Ok, but does anyone know what programs I can use to make these icons ?

how about you make icons with a icon making proggy for iconpacker?

would be a better idea.

What program would that be? Im nub at this

Why do people keep talking about Samurize as if it were even remotely the same kind of program? Are we talking about the same Samurize?

Anyway, Like I said on another string, it ain't just DX and Konfabulator. There are a half dozen apps on PC that I know of that get these jobs done with great success. Beyond the poseur Mac fetishists, I dunno who would be clamoring for another option. Do they make 4k Alienware doorstops that look like a Mac?

Scooby: did you read the news article on Icon Developer on the WC main page? Click on the "visit now" link and it takes you to this page where you can read about it: http://adam.joeuser.com/index.asp?AID=990

Just a hint: it's an Object Desktop app.




Edited: Just noticed that you posted in the news article thread on Saturday which was about the new OD app, Icon Developer, and had your answer there and were given a link to the site https://www.stardock.com/products/icondeveloper/ As noted on the news article thread it's a new app and currently is only available on OD. If you read the program's site you'll notice that it will be available for individual download and purchase.

[Message Edited]

My desktop X themes will Blow Konfabulator out of the water.

Nah...you're wrong. Konfabulator can't even MAKE themes...only widgets!

Kona says: OK you have a point. But Konfabulator SUCKS compaired to DX. I am not a big fan of DX but I have tried it recently (because I upgraded to XP a few days ago) and I loved it but I love WB even more.

Konfabulator doesn't suck compared to anything. Konfabulator is a good program on the Mac. On the PC, no one knows.  My point isn't that Konfabulator is bad. My point is that Konfabulator isn't compelling on the PC because there are other alternatives that already exist that have more features, cost less, and more support.

Incidentally, Konfabulator has nothing to do with Style XP. Konfabulator, for instance, actually does something. Something quite neat I think.  The closest thing to Konfabulator is Samurize. DesktopX is a superset of the two.

"The closest thing to Konfabulator is Samurize."

And they'll probably both be great programs at what they do. I just wonder if the Konfabulator guys can keep it as small & svelte as Samurize.

EDIT: Okay, I need to edit this because Samurize -IS- a great program at what it does! (And getting better all the time! I say, just in case NeM drops by. ^.^)

[Message Edited]

Agreed. Samurize is presently (as in today, already) a great program.

If Konfabulator, a $25 program, can beat Samurize, a free program, it will truly be a triumph of marketing.

ScoobyWRX STi 04, you can't win this, frogboy is the person who 'created' (well, probably not alone ) desktop X.

Great games btw..

I'm just the Project Manager of DesktopX. I don't code it.

But Scooby brings up an important issue that I think is good to debate about.

MacOS programs get a free marketing ride, regradless of quality, when they reach the PC.

A lot of this has to do with pretty artwork.

Can any Konfabulator user (I am one btw) name ONE thing that Konfabulator can do, today, that Samurize cannot do? How about SysMetrix?

Both of those programs are free. FREE. Konfabulator is $25.

If desktop enhancements were a boxing match, I'd say Konfabulator first needs to prove itself against those free programs that have similar features before one could even get into the big event -- DesktopX. Being able to do everything what Konfabulator can do is just ONE of the dozens of things DesktopX can do. And DesktopX is also cheaper.

Konfabulator widgets are in .sit and .dmg. Mac users don't use .ZIP.So unless Konfabulator for the PC somehow bundles .sit and .dmg (which adds more overhead) then sharing widgets between the platforms isn't going to be easy.

I think there is so much more. A few examples:
- CPU meter. It is an hell doing that on Windows. The PDH API is full of tricks you must know and workaround.
- Fonts. I don't think Mac fonts can just simply used into Windows. You probably need a conversion table with similar looking fonts, sizes, etc.
- Rendering, transparency etc. Layered windows are pretty limited, and GDI+ can be slow. One has to do its own routines to do things like shadows. I think those things are provided by the Mac OS API.

I studied the Konfabulator docs a bit, and at first sight I would say DX is more powerful and can do more things.
That said, a lot of new things are coming for DX in the next two months, most of them to meant to make the widget concept a lot more powerful and reliable: instance isolation, custom icon, new scripting features and possibilities, more solid widget composition (WRT parent/children relations, zorder behaviour, better right/bottom alignment, keyboard input, new text features etc etc).

