WindowBlinds 4 features
Sunday, November 17, 2002 by Frogboy | Discussion: WinCustomize Talk
One of the debates we regularly have with regard to WindowBlinds is a classic argument:
Are we better off throwing in more features into the base product or breaking out new features into new programs?
Here's a good example: We can change IE toolbar icons and the throbber. You can do that with WebBlinds. But few people seem to use WebBlinds even though you could just use it to change the toolbar buttons and nothing else (with minimal system impact).
I tend to come from the school of thought of having more programs that do fewer things each to keep each one as small and tight as possible.
But that also opens up the door for the guy who says "Well, my program does X, Y, and Z in a single program."
So with WindowBlinds 4, we have ideas such as having the ability to skin the toolbar icons in IE and explorer and changing error messages and progress dialog animations and all sorts of pieces of Windows that many people take for granted as being unchangable.
But would we be better off breaking that sort of thing off into a seperate program (part of Object Desktop still of course) that does that and let WindowBlinds call that program to do its thing rather than have it integrated into WindowBlinds itself?
I could go either way on this. We really want to see toolbar icon changing in Windows become much more popular than it already has. That's the larger goal here.
Which path would you suggest?
Are we better off throwing in more features into the base product or breaking out new features into new programs?
Here's a good example: We can change IE toolbar icons and the throbber. You can do that with WebBlinds. But few people seem to use WebBlinds even though you could just use it to change the toolbar buttons and nothing else (with minimal system impact).
I tend to come from the school of thought of having more programs that do fewer things each to keep each one as small and tight as possible.
But that also opens up the door for the guy who says "Well, my program does X, Y, and Z in a single program."
So with WindowBlinds 4, we have ideas such as having the ability to skin the toolbar icons in IE and explorer and changing error messages and progress dialog animations and all sorts of pieces of Windows that many people take for granted as being unchangable.
But would we be better off breaking that sort of thing off into a seperate program (part of Object Desktop still of course) that does that and let WindowBlinds call that program to do its thing rather than have it integrated into WindowBlinds itself?
I could go either way on this. We really want to see toolbar icon changing in Windows become much more popular than it already has. That's the larger goal here.
Which path would you suggest?
 |
|
Page 2 of 5 | |
|
|---|
Chef Garry
Reply #23 Sunday, November 17, 2002 11:58 PM
Reply #23 Sunday, November 17, 2002 11:58 PM
From a user perspective, one app would seem to make it easier to use while the more the skinner has to do, the harder it will be to learn. I kind of like BakerStreet's suggestion of modules. It might look something like WinStyles?
While we all know (or should) that there can be difficulties with Beta software and incompatibilities, it seems likely that the more complicated the app, the more likely problems are going to occur.
While we all know (or should) that there can be difficulties with Beta software and incompatibilities, it seems likely that the more complicated the app, the more likely problems are going to occur.
JamMeister33
Reply #24 Monday, November 18, 2002 12:06 AM
Reply #24 Monday, November 18, 2002 12:06 AM
Excuse me, but the TOOLBAR is the first thing you see on your screen, it HAS to be awesome!
And no, don't separate IconPackager, it needs to be a stand alone product....
And no, don't separate IconPackager, it needs to be a stand alone product....
joetheblow
Reply #26 Monday, November 18, 2002 9:58 AM
Reply #26 Monday, November 18, 2002 9:58 AM
Keep it simple. That is it. If you do incorporate it in make sure it does not make it harder to make skins for WindowBlinds. I think calling the extra program is better. If a skinner does not skin it then it is not there. If the user does not want it then turn it off and the cpu/memory/whatever does not suffer.
I notice not all of the sliders ar not skinned in the full version of WindowBlinds. Maybe that can be an addition. In WebBlinds the scroll bars are skinned. I would like all my scroll bars skinned like that (sometimes, not always).
I notice not all of the sliders ar not skinned in the full version of WindowBlinds. Maybe that can be an addition. In WebBlinds the scroll bars are skinned. I would like all my scroll bars skinned like that (sometimes, not always).
paxx
Reply #27 Monday, November 18, 2002 10:47 AM
Reply #27 Monday, November 18, 2002 10:47 AM
No, I think Windowblinds should only worry about system skinning, not individual programs. If Windowblinds skins IE, what's next? Is Windowblinds going to also skin Windows Media Player, ICQ and Sysmetrix?
