Boot Screens and Legal Issues...
Tuesday, August 12, 2003 by Frogboy | Discussion: WinCustomize News
In our last poll we asked you what section would you like WinCustomize to add the most. With about 1100 people voting it was pretty clear:
BOOT SCREENS: ~40%
Trillian: 22%
Other: 16%
The Rest: 24%
Many other customization related sites support boot screens. But there's a problem. Most boot screens are actually pirated software. Which is ironic because the same person who would never consider clicking on an attachment would happily replace their WINDOWS KERNEL.
The way you replace your boot screen on Windows XP is to replace the graphic images in the Windows XP kernel. So many, if not most, boot screens on various sites actually contain a copy of the Windows XP kernel.
In a community that values intellectual property as ours does or at least says it does, we just can't reconcile this. How can we morally or ethically be against ripping while allowing people to submit files that contain the Windows XP kernel? It's in essence software piracy.
This has been a difficult decision for us because we want to serve the needs of our users and skinners. And with 40% of you wanting this section, it's pretty temping. I mean think about it, nearly half the people who responded to the poll want boot screens.
Not having boot screens hurts the popularity of our site so you can see the dilemna.
Now, if someone knows of a way to apply a boot screen in such a way where the boot screen submitted doesn't need to contain the NT kernel please respond here and let us know. We're perfectly okay with having a boot screen section if the submitted files contain just the graphics needed to do so. Perhaps someone has written a program that can apply those images to the system.
In the meantime, we will be looking at adding other sections including perhaps a Trillian section. Are there enough Trillian skinners here interested in submitting their work to get a section going? Let us know. Thanks!
 |
|
Page 2 of 3 | |
|
|---|
sig101
Reply #22 Tuesday, August 12, 2003 2:35 PM
Reply #22 Tuesday, August 12, 2003 2:35 PM
And since there is no need to host .exes, if you go for just hosting images that the user would convert themselves to a bootscreen, all the images would be are essentially walls that would make a cool bootscreen.
So that might mitigate the need for a bootscreen specific library: you could just have a subsection within the existing wallpaper section. Or if you wish to highlight the bootscreen section then have a separate library, but they would really just be wallpapers. Whether 16 color (which I understand is required for bootscreens) or otherwise which might be better since the programs can convert them as is. Just a thought.
Oh and YeahCoolDude makes a point: while the bootscreen programs I've seen can be run on W2K (I'm pretty sure...I know BootXP supports W2K), having images only means that virtally anyone can use them and apply them, regardless of what OS they run.
So that might mitigate the need for a bootscreen specific library: you could just have a subsection within the existing wallpaper section. Or if you wish to highlight the bootscreen section then have a separate library, but they would really just be wallpapers. Whether 16 color (which I understand is required for bootscreens) or otherwise which might be better since the programs can convert them as is. Just a thought.
Oh and YeahCoolDude makes a point: while the bootscreen programs I've seen can be run on W2K (I'm pretty sure...I know BootXP supports W2K), having images only means that virtally anyone can use them and apply them, regardless of what OS they run.
dhSIMON
Reply #23 Tuesday, August 12, 2003 2:51 PM
Reply #23 Tuesday, August 12, 2003 2:51 PM
http://www.littlewhitedog.com/reviews_other_00027.asp
Works on 2000 and XP.
It is safe in that you have a backup that you can access no matter what happens to your customized kernel.
People for some reason thing that if it messes up, you have no chance at saving windows. Anyways, even if you don't make a backup. Using the 'repair' utility on the Windows installation disc will fix it. I have never had to do that though. I never had a problem customizing my boot logo.
Works on 2000 and XP.
It is safe in that you have a backup that you can access no matter what happens to your customized kernel.
People for some reason thing that if it messes up, you have no chance at saving windows. Anyways, even if you don't make a backup. Using the 'repair' utility on the Windows installation disc will fix it. I have never had to do that though. I never had a problem customizing my boot logo.
