Problems with WindowBlinds v4...
Friday, September 12, 2003 by Izagaia | Discussion: WinCustomize Talk
For whatever reason, WB does not seem to want to skin my start menu and task bar. Explorer seems to skin correctly as well as application windows but nothing associated with my desktop. Come to think of it, the box for display properties does not seem to skin either. These menu bars and windows appear in windows "classic" style of whatever color they are supposed to be skinned in. I have played with all sorts of options in the settings menus but nothing works so far.
Can anyone help?
Can anyone help?
Satans Child
Reply #2 Friday, September 12, 2003 1:14 PM
Reply #2 Friday, September 12, 2003 1:14 PM
Some older WB do not skin taskbar and start menu, try using a recent WB and see if you still have the same problem.
Izagaia
Reply #3 Friday, September 12, 2003 1:21 PM
Reply #3 Friday, September 12, 2003 1:21 PM
So far I have downloaded the "StrangeWorld" WB which has a msstyle equivalent and a few others which do not have these alter versions. They all claim to have XP shell style support. I am afraid that it still does not work.
I have also unchecked the options of "always use the XP taskbar defined in..."
I have also unchecked the options of "always use the XP taskbar defined in..."
messybuu
Reply #4 Friday, September 12, 2003 1:36 PM
Reply #4 Friday, September 12, 2003 1:36 PM
If I remember correctly, somebody also had the same problem recently. They had WindowBlinds 3 previously and now had WindowBlinds 4. Is the same true for you? I wasn't sure what the actual fix to it was, but I think it was this:
First uninstall WindowBlinds. Then, in the Registry Editor, delete the following keys (back them up first as well in case I'm wrong):
HKEY_CURRENT_USER\Software\Stardock\WindowBlinds
HKEY_LOCAL_MACHINE\SOFTWARE\Stardock\WindowBlinds
Then delete wb.ini in C:\Windows\ and if the WindowBlinds directory is still there, delete that as well (but make sure not to delete the skins. It'd probably be best to just rename the folder). Finally, reinstall WindowBlinds.
Hopefully, that'll fix it, but first I'd see if anybody else has a better solution to your problem.
First uninstall WindowBlinds. Then, in the Registry Editor, delete the following keys (back them up first as well in case I'm wrong):
HKEY_CURRENT_USER\Software\Stardock\WindowBlinds
HKEY_LOCAL_MACHINE\SOFTWARE\Stardock\WindowBlinds
Then delete wb.ini in C:\Windows\ and if the WindowBlinds directory is still there, delete that as well (but make sure not to delete the skins. It'd probably be best to just rename the folder). Finally, reinstall WindowBlinds.
Hopefully, that'll fix it, but first I'd see if anybody else has a better solution to your problem.
Izagaia
Reply #5 Friday, September 12, 2003 2:56 PM
Reply #5 Friday, September 12, 2003 2:56 PM
If this is relevant:
I did, sometime ago, alter my explorer.exe file in C:\WINDOWS with "resource hacker" so that I could rename my "start" button.
I did, sometime ago, alter my explorer.exe file in C:\WINDOWS with "resource hacker" so that I could rename my "start" button.
Izagaia
Reply #6 Friday, September 12, 2003 3:56 PM
Reply #6 Friday, September 12, 2003 3:56 PM
I reverted back to my original "explorer.exe" file. And that solved the problem strangely enough. It seems that Windowblinds will only recognize the default file. My WB themes are performing flawlessly now. Mark one up in the lesson books for future reference.
Thank-you for all the help, anyways.
Thank-you for all the help, anyways.
kona0197
Reply #7 Friday, September 12, 2003 7:47 PM
Reply #7 Friday, September 12, 2003 7:47 PM
boy if i just had a quarter for every one of the help threads relating to WB...hmmmmm 
Izagaia
Reply #8 Saturday, September 13, 2003 10:30 AM
Reply #8 Saturday, September 13, 2003 10:30 AM
In all honesty, I love my Icon Packager app and it's versitality in handling windows icons, however, WB is not very user friendly and, it seems that it only takes a minor tweak or "jolt" that differenciates from the "norm" to completely throw it out of whack. The themes themselves, though very appealing, take a deal more effort to completely apply whereas the standard .msstyles theme files take no more than a click.
I will play around with WB some more, but IMO, StyleXP seems to offer more along the lines of stability and ease of use.
I will play around with WB some more, but IMO, StyleXP seems to offer more along the lines of stability and ease of use.
messybuu
Reply #9 Saturday, September 13, 2003 10:40 AM
Reply #9 Saturday, September 13, 2003 10:40 AM
I wouldn't blame WindowBlinds for something done to the explorer.exe, unless it actually hacked the explorer.exe.
I.R. Brainiac
Reply #10 Saturday, September 13, 2003 10:42 AM
Reply #10 Saturday, September 13, 2003 10:42 AM
Is it my imagination or do most of the people who have these kinda problems with WB ,have also hacked their system in some way or another and then complain about WB being glitchy.? 
Izagaia
Reply #11 Saturday, September 13, 2003 11:33 AM
Reply #11 Saturday, September 13, 2003 11:33 AM
Food for thoughtful consideration:
It can be debated that using many of Stardock's theming programs or even TGT Soft's Style XP is nothing more than "hacking" your OS to achieve the desired result of an appearance other than the default originally imbedded in the system. In fact, of all "hacks" for your own system, running different themes using third-party applications is perhaps considered the biggest "hack" of all.