No, Let IE users download and install the app that will skin IE seperately.
No, Let IE users download and install the app that will skin IE seperately.
T-Man
Reply #28 Monday, November 18, 2002 11:18 AM
Reply #28 Monday, November 18, 2002 11:18 AM
Modules! Good idea Bakerstreet! I love the idea of modules that all fall under WindowBlinds. The Window Module, the Toolbar Module, The StartBar Module, the buttons module. Lets see, I use the MetalX Windows Skin, and Apply the CopperDeck StartBar, while using the BlackComb Toolbar. You get the idea!
feline
Reply #29 Monday, November 18, 2002 11:26 AM
Reply #29 Monday, November 18, 2002 11:26 AM
i think some of the comparisons to webblinds are mis-leading.
i have tried and then given up on web-blinds several times. the basic reason for this is that shortly after i started using web blinds, a new version of WB (3 as i remember) came out, and suddenly i couldn't have IE using the same skins as the rest of my programs.
there have been a series of compatibility problems between web-blinds and WB.
i see this as one of the major risks of having a separate program.
for "average" users, they probably want a simple button to make all their windows have the same new look. we get so many questions about why is program xyz not the same as all the other windows.
i think a separate program seamlessly called from WB would be best.
at the end of the day the only reason i use web-blinds is for the popup window blocking.
second point:
you have a reference to skinning the "progress dialogues". do you mean things like the "file copy" dialogue with its picture of flying folders?
that sounds like a rather different type of skinning to WB skinning.
it seems to me a separate program is best from the back-end, but for users the appearance of a single program is best.
after all, the user has no need to know how many programs it takes, so long as it looks like a single, simple to use, program.
i have tried and then given up on web-blinds several times. the basic reason for this is that shortly after i started using web blinds, a new version of WB (3 as i remember) came out, and suddenly i couldn't have IE using the same skins as the rest of my programs.
there have been a series of compatibility problems between web-blinds and WB.
i see this as one of the major risks of having a separate program.
for "average" users, they probably want a simple button to make all their windows have the same new look. we get so many questions about why is program xyz not the same as all the other windows.
i think a separate program seamlessly called from WB would be best.
at the end of the day the only reason i use web-blinds is for the popup window blocking.
second point:
you have a reference to skinning the "progress dialogues". do you mean things like the "file copy" dialogue with its picture of flying folders?
that sounds like a rather different type of skinning to WB skinning.
it seems to me a separate program is best from the back-end, but for users the appearance of a single program is best.
after all, the user has no need to know how many programs it takes, so long as it looks like a single, simple to use, program.
Woodbridge
Reply #30 Monday, November 18, 2002 12:04 PM
Reply #30 Monday, November 18, 2002 12:04 PM
I think the modules idea sounds like a good one too
Dangeruss
Reply #31 Monday, November 18, 2002 3:20 PM
Reply #31 Monday, November 18, 2002 3:20 PM
The only problem I see is that changing your WB skin will change your toolbar icons. If I really like a particular set, I might want to use it with different skins. If it were part of a particular WB skin then I'd have to modify the skin to incorporate it into the altered skin - and then if my taste changes later on.... again with the mods.
Now if it is a separate program, then the icons are persistant regardless of what skin or *cough* .msstyle I'm running. The other thing to consider is that good icon sets for the explorer par are few and far between. There's not much depth to the WebBlinds toolbar section or any other library for similar programs. You'd be much better off with a separate app to widely disperse the icons sets without having to roll them into a WB skin.
Skinning and icon creation are often two different disciplines - adni, treetog and a handful of others seem to manage it, but by and large, skinners skin, and iconists do icons. Combining the two in one app excludes a lot of participation from iconists who may have a great toolbar set, but no interest in creating a WB skin to support it.
Now if it is a separate program, then the icons are persistant regardless of what skin or *cough* .msstyle I'm running. The other thing to consider is that good icon sets for the explorer par are few and far between. There's not much depth to the WebBlinds toolbar section or any other library for similar programs. You'd be much better off with a separate app to widely disperse the icons sets without having to roll them into a WB skin.
