The Skin Patch Debate
Monday, February 24, 2003 by Frogboy | Discussion: WinCustomize Talk
There is a new technology being developed but its eventual available form will be heavily dependent on the input of thousands of users such as you.
Each year, thousands of skins are created and released. Skins take many many hours to create. But often times, once released, they are never updated. As the software for these skins gains in function, these skins come to look outdated and are no longer used. The proposed answer: Skin patching.
Please read this next part carefully: What Skin patching does is allow third parties to submit updates to an existing skin. But these updates do not contain any parts from the original skins. Instead, they only contain the pieces that have been updated. Or in other words, patches are completely seperate files in themselves. The actual "patching" takes place in software. It would download the original skin and then the updates would be provided as additional sub-styles. If the user applies one of those sub-styles, the program the original skin and then includes the updates when it applies.
For example, let's say someone created a really nice WindowBlinds skin in 2001. But this skin doesn't support Windows XP Start bars, doesn't support the task panel (shellstyle), doesn't support the slider control nor does it support the logon/logoff dialog skinning.
Five different users could submit "patches" to this skin.
Patch 1 would just have the task panel (shellstyle).
Patch 2 would just be the logon/logoff dialog skinning
Patch 3 would have the have the XP Start bar
Patch 4 would have the slider control
Patch 5 would be another rendition of the task panel and it would have the XP Start bar and the logon/logoff skinning.
On a site like WinCustomize (or any other site that supported this technology), when the user chose to download the skin, it would bring up a dialog asking which patches (if any) a user would like to also download.
Once downloaded, when the user went to apply the skin it would bring up a dialog asking which patches they would like to apply. The updates would be displayed to user by widget (so patch 5 contains 3 widgets whereas the others are 1 widget each) to choose which pieces to use.
In this way, older skins could be updated by fans and the original effort to create the skin would be rewarded by keeping the skin fresh and new over the long term.
So where is the debate? How much say should the skin author have? WinCustomize is known for being very protective of skin author rights. But there is the conflict in wanting skin authors work to be kept useful and worthwhile over the long run. Obviously any skin patch that used the original author's graphics would need express written consent. But what about skin patches that don't use any of the graphics from the original skin? I.e. a Shellstyle wouldn't need graphics from the original skin and neither would an XP Start bar. Additionally, what policies should be by default?
Stardock's view is to make it so that the original skin author has the right to deny any skin patches be made for their skin (or at least displayed as part of the skin). Additionally, it believes that original author should have the right to reject individual skin patches from being displayed. But there is also the matter on what the default is. By default, should skin patches be allowed on skins where the author is long gone? Stardock's view is presently that skin patches on those skins would be allowed based on the discretion of the moderator and if the original author returns they can then change the setting if they so choose. This way, the thousands of existing skins can gain a second life and it is Stardock's view that the vast majority of MIA skin authors would prefer that. Moderators would still reject any skin patch that used artwork from the original skin without express written consent however.
What's your view?
Each year, thousands of skins are created and released. Skins take many many hours to create. But often times, once released, they are never updated. As the software for these skins gains in function, these skins come to look outdated and are no longer used. The proposed answer: Skin patching.
Please read this next part carefully: What Skin patching does is allow third parties to submit updates to an existing skin. But these updates do not contain any parts from the original skins. Instead, they only contain the pieces that have been updated. Or in other words, patches are completely seperate files in themselves. The actual "patching" takes place in software. It would download the original skin and then the updates would be provided as additional sub-styles. If the user applies one of those sub-styles, the program the original skin and then includes the updates when it applies.
For example, let's say someone created a really nice WindowBlinds skin in 2001. But this skin doesn't support Windows XP Start bars, doesn't support the task panel (shellstyle), doesn't support the slider control nor does it support the logon/logoff dialog skinning.
Five different users could submit "patches" to this skin.
Patch 1 would just have the task panel (shellstyle).
Patch 2 would just be the logon/logoff dialog skinning
Patch 3 would have the have the XP Start bar
Patch 4 would have the slider control
Patch 5 would be another rendition of the task panel and it would have the XP Start bar and the logon/logoff skinning.
On a site like WinCustomize (or any other site that supported this technology), when the user chose to download the skin, it would bring up a dialog asking which patches (if any) a user would like to also download.
Once downloaded, when the user went to apply the skin it would bring up a dialog asking which patches they would like to apply. The updates would be displayed to user by widget (so patch 5 contains 3 widgets whereas the others are 1 widget each) to choose which pieces to use.
In this way, older skins could be updated by fans and the original effort to create the skin would be rewarded by keeping the skin fresh and new over the long term.
So where is the debate? How much say should the skin author have? WinCustomize is known for being very protective of skin author rights. But there is the conflict in wanting skin authors work to be kept useful and worthwhile over the long run. Obviously any skin patch that used the original author's graphics would need express written consent. But what about skin patches that don't use any of the graphics from the original skin? I.e. a Shellstyle wouldn't need graphics from the original skin and neither would an XP Start bar. Additionally, what policies should be by default?