Speaking of Z-order -- DesktopX objects can be desktop z-order. Nothing else I know of can do that.

That matters a lot when it comes to trying to create things that blend onto your desktop.

"- Fonts. I don't think Mac fonts can just simply used into Windows. You probably need a conversion table with similar looking fonts, sizes, etc."

Well, actually - with OSX and higher, they use the exame same format for TTF and OpenType fonts now. The PS fonts are in the same file formats too, I /think/ - for those still using postscript.

Well, I believe OSX still accepts old Mac fonts as well. At work, the "print" department (Mac) are in the process of switching to OSX, and I'm pretty sure they are using the same fonts. They have thousands of fonts, and I doubt they bought or intend to buy them all over again.

you can still run in classic mode and also use and or covert fonts I think?

I don't think the fonts will be a significant issue.

I really should try to arrange an interview with Arlo for WinCustomize Magazine. What Arlo and Co. are doing is germane to WinCustomize after all. If Konfabulator gets popular enough on the PC, we would create a section for it just like we would for any program that has its own content format that needs a library.

But basically this is how Konfabulator works:

Konfabulator is a run-time that reads in .XML files. The .XML encapsulates a Javascript language with functions that are defined by Konfabulator. Most of the drawing is handled by Quartz, the rendering system on MacOS X.

Windows doesn't have Quartz. Also, a lot (most) Konfabulator widgets are doing system specific stuff.

In fact, here is the firt widget on their site:

Doing this on Windows isn't trivial. Look closely at this widget. It has a task list, RAM, idle team, and uptime.  Programs like DesktopX and SysMetrix do this but it involves considerable work jsut to do that. And this is just one type of thing that would have to be written. Bear in mind, the bulk of the work in a program like SysMetrix is in providing this functionality.  It took one of our developers some weeks to incorporate this kind of capability into DesktopX.

And that's just the tip of the iceberg.  The biggest challenge will be doing the work Quartz provides on Windows.  DesktopX has DirectGUI. This took us 2 years to write. DirectGUI ~ Quartz (for our purposes).

In DesktopX, I can open up a script and write in Object.Rotate = 45 to rotate something 45 degrees. It can even be done in real time. How do you do that on Windows without a DirectGUI equivalent?

How are they going to handle cross platformness? Besides the aformentioend .DMG files and .SIT files which PC users don't deal with, even if these were made available as .ZIP, there would need to be flags to determine whether such a widget would work on Windows.  The weather object, for instance, could work fine on Windows. But what about all those widgets that have GUI controls? Are they going to re-implement them? DesktopX can do GUI widgets (check boxes, entry fields, etc.) easily because it can do ActiveX controls. Is Konfabulator going to be able to do ActiveX? Not likely, that alone would involve a LOT of work. And getting ActiveX to work with other things together is not trivial.

By now, you can probably see why, from a developer perspective, there is a lot of hair pulling when people say "Oh yea, Konfabulator on the PC is going to be great!"  Konfabulator is uniquely suited to the Mac. The Mac saves them immense amounts of development effort. On the PC, they'll have to now do all that work that the Mac saved them on if they want to have a chance.

And then, even after overcoming all those obstacles, even after all that effort, it still won't have the feature richness of Samurize or SysMetrix which are both freeware -- let alone get onto the same turf as DesktopX.

It has only gotten this far because of the free marketing ride popular Mac programs seem to get in the media.

 

Both Konfabulator and DX seem to have large libraries available. One thing I noticed though. Konfab's widgets are way cooler than those from DX. If Konfab somehow manages to do a clear port to PC and solve the compatibility issues of its widgets, it will certainly pose a serious threat to DX.

why? all it takes is people to write "cooler" DX widgets than Konfab has to offer...

It isn't an issue of one being cooler than the other, but a question of what people add to it.

Though, I can see one driving the other on the innovation tier without a doubt

Name the cooler widgets and they shall be made...sometime, by someone. But it would be nice for everybody if we know what widgets you find cooler then the ones for desktopx. Most of them that I see can be made with desktopx with none to little scripting, and that is fairly easy to do. Scripting is the beast and monster that makes desktopx incredibly powerful and difficult, as not only do you have the numerous built in commands but you can use vb commands, javascript, and activex controls. The biggest difference that I see is in the quality of the art. Now if some of the artists here were to team up with some of the great dxobject scripters/creators then konfabulator will have no chance. hint hint.