Drop125
Reply #24 Tuesday, August 12, 2003 3:00 PM
Reply #24 Tuesday, August 12, 2003 3:00 PM
In risk of starting a INT Prop fight..I said it before and Ill say it again..Has any one even bothered to ask Microsoft for Permission???? No..You guys have not..Just Freakin ASK!!!!!!!All you guys seem to say is We want to But we are to Chicken to Ask...Now if you really want to get into it..Micro soft is accused of and in the process of Being sued for Basically cornering the OS market..Right?? So why would they want to make an even bigger stink over a Kernal ...?????Seems no one has Really put any effort into this..Including you Frogboy..Ive not seen one response to the fact as to weither you have tried to get in touch with some one at MicroSoft..Now if Stardock has done stuff with MS in the oast..(I remember an article about You guys Desighning some sort of skin for an MS VideoGame) then Permission shouldnt be such an Issue..???Come on STOP whinning about Boot screen Infringment and JUST ASK!!!!! Nuff Said....!
dhSIMON
Reply #26 Tuesday, August 12, 2003 4:38 PM
Reply #26 Tuesday, August 12, 2003 4:38 PM
You can't just "ask Microsoft" You are able to edit the kernel by yourself and for youself, because Steve Balmer isn't about to walk into your house and tell you to knock it off. However, you can post the bitmaps to let the downloaders edit the kernel. That is fine and legit.
kenwas
Reply #27 Tuesday, August 12, 2003 4:47 PM
Reply #27 Tuesday, August 12, 2003 4:47 PM
I agree that Microsoft would be very hard pressed to say yes to any request to open/alter kernels as it would open a pandora's box for them with every Tom, Dick, and Harry wanting the same allowance for another type of alteration. The skinning world is rather insignificant when compared to the world of issues that MS would create for themselves by granting any kind of permission as being discussed here. That is partly why they seem to have a hear no evil, see no evil when it comes to the limited world of skinning in relation to their world wide consumer base.
dhSIMON
Reply #28 Tuesday, August 12, 2003 4:58 PM
Reply #28 Tuesday, August 12, 2003 4:58 PM
I meant that....how exactly are you going to "ask Microsoft."
It isn't that simple, and frankly not worth the hassle. So you can in fact do it a legit way..but people are making too big of a deal out if it already.
It isn't that simple, and frankly not worth the hassle. So you can in fact do it a legit way..but people are making too big of a deal out if it already.
GhoS
Reply #29 Tuesday, August 12, 2003 5:14 PM
Reply #29 Tuesday, August 12, 2003 5:14 PM
Quicknote is a program like notepad only skinnable.
Rainlendar is a calender that shows on your desktop very much like the current crop of DesktopX calendar objects, although rainlendar can link up with Outlook. Many times rainlandar appears in a screenshot for a Windowblind or DesktopX theme.
As far as the Boot section, it doesn't matter either way for me. If it is does without having to host kernals, that certainly would be the better way. BootXp seems to be the more popular program for that.
Rainlendar is a calender that shows on your desktop very much like the current crop of DesktopX calendar objects, although rainlendar can link up with Outlook. Many times rainlandar appears in a screenshot for a Windowblind or DesktopX theme.
As far as the Boot section, it doesn't matter either way for me. If it is does without having to host kernals, that certainly would be the better way. BootXp seems to be the more popular program for that.
Drop125
Reply #30 Tuesday, August 12, 2003 5:22 PM
Reply #30 Tuesday, August 12, 2003 5:22 PM
Well then if its not worth the hassel..Then as My Grandpa used to say.."Anything worth doing isnt going to be easy in the first place or else someone else would have already done it.." See the guy up there who posted the Bootloader Link.....in the someone else would have already done it...So ...whats the issue....All were really talkin about is replacing an Image in Bitmap form....This is my final reply and I wont visit this thread anymore..(I genarally just sjhow up to keep up on the pertinant info...and create havoc..Just ask Big Doug...
stark23x
Reply #31 Tuesday, August 12, 2003 5:52 PM
Reply #31 Tuesday, August 12, 2003 5:52 PM
I use BootXP, and it works great. However, I have NEVER used anyone else's NTOSKernel file. Not on a dare would I. All you need to do is save a bitmap and drag it into the program...it can convert to 256 on the fly.
