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 4 of 5 | |
|
|---|
chichigirl46
Reply #62 Wednesday, November 20, 2002 4:06 AM
Reply #62 Wednesday, November 20, 2002 4:06 AM
I agree with some of the others above, keep it out of wblinds and maybe you could add it to Icon packager along with Icon Text and Icon background Transparencies where it belongs, WFX not every one can use it, Wblinds has become to much skinning for me, It's become work instead of enjoyment.... The only thing any more I've been using is wblinds and icon pkgr, there is too many separate programs in object desktop and some don't get along with their relatives and cause puter problems.... using wblinds is skins, using Icon packager is for icons and all icons settings, web blinds should take the place of hotbar etc.... just another view point 
bakerstreet
Reply #64 Wednesday, November 20, 2002 4:26 AM
Reply #64 Wednesday, November 20, 2002 4:26 AM
sig said: 'The OS still functions and apps still run.'
That isn't always true. The real death of any OS is when they stop releasing hardware drivers and DirextX upgrades for it. If you can't put a sound, video, or network card in it, or upgrade virus software, or even use new patches for programs you already have, it is pretty much dead.
When Everquest patched last year, you *had* to upgrade to DX8. If you had an OS they didn't make DX8 for, you couldn't play... software you already owned. With the new MS limits, I think it is safe to assume that 98 probably doesn't have much more than a year left.
I don't see how spending months to develop a program for an OS that doesn't have more than a couple of years left is cost effective. Not much time to pay for your labor.
That isn't always true. The real death of any OS is when they stop releasing hardware drivers and DirextX upgrades for it. If you can't put a sound, video, or network card in it, or upgrade virus software, or even use new patches for programs you already have, it is pretty much dead.
When Everquest patched last year, you *had* to upgrade to DX8. If you had an OS they didn't make DX8 for, you couldn't play... software you already owned. With the new MS limits, I think it is safe to assume that 98 probably doesn't have much more than a year left.
I don't see how spending months to develop a program for an OS that doesn't have more than a couple of years left is cost effective. Not much time to pay for your labor.
aafuss
Reply #65 Wednesday, November 20, 2002 4:44 AM
Reply #65 Wednesday, November 20, 2002 4:44 AM
I agree- just drop 95 supprt )if not done already).
sig101
Reply #67 Wednesday, November 20, 2002 5:08 AM
Reply #67 Wednesday, November 20, 2002 5:08 AM
Of course, it depends what apps you use and what you do on your PC. And typically W98 users are running them on older machines. For people running programs that are using the latest DirectX, etc and require new hardware and drivers, the older PC's and OS's won't cut it. But not everyone has those requirements.
Basic mainstream apps such as AV's, for example, don't require driver upgrades, etc. So in those areas there will be vendors that will have apps supporting W98 as long as a profitable market is there. I don't see them dropping W98 quite as soon as you.
Basic mainstream apps such as AV's, for example, don't require driver upgrades, etc. So in those areas there will be vendors that will have apps supporting W98 as long as a profitable market is there. I don't see them dropping W98 quite as soon as you.
bakerstreet
Reply #68 Wednesday, November 20, 2002 5:50 AM
Reply #68 Wednesday, November 20, 2002 5:50 AM
Well, we're only up to N.I.S. 2003, so I guess we'll see next year. If Norton is updating for win98 in 2004, I'll buy you a cookie. 
aafuss
Reply #69 Wednesday, November 20, 2002 6:03 AM
Reply #69 Wednesday, November 20, 2002 6:03 AM
Well, treegforf, vagarant Frogboy-0driop 98 support-becausr it's 4 years old, nsecure,noyt a stsble as 2000/xp is?
moshi
Reply #71 Wednesday, November 20, 2002 6:38 AM
Reply #71 Wednesday, November 20, 2002 6:38 AM
first you want your Windows98 to look like XP. then you want Windows9x support for programs that would help you doing this dropped. does that make any sense?
aafuss
Reply #72 Wednesday, November 20, 2002 6:43 AM
Reply #72 Wednesday, November 20, 2002 6:43 AM
well,I thinmk 98 isn't secyre-pludi ty's old-msyube release a 98 version of wb (as free-in 3yes or 4yres time).,
Jafo
Reply #75 Wednesday, November 20, 2002 7:06 AM
Reply #75 Wednesday, November 20, 2002 7:06 AM
OK...maybe he's just discovered alcohol and he just pickled the only functioning brain cell...
Grog
Reply #76 Wednesday, November 20, 2002 7:10 AM
Reply #76 Wednesday, November 20, 2002 7:10 AM
I know I'm going to hate myself for this one but Aafuss what is this word "secyre-pludi ty's"? Oh and by the way at work I still have a machine that runs 3.11, not 3.1 mind you but 3.11 so it's not that horrible. But it serves a purpose every day, all day long, and all the rest of the machines are 98 or NT with a couple of 2000's thrown in for fun. Not one XP machine in the place. As a matter of fact standing orders say that any machine that shows up with XP on it gets reformatted to 2000.
feline
Reply #78 Wednesday, November 20, 2002 10:29 AM
Reply #78 Wednesday, November 20, 2002 10:29 AM
aafuss, PLEASE try and type more clearly!
i may not be the greatest speller here, but at least i try and get words that look reasonable for posting, before posting.
try downloading and using "IESpell" http://www.iespell.com/ , it is free (donate ware) and lets you spell checks your posts before submitting them.
i may not be the greatest speller here, but at least i try and get words that look reasonable for posting, before posting.
try downloading and using "IESpell" http://www.iespell.com/ , it is free (donate ware) and lets you spell checks your posts before submitting them.
Chef Garry
Reply #79 Wednesday, November 20, 2002 10:41 AM
Reply #79 Wednesday, November 20, 2002 10:41 AM
Feline - doesn't Babya do spelling (& OS, search, dishes . . . )
TEDDY!
TEDDY!
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 4 of 5 | |
|
|---|
Reply #61 Wednesday, November 20, 2002 4:04 AM
Translation:
m2 as4ul pl3asee sh8t thr 7uc5 up.