Stardock's view is to make it so that the original skin author has the right to deny any skin patches be made for their skin (or at least displayed as part of the skin). Additionally, it believes that original author should have the right to reject individual skin patches from being displayed. But there is also the matter on what the default is. By default, should skin patches be allowed on skins where the author is long gone? Stardock's view is presently that skin patches on those skins would be allowed based on the discretion of the moderator and if the original author returns they can then change the setting if they so choose. This way, the thousands of existing skins can gain a second life and it is Stardock's view that the vast majority of MIA skin authors would prefer that. Moderators would still reject any skin patch that used artwork from the original skin without express written consent however.
What's your view?
 |
|
Page 4 of 9 | |
|
|---|
IPlural
Reply #62 Tuesday, February 25, 2003 10:49 AM
Reply #62 Tuesday, February 25, 2003 10:49 AM
dang * bakerstreet *
IPlural ,now has got to go get the dog brushed so I can put him in the truck and drive over the bridge and hope, mind you after a 40 minute drive, that this little older lady from Honduras has her kitchen trailer stopped where she normally parks it so I can get a real meal
heck I think I'll do just that about 1:00, give her time to setup and get the grill hot and cured with seasoning
IPlural ,now has got to go get the dog brushed so I can put him in the truck and drive over the bridge and hope, mind you after a 40 minute drive, that this little older lady from Honduras has her kitchen trailer stopped where she normally parks it so I can get a real meal
heck I think I'll do just that about 1:00, give her time to setup and get the grill hot and cured with seasoning
spinal
Reply #63 Tuesday, February 25, 2003 1:51 PM
Reply #63 Tuesday, February 25, 2003 1:51 PM
I think the idea of patching skins is a fine one, its an idea that has been batted around messageboards for a while now, first of all, who can claim they have never updated a skin for their own use, eg added a start bar/menu, changed the colours etc. so why not make these updates available for everyone? as for defaults, I personally think, that by default a skin should be patchable, cos I would love people to patch skins I create, I cant think why anyone would mind. It should be left up to those who are against there work being updated to say so, it would be a lot easier than getting everyone else to say yes.
(sorry if a rambled to much, I think what I meant to say is in there somewhere).
(sorry if a rambled to much, I think what I meant to say is in there somewhere).
spinal
Reply #64 Tuesday, February 25, 2003 2:20 PM
Reply #64 Tuesday, February 25, 2003 2:20 PM
oh, and why not have the patches all seperate, catagorised by some sort of grouping, taskbars, startmenu's etc, but instead of having the specifically for a certain skin, just have a comment, saying that it is recomende for use with a skin, no specifics involved, then permissions would be less of a problem.
Koasati
Reply #67 Tuesday, February 25, 2003 11:03 PM
Reply #67 Tuesday, February 25, 2003 11:03 PM
Spinal, there is nothing wrong with modifying a skin for your personal use, it's when you redistribute the modified work, that it becomes a copyright infringement. And this is why making this an 'opt out' process, is unethical.
JamMeister33
Reply #68 Tuesday, February 25, 2003 11:19 PM
Reply #68 Tuesday, February 25, 2003 11:19 PM
This seems like a very unstable, highly volatile subject.......
Also extremely subjective in content.
Lotsa Luck...
Also extremely subjective in content.
Lotsa Luck...
IPlural
Reply #69 Wednesday, February 26, 2003 3:17 AM
Reply #69 Wednesday, February 26, 2003 3:17 AM
I like it
but maybe there could be a twist applied to the opt in process?
Go ahead and start it with resident skinners and such having the choice to opt in. Let it run for a bit, see how it is doing and if all is well then spread it to the other sites and
let people know that they have to opt in for it at this site alone to register with an email
from their members account in the records. Patches and updates would reside at this location for as long as was decided was best. If at some point other sites wish to opt themselves into the process, great, if not, this will be the site for legal updates with authors permission and quality assurance...
maybe?
but maybe there could be a twist applied to the opt in process?
Go ahead and start it with resident skinners and such having the choice to opt in. Let it run for a bit, see how it is doing and if all is well then spread it to the other sites and
let people know that they have to opt in for it at this site alone to register with an email
from their members account in the records. Patches and updates would reside at this location for as long as was decided was best. If at some point other sites wish to opt themselves into the process, great, if not, this will be the site for legal updates with authors permission and quality assurance...
maybe?
IPlural
Reply #70 Wednesday, February 26, 2003 3:20 AM
Reply #70 Wednesday, February 26, 2003 3:20 AM
Kind of like "If you build it they will come" those interested in allowing others to do this would come to apply, or send the email...
Those that don't wouldn't, probably get stinky a bit, some, but
The mechanics for selection of submitted things would have to be decided upon and such, but that would have to come about anyways...
Those that don't wouldn't, probably get stinky a bit, some, but
The mechanics for selection of submitted things would have to be decided upon and such, but that would have to come about anyways...
White_Moth
Reply #71 Wednesday, February 26, 2003 10:16 AM
Reply #71 Wednesday, February 26, 2003 10:16 AM
A -can "o" worms- I say.