Skinning and icon creation are often two different disciplines - adni, treetog and a handful of others seem to manage it, but by and large, skinners skin, and iconists do icons. Combining the two in one app excludes a lot of participation from iconists who may have a great toolbar set, but no interest in creating a WB skin to support it.
treetog
Reply #32 Monday, November 18, 2002 4:12 PM
Reply #32 Monday, November 18, 2002 4:12 PM
Brad: here is the link for the thread you asked me
Windowblinds wishing list
https://www.wincustomize.com/msgboard.asp?id=58876
Windowblinds wishing list
https://www.wincustomize.com/msgboard.asp?id=58876
sig101
Reply #33 Monday, November 18, 2002 4:38 PM
Reply #33 Monday, November 18, 2002 4:38 PM
Dangeruss makes a good point. I currently run WebBlinds just for the IE toolbar icons. While some skinners make WindowBlinds skins with WebBlind support, or have separate WebBlind files available for download, I usually pick what toolbar icon sets I want independently of the WindowBlind skin. And, as Dangeruss mentioned, there are not that many choices for toolbar icons at present.
If a separate program gives the user (as well as the skinner) more options or flexibility to do things as they prefer, that may be the way to go. And from a user's standpoint, if on occasion the user wants to run toolbar icons without windowblinds, that would work too.
If a separate program gives the user (as well as the skinner) more options or flexibility to do things as they prefer, that may be the way to go. And from a user's standpoint, if on occasion the user wants to run toolbar icons without windowblinds, that would work too.
Delicious
Reply #34 Monday, November 18, 2002 4:44 PM
Reply #34 Monday, November 18, 2002 4:44 PM
I say flip a coin and if the govt. doesn't ask for their cut, then make it one program.
Not everyone has a zillion mb of memory and a 2 gig processor so it would be a good idea to keep that in mind.
Not everyone has a zillion mb of memory and a 2 gig processor so it would be a good idea to keep that in mind.
kith
Reply #35 Monday, November 18, 2002 11:59 PM
Reply #35 Monday, November 18, 2002 11:59 PM
The only problem I see with a module concept is that Windows only allows a single global coloring. You can already use a seperate task bar and start menu from one skin and say a non-xp skin for window frames, but the problem is if the colors don't match or the fonts are different it will look awful. I hope MS will consider this for the future, but we know how that goes...
kith goes looking for Mr. Banfield!
kith goes looking for Mr. Banfield!
bakerstreet
Reply #36 Tuesday, November 19, 2002 12:29 AM
Reply #36 Tuesday, November 19, 2002 12:29 AM
weeeeell... actually I didn't mean independantly skinned modules, rather optional segments of a single theme, that would load only if asked. If it could work, that would be cool too, but my suggestion was mainly to add functionality to a single app without causing bloat for those who didn't want to use it.
aafuss
Reply #37 Tuesday, November 19, 2002 5:59 AM
Reply #37 Tuesday, November 19, 2002 5:59 AM
I think that support for 95/98/me/nt 430 be dropped-as they will nogt offically be supported ay more-make all stardock products 200/xp-most stablest of the alot-more secure than 9x based OS'es.
Jafo
Reply #38 Tuesday, November 19, 2002 6:47 AM
Reply #38 Tuesday, November 19, 2002 6:47 AM
I'd translate that but it's beyond human comprehension....
Actually, the support for the 'older Windows' is what puts WB particularly above StyleXP....
Actually, the support for the 'older Windows' is what puts WB particularly above StyleXP....
kith
Reply #39 Tuesday, November 19, 2002 8:34 AM
Reply #39 Tuesday, November 19, 2002 8:34 AM
From what I understand the installer for WB4 will have multiple builds specifically for the version of Windows you are running. It doesn't get any better than this...
aafuss
Reply #40 Tuesday, November 19, 2002 5:09 PM
Reply #40 Tuesday, November 19, 2002 5:09 PM
Biut, guess qwhat,they ar as not as stable-and basivally they are unsuported by MS-so mame v 14 XP/2000 ONLY-drop the legacy oss'es-security is not as good-doitlike withobjectbar-all staedofk products should not installiom 9x ose;s only 2000/xp? it's tome to do so now-regret if you don't SD
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 5 | |
|
|---|
Reply #21 Sunday, November 17, 2002 11:50 PM
Toolbar icons are a different matter though.
There is WinStyles for creating an overall theme.
Are there thoe who think IconPackager and WindowBlinds should be merged too?