Editorial.....[part deux]
Sunday, December 28, 2003 by Jafo | Discussion: WinCustomize Talk
Posted on Skinbase....but reposted here to provide food for thought for those who may not go there all that often...
hobnobber...yes, basically all that is correct, though a more accurate estimate of those who contribute via skins, purchases, community input/interaction vs. those who only 'leech' for freebies is very much more than the ratio of 25 to 1....perhaps more in the realm of 2500 to 1....and that's the rub.
When skinning was in its infancy, say 5 years ago, it was all new and thrilling to everyone....now it has grown, not so much with newer apps coming on the scene on a daily basis...that was the 'norm' back in skinz.org [mk.1] days, but now the growth is in general interest/popularity, thanks to Microsoft's added awareness of the concept, with its visual styles, etc.
What you get now is many more 'users' but not a heck of a lot new blood in skinning as skinners as such....certainly not a comparable ratio to the popularity growth.
When once the skinners and their 'community' sites could foot the bill for all, as the majority were like-minded skinners themselves, now it's more a case of 'us and them'...the providers of product vs. the users of the product.
The dynamics have changed. With this change comes commercial pressures on everyone involved.
New specifics require new handling.....people need to cater for the changes with methodology that makes the situation survivable or else viability suffers and the reality of the system falls apart.
Change can be horrid and unpalatable but may just be absolutely necessary and unavoidable.
Anyone involved in the game for long enough can see the writing on the wall....even since the dot-com failings of the likes of eFront that killed the first REAL skinning community we have been striving for sustainability.
Anyone with genuine heart-felt feelings for the skinning community as a whole will realise the necessity to not put heads in the sand and blindly hope life will magically go on as normal, but make a conscious effort to find a sustainable model.
Sure, many will arrive at alternate theories of a working model, but until tried no-one will be sure what actually will succeed or not.
All that can be done is to try our collective best, hence many soul-searching threads on the subject of 'the future of skinning' in one form or another on many/most sites.
Poor old Devart has a massive user-base and being a graphics site demands high bandwidth/server load as does any skinning site at their relative levels.
I remember what the world was like before skinning....[my first foray was with Dos GUI shells - pre Windows...then Win 3x and beyond] and would hate to see the whole skinning world fall apart due to ennui or apathy, hence the hands-on involvement.
Let's all look forward to skinning/GUI modification still being not just 'fun', but sustainable in another 5 years, or 50...
[Message Edited]
 |
|
Page 2 of 2 | |
|
|---|
Reply #22 Tuesday, December 30, 2003 6:20 PM
the reason is that i have seen several premium suits, and many outstanding skins in my time here, but only a very tiny number of these skins are ones i personally can and do use on a regular basis.
perhaps my tastes are just odd
in part though it is due to the way i use my computer, the programs i run, and the sort of requirements i have.i am quite happy to pay for a skin or suite i really like and will use, but so far there has only been one such, which was the premium Oranda cursorXP set.
so, would i pay for 'x' premium skins, knowing from experience that none of them are likely to be used on my computer? no.
would i pay for a single premium skin i will use on my computer? yes
of course, i am not representative of the average WC visitor, but i suspect i am not alone in the fact that the bulk of items at WC hold very little real interest for me.
turning to the more general question of WC and premium skins, how many of you who have purchased WC subscriptions use either of the two premium skins that came with your subscription on a regular basis? i know i am not alone in thinking that these weren't the most compelling premium skins ever.
on top of this, for me there is often a conflict between a visually impressive (as in WOW, i will pay for that) skin and a functional skin you can live with day in and day out.
of course, it is far easier to point to possible problems than it is to offer up solutions.
Reply #23 Tuesday, December 30, 2003 7:36 PM
) and the cheapest ISP I can find. So for me, free is even better.(I would love to learn how to skin, but am fearful of screwing something up, and crashing my poor 'puter, call me a chicken, but my brother-in-law gets tired of "helping" me fix my messes
Must find a good tutor to help me I guess.)
Reply #24 Tuesday, December 30, 2003 7:57 PM
Reply #25 Tuesday, December 30, 2003 9:05 PM
I don't mind paying for "extra" skins or cursors that I might never use as long as I knew that there was at least something valuable in the purchased package for me. One might equate it to buying a computer program with tons of features; some will use these, some will use those but very rarely will anyone use all of them.
The point is that these "packages" would become part of my personal library, available to me when I wanted a change in functionality or mood. And the fact that they would be "premium" would most likely mean that I wouldn't have to spend a lot of time tweaking them to get them "just right".
Jeff
Reply #26 Tuesday, December 30, 2003 9:37 PM
Reply #27 Tuesday, December 30, 2003 11:47 PM
I know, I know ... some people want all the bells and whistles, several colour options and a wall but in recent weeks we have more than a few packages under the 'WB' category that are just under or over the 1Mb figure.
Add the rash of 'IP' sets that are up to 3 or 4Mb ( great choice of sizes and super artwork) and the 50Mb cap for the non-subscribers is easily reached.
That's not excusing the free-loader mentality either.
Nothing is free in life, period!
But ... perhaps a little extra thought could be put into the way our talented creative 'contributers' bundle their packages together.
Speaking for myself alone, if I want a specific wall then I'll get it seperately or create my own 'look'.
Why load up a WB zip with one?
The same with an IP, do we really need all the size variations in one hit?
I'm a chronic down-loader, I really like to see how a design will fit my mood and where it will impact other skins that I like to use, however, I do find (me, myself!) the line between function and the 'gee-whiz' factor becoming more clearly defined.
I appreciate the work behind a complete skin 'suite' and have no qualms re paying for something I like.
But I only use a few of the included skins myself, Windowblinds, Iconpackager and Sysmetrix being my usual day-to-day runners.
There is no easy 'one size fits all' answer to the costs of running the site, I would pay for the option of access to 'premium' packages as a simple way of putting money into the system, but I'd go for a lower number of units PA and then the quality would have to be very good across the board.
And as for the $1-00 per download option, I can't see that working.
The logistics alone would be a nightmare.
My only suggestion, non-subscribers get a maximum of 10 units 'free' out of a choice of some 25 .... Windowblinds for example.
Give them a cross-section of tried and tested designs, a few basic, a few complex and a working balance in between.
Any more and the '$12.00 PA or $20.00 for Two Years' subscription rule comes into force.
I do think some if the 'WB Skins' (or whatever!) need to be slimmed down, as they have become closer to 'suites' in many cases, another example that has crossed my mind, Sysmerix 'colour packages' .... over 1Mb ..... nice to have a choice of several colours but not much sense if you only use a couple.
As an aside, why is US$20.00 such a big hassle?
I have a basic approach to how I spend what funds I have .... do I 'need' something as opposed to 'wanting' it.
And if I can't pay then I do without ....
Before I get dumped on, as a 'skinning dyslexic', these are my own random thoughts, OK?
Reply #28 Wednesday, December 31, 2003 12:18 PM
Reply #29 Wednesday, December 31, 2003 7:04 PM
All the different sizes are included in the icon package because people use them and I think windows uses them also.(might be wrong there)
Reply #30 Friday, January 2, 2004 5:43 PM
i am under the impression that IconX in DesktopX can use the larger icon sizes to produce smoothly zooming desktop icons.
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 2 | |
|
|---|
Reply #21 Tuesday, December 30, 2003 3:15 AM
Unfortunately after I asked about it several times on a previous thread I got no response.