But hey, you can do a lot fishin' with a can of worms, it's simply a matter of making it through the briar patch without losing too many before you get to the water.
So how many of you are scratching your heads now?
But hey, you can do a lot fishin' with a can of worms, it's simply a matter of making it through the briar patch without losing too many before you get to the water.
So how many of you are scratching your heads now?
Jafo
Reply #77 Wednesday, February 26, 2003 6:29 PM
Reply #77 Wednesday, February 26, 2003 6:29 PM
OK...let's stop...there's 24 of them...
This is an important topic.
It's not every day that people get to perhaps determine exactly what direction the future of [one part of] skinning takes.
This is a perfect opportunity to discuss/debate options, between the product creator and the skinners themselves.
Both have vested interests in a successful resolution/determination.
So let's keep it strictly 'on-topic'....
This is an important topic.
It's not every day that people get to perhaps determine exactly what direction the future of [one part of] skinning takes.
This is a perfect opportunity to discuss/debate options, between the product creator and the skinners themselves.
Both have vested interests in a successful resolution/determination.
So let's keep it strictly 'on-topic'....
adni18
Reply #78 Wednesday, February 26, 2003 7:12 PM
Reply #78 Wednesday, February 26, 2003 7:12 PM
My opinion about this idea is that with all those new skins coming out everyday, there is no need to make things more complicated.
So many skins, so many fresh ideas.
I am wondering who is going to make those updates for the skin that belongs to someone else? If someone is good enough he is going to make his own skins, not updates.
In the other hand, imagine someone to work hard for an update and in the end the author of the original skin to refuse the final update for any reason or imagine the other side, which is that some good authors the will be in a very difficult position if they find out that the update is ugly.
I believe in the spirit of collaboration, but do you think that we are ready for that? Allow me to doubt about it.
Just my 2 cents
So many skins, so many fresh ideas.
I am wondering who is going to make those updates for the skin that belongs to someone else? If someone is good enough he is going to make his own skins, not updates.
In the other hand, imagine someone to work hard for an update and in the end the author of the original skin to refuse the final update for any reason or imagine the other side, which is that some good authors the will be in a very difficult position if they find out that the update is ugly.
I believe in the spirit of collaboration, but do you think that we are ready for that? Allow me to doubt about it.
Just my 2 cents
pjpowell
Reply #79 Wednesday, February 26, 2003 8:35 PM
Reply #79 Wednesday, February 26, 2003 8:35 PM
As a someone who has created their own skins and also updated someone elses skin (ThredzWB by dangeruss) I have to say I think skin patching is a great idea. As long as it is regulated and that skinners opt into it. I would welcome the work someone would put in updating my skins to the latest features. I just haven't got the time to do it myself. Also you get bored of looking at the same skinall the time. Skinning can be an exhausting process that by the end of it you just don't feel like doing any more for a while.
As to the statement that 'if someone is good enough he won't update other peoples skins' I have to just laugh out loud at that.
What is someone who is porting a skin to another app doing other than updating that skin that belongs to someone else? It's the same concept. Just in the same app instead of different apps. Look at dangeruss. He has done some great ports. But I wouldn't say he is 'not good enough' to be a skinner. He's one of the best skinners there is. Many skins are just too good to be allowed to fade into obscurity simply because the app has moved on and added a ton of new stuff the skin doesn't support. Personally I won't use a WB skin that doesn't have XP support. It just looks so ugly.
Having the ability for WB to apply skin parts instead of having to create a full new skin and upload it would also be great.
As to the statement that 'if someone is good enough he won't update other peoples skins' I have to just laugh out loud at that.
What is someone who is porting a skin to another app doing other than updating that skin that belongs to someone else? It's the same concept. Just in the same app instead of different apps. Look at dangeruss. He has done some great ports. But I wouldn't say he is 'not good enough' to be a skinner. He's one of the best skinners there is. Many skins are just too good to be allowed to fade into obscurity simply because the app has moved on and added a ton of new stuff the skin doesn't support. Personally I won't use a WB skin that doesn't have XP support. It just looks so ugly.
Having the ability for WB to apply skin parts instead of having to create a full new skin and upload it would also be great.
Alobar
Reply #80 Wednesday, February 26, 2003 8:44 PM
Reply #80 Wednesday, February 26, 2003 8:44 PM
I very much like the idea of skin patches. I do agree that individual authors have the right to refuse a patch, but if the author is no longer around, I think wincustomize people should arbitrate. I love some of the older WB skins (like Yeech) but I do not have the time or skill to update them myself.
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 9 | |
|
|---|
Reply #61 Tuesday, February 25, 2003 10:48 AM
1. Turn off shellstyles.
2. Use a shell such as Blackbox or LiteStep - never have to worry about that unskinned XP start menu again!
*coughs* Sorry, I couldn't resist. I /do/ want to say though - I think this is a wonderful idea - I just... can't really give any opinions on it yet. I've been mulling it all over since the first time Frogboy mentioned it way-back-when. There's just too many variables involved for my poor mind to handle easily.