If people REALLY want bootscreens at the site on top of Logons, which I do, BTW...well, I think Stardock can either write an app that duplicates the functionality of BootXP, or offer a link to the software.
Drop125: It's more than just asking for permission, IMHO. This is messing with the very heart of the NT-based OS. The casual user could easily break their machine beyond their ability to repair. Have you seen how many complaints people have with just WindowBlinds? The average user isn't computer savvy to use a piece of software that is basically point-and-click. Distributing varied NT kernels from virtually anywhere and anyone could introsuce lord only knows what kinds of instability, and the average person will immediately blame Stardock. But, if each user is forced to modify their *own* kernel...well, the responsibility for any mistakes is solely on their shoulders, and Stardock is completely off the hook.
If people REALLY want bootscreens at the site on top of Logons, which I do, BTW...well, I think Stardock can either write an app that duplicates the functionality of BootXP, or offer a link to the software.
Drop125: It's more than just asking for permission, IMHO. This is messing with the very heart of the NT-based OS. The casual user could easily break their machine beyond their ability to repair. Have you seen how many complaints people have with just WindowBlinds? The average user isn't computer savvy to use a piece of software that is basically point-and-click. Distributing varied NT kernels from virtually anywhere and anyone could introsuce lord only knows what kinds of instability, and the average person will immediately blame Stardock. But, if each user is forced to modify their *own* kernel...well, the responsibility for any mistakes is solely on their shoulders, and Stardock is completely off the hook.
L-E-O
Reply #32 Tuesday, August 12, 2003 6:04 PM
Reply #32 Tuesday, August 12, 2003 6:04 PM
I would like to see a boot section with just images and in 16 colors only.The people will know how to use the programs to merge the boot pic into the kernel.I wouldn't mind if Stardock will code it's own program to do that as well 
But instead of just upload classic walls converted in 16 colors by a program (usually an ugly result)why not drawing pics with 16 colors custom palette that really worth the view ? This would be an interesting challenge for gfx artists and skinners.Remember de good old days of the Amiga and demos scene ? Great pics in 16 and 32 colors
But instead of just upload classic walls converted in 16 colors by a program (usually an ugly result)why not drawing pics with 16 colors custom palette that really worth the view ? This would be an interesting challenge for gfx artists and skinners.Remember de good old days of the Amiga and demos scene ? Great pics in 16 and 32 colors
alicizmar
Reply #34 Tuesday, August 12, 2003 7:34 PM
Reply #34 Tuesday, August 12, 2003 7:34 PM
Bootscreen>sections-
-low-res backgrounds (640x480 res walls)
-progress BMPs (progress bars)
-Windows OS besides XP (all said in title)
As in we should upload BMPs here-plain and simple.
We aren't losing as many users here to Trillian as to Boots obviously.
Can we just leave it at that please?
-low-res backgrounds (640x480 res walls)
-progress BMPs (progress bars)
-Windows OS besides XP (all said in title)
As in we should upload BMPs here-plain and simple.
We aren't losing as many users here to Trillian as to Boots obviously.
Can we just leave it at that please?
Asimo
Reply #35 Tuesday, August 12, 2003 9:26 PM
Reply #35 Tuesday, August 12, 2003 9:26 PM
Frogboy –
I’ve been changing out my boot screens for quite some time using this program:
http://www.belchfire.net/~userxp/indexbe.htm
I wrote a program to back up my original NTOSKRNL.EXE file prior to using this, and was pleased to find the feature built into this program itself. At any rate, when me and my friends give each other boot screens we make sure that they’re all zipped up the same way, so we’re only giving each other a series of bitmaps. We unzip them into a folder, open up BootEditor, and build the boot screen. Now this may sound like a cumbersome/confusing process, but actually it’s really simple. The graphics that we send are all named exactly what they are in the BootEditor program, so in your “new” boot screen, you replace image1.bmp with your new image1.bmp, and continue doing so for the rest of the numbered images. It takes all of two minutes to open the program, select new boot screen, replace the images, and “build” the new boot screen. You should check out the process once or twice yourself to see what I mean.
