Guest! Please take the time to register with us.
There are many great features available to you once you register, including:
- Richer content, access to many features that are disabled for guests like commenting on the forums and downloading skins.
- Access to a great community, with a massive database of many, many areas of interest.
- Access to contests & subscription offers like exclusive emails.
- It's simple, and FREE!







Reply #161 Saturday, February 24, 2007 2:01 AM
Thanks for the FUD explanation. Normally you can figure it out from the context, but I just couldn't come up with that one.