In the end, I had two "hacks" that seemed to be conflicting with one-another. Eliminating one solved the problem of my "glitch".
It can be debated that using many of Stardock's theming programs or even TGT Soft's Style XP is nothing more than "hacking" your OS to achieve the desired result of an appearance other than the default originally imbedded in the system. In fact, of all "hacks" for your own system, running different themes using third-party applications is perhaps considered the biggest "hack" of all.
In the end, I had two "hacks" that seemed to be conflicting with one-another. Eliminating one solved the problem of my "glitch".
I.R. Brainiac
Reply #12 Saturday, September 13, 2003 11:47 AM
Reply #12 Saturday, September 13, 2003 11:47 AM
WB is not a 'hack'.It is a program. Style xp is a 'hack'.
[Message Edited]
Style xp is a 'hack'.
[Message Edited]
sig101
Reply #13 Saturday, September 13, 2003 12:59 PM
Reply #13 Saturday, September 13, 2003 12:59 PM
Style XP essentially is a GUI for a hack of an MS file. As proof, one can run those skins without StyleXP installed at all, just by using the hack which is available on the net. When XP SP1 came out, the original hack no longer worked and a revision to the hack was needed to get the themes working again. WB doesn't work that way since it doesn't rely on actually hacking MS files. And WB can skin more of the GUI than those Style XP skins.
Use what you prefer, but I've used WB for years and found it very user friendly. Sounds like whatever problems you encountered are due to your changes to the native GUI rather than an inherent issue with the WB program. I started using WB on my old W98 box. WB 3.5 still works fine on it although the newer skins for WB4 utilize capacities of the XP GUI that are not present in the older MS OS'.
Use what you prefer, but I've used WB for years and found it very user friendly. Sounds like whatever problems you encountered are due to your changes to the native GUI rather than an inherent issue with the WB program. I started using WB on my old W98 box. WB 3.5 still works fine on it although the newer skins for WB4 utilize capacities of the XP GUI that are not present in the older MS OS'.
Izagaia
Reply #14 Saturday, September 13, 2003 1:31 PM
Reply #14 Saturday, September 13, 2003 1:31 PM
I have already concluded the "why" reason for having problems with WB. And if explorer.exe is tied to the GUI then you (sig101) are absolutely correct.
But it is still arguable that WB is also a "hacking" application since it replaces the imbedded theming elements in favor for using versions of it's own files.
It just depends on how you interpret it is all.
WB is something new for me. I do not pretend to be able to pick it up in only one day. StyleXP only allows for the running of "unsigned" .msstyles theme files. These .dll files are no different in nature than those included with the XP operating system. But they are not the intended files for the OS so they too could be considered as "hacks". My argument is simply that if the OS did not require the use of a third-party app in the first place to change it's appearance, then it is possible that the app in question may not be considered, by definition, a "hacking" app.
But it is still arguable that WB is also a "hacking" application since it replaces the imbedded theming elements in favor for using versions of it's own files.
It just depends on how you interpret it is all.
WB is something new for me. I do not pretend to be able to pick it up in only one day. StyleXP only allows for the running of "unsigned" .msstyles theme files. These .dll files are no different in nature than those included with the XP operating system. But they are not the intended files for the OS so they too could be considered as "hacks". My argument is simply that if the OS did not require the use of a third-party app in the first place to change it's appearance, then it is possible that the app in question may not be considered, by definition, a "hacking" app.
I.R. Brainiac
Reply #15 Saturday, September 13, 2003 1:53 PM
Reply #15 Saturday, September 13, 2003 1:53 PM
I disagree...WB is a MS certified program using its own skinning engine.Nothing is hacked.XP theming elements are not embedded.They can ge turned off.
sig101
Reply #16 Saturday, September 13, 2003 2:27 PM
Reply #16 Saturday, September 13, 2003 2:27 PM
It's not an equivalent. Actually Stardock worked with MS when XP was in development. But WB doesn't actually rely on cracking or replacing MS proprietary files.
In contrast, StyleXP does rely on actually replacing the native proprietary MS uxtheme.dll. Which is why people who use the crack/patch do not need StyleXP in order to run unsigned msstyles. Since MS hasn't gone after StyleXP's developers (or other products that similarly crack or replace proprietary MS files) in court, people think what WB and StyleXP do are the same thing. It isn't.
[Message Edited]
In contrast, StyleXP does rely on actually replacing the native proprietary MS uxtheme.dll. Which is why people who use the crack/patch do not need StyleXP in order to run unsigned msstyles. Since MS hasn't gone after StyleXP's developers (or other products that similarly crack or replace proprietary MS files) in court, people think what WB and StyleXP do are the same thing. It isn't.
[Message Edited]
werewolf
Reply #17 Sunday, September 14, 2003 9:10 AM
Reply #17 Sunday, September 14, 2003 9:10 AM
This happened to me this morning. Using the Skins Update app, I clicked 'Apply Skin'. Everything changed correctly except the task bar and start menu. I had to use wbconfig.exe to load the skin and everything was fine.
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 #1 Friday, September 12, 2003 1:05 PM
I am running XP pro (sp1)with StyleXP installed as well. I would not mind dumping StyleXP since I understand it can convert or run unsigned .msstyle themes as well.
(edit: it just occurred to me that I posted this in the wrong area- my apologies)