Anyhow, I would love to see some of the artists here make boot screens as the art found here is simply amazing at times, and there’s nothing better than a boot screen to top off a whole skin suite.
It seems to me that if this program didn’t suit your needs, a little reverse engineering could result in a StarDock product that does the same thing in a more standardized process.
I’ve been changing out my boot screens for quite some time using this program:
http://www.belchfire.net/~userxp/indexbe.htm
I wrote a program to back up my original NTOSKRNL.EXE file prior to using this, and was pleased to find the feature built into this program itself. At any rate, when me and my friends give each other boot screens we make sure that they’re all zipped up the same way, so we’re only giving each other a series of bitmaps. We unzip them into a folder, open up BootEditor, and build the boot screen. Now this may sound like a cumbersome/confusing process, but actually it’s really simple. The graphics that we send are all named exactly what they are in the BootEditor program, so in your “new” boot screen, you replace image1.bmp with your new image1.bmp, and continue doing so for the rest of the numbered images. It takes all of two minutes to open the program, select new boot screen, replace the images, and “build” the new boot screen. You should check out the process once or twice yourself to see what I mean.
Anyhow, I would love to see some of the artists here make boot screens as the art found here is simply amazing at times, and there’s nothing better than a boot screen to top off a whole skin suite.
It seems to me that if this program didn’t suit your needs, a little reverse engineering could result in a StarDock product that does the same thing in a more standardized process.
dhSIMON
Reply #36 Tuesday, August 12, 2003 9:29 PM
Reply #36 Tuesday, August 12, 2003 9:29 PM
You don't need any program running to change a boot logo. There is no "BootBlinds." You just download a resource hacker like 'Resource Hacker' for example and change it and save it (after you made a backup kernel) boom you are done. The idea was great, but one negative that was brought up and that doesn't even really exist...killed it.
Asimo
Reply #37 Tuesday, August 12, 2003 9:39 PM
Reply #37 Tuesday, August 12, 2003 9:39 PM
In case anyone went to the previous link that I had posted, I updated it to point directly to the program I talked about, Boot Editor, and not the entire list of the other software...
Drop125
Reply #38 Tuesday, August 12, 2003 10:22 PM
Reply #38 Tuesday, August 12, 2003 10:22 PM
Umm Acouple of entrys or so above me said "ask microsoft"..Refering to the fact that that was not as simple as I would make it to be...Um sorry to inform that citizen.But I work in full system repair..componet to full netwerk instalation..I have to modify all sorts of things to run bench test to perform repairs...I work with IBM and AS400 Systems all day long..When I need to create testing apps I call and get an e-mail with permision to edit and Diasect all I want as long as I dont repackage and SELL the software..Now..If the said Boot editor were made by STARDOCK and DISTRIBUTED FOR FREE...Are you all listening..The key word is FREE as in not Making any Money...Microsoft has an entire division that I get transfered to espressely for that reason...Microsoft does want to work for you Not against you...Belive it or not..Yes they want to make a Buck while their doing it...but they are willing to let people create fore them for free.If they feel they can profit from it. Well then they step in and say something..and we all know how Dos came to have MS-Dos with MS in front of it...Um thats it..
Drop125
Reply #39 Tuesday, August 12, 2003 10:30 PM
Reply #39 Tuesday, August 12, 2003 10:30 PM
m Id also like tp point out that Microsoft only gets like 3 dollars for everycomputer that Is sold with Windows on it...Hence the partition windows version you get instead of the actual disk....
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!
|
|
Page 2 of 3 | |
|
|---|
Reply #21 Tuesday, August 12, 2003 2:25 PM
I think that we, as windows users (despite that fact that I wouldn't give up my Mac in a million years) deserve to mess with Windows a little.
And if Microsoft has a problem with it, bring up the moral issue against them. They of all companies should know that ripping and stealing software AND hardware is wrong.