Why do I need to install 3rd party software to skin Windows?
... when Windows already has the facility to do this?
Sunday, March 6, 2005 by mahoobley | Discussion: New Users
I guess the title says it - I'm just curious as to why the only themes that appear to be available to download these days require you to install StyleXP or Windowblinds or whatever to change the look of Windows?
I understand in the instances where additional functionality is added, such as sidebars, docks etc, but I have no need for such things - I just want to change the basic look of windows.
Now I know windows can already do this - under display settings is a list of 'themes', including the standard windows grey, and the more interesting Blue and Silver metallic themes. In fact, a year or so ago I was able to download a couple of other themes that I could load under display properties that made my Windows look a little like the Mac OS.
So why is it then that nobody makes any themes that use this already inherent functionality within windows? It seems absurd that I should need to install a 3rd party application (that may fill my computer with spyware and adware) to do something that my computer can do already. Is there perhaps an issue with the licensing of 'official' windows themes, or is there perhaps a vested interest from all of these 'theme' sites to support their commercial software?
I understand in the instances where additional functionality is added, such as sidebars, docks etc, but I have no need for such things - I just want to change the basic look of windows.
Now I know windows can already do this - under display settings is a list of 'themes', including the standard windows grey, and the more interesting Blue and Silver metallic themes. In fact, a year or so ago I was able to download a couple of other themes that I could load under display properties that made my Windows look a little like the Mac OS.
So why is it then that nobody makes any themes that use this already inherent functionality within windows? It seems absurd that I should need to install a 3rd party application (that may fill my computer with spyware and adware) to do something that my computer can do already. Is there perhaps an issue with the licensing of 'official' windows themes, or is there perhaps a vested interest from all of these 'theme' sites to support their commercial software?
 |
|
Page 1 of 2 | |
|
|---|
Thomas Thomassen
Reply #3 Sunday, March 6, 2005 5:03 PM
Reply #3 Sunday, March 6, 2005 5:03 PM
Because there is no inherent functionality within windows that allows you to create your own skins. WindowBlinds works by hooking into the Window processes while StyleXP cracks/hacks your windows system files. (WB4 works on XP and 2000, earler versions also worked ont he Win9x series. StyleXP works only on XP)
The .msstyles that exists in XP where meant only to be created by Microsoft.
The .msstyles that exists in XP where meant only to be created by Microsoft.
IUPUI
Reply #4 Sunday, March 6, 2005 5:14 PM
Reply #4 Sunday, March 6, 2005 5:14 PM
I agree with Mahoobley. The problem with adding 3rd party software (esp Windowblinds and Iconpackager, etc) is that unless you have a super fast gaming system, the system significantly slows down. When I had this software on my desktop system, it ran OK, but When I switched to a laptop, the system just crawls along. I thought I had spyware or a virus on my system that really slowed it down, so I totally reimaged my Laptop (using the supplier's disk), and everything ran great. I reinstalled MS Office, and all my other apps (except for any of the types of software that modify the looks of windows), it still ran great. Matter of fact, I didn't even install Microsoft Plus. Well to make a long story short, I tried installing Windowblinds, Iconpackager, CursorXP, and my system stalled to a crawl. I had previously purchased the real versions, so when I reinstalled it, I had downloaded the newest version. Well my system slowed to a crawl... I had to reimage my drive again (because when you uninstall these, they don't clean-up after themselves very well - It still was slow AFTER I unistalled them. The only "Cool" software I'm using is CursorXP, because it doesn't seem like too much of a CPU time killer. I hope that they can figure out why the systems slow way down, because I really liked it on my desktop. BTW my Desktop was only a P4, 1.6 GHZ, 768 MB Ram. Laptop is a Centrino (Mobile Pentium), 1.5 GHz, 512 MB Ram
IUPUI
Reply #5 Sunday, March 6, 2005 5:20 PM
Reply #5 Sunday, March 6, 2005 5:20 PM
Oh Last thing On my systems, I was using an ATI Radeon (256 MB, 4x AGP - Not the Motherboard card) on my desktop and my laptop I am using the built in Video card(Duh Can't use a different one). The built in one is a Intel 82852/82855 GM/GME Graphics Controller
horiz0n
Reply #6 Sunday, March 6, 2005 5:25 PM
Reply #6 Sunday, March 6, 2005 5:25 PM
windows obviously has some way to be changed, if microsoft has theme's it makes available, cursors to use without having to install cursor xp etc etc... Other programs add features, not available normally. Anyway, stuff like that is available, but not here because we make stuff for specific programs.
I think litestep is kinda neat with how it isn't running on top of but replacing explorer, so not only is it not taking more resources to run, it takes less, and fully customizeable. Too bad I barely know how to use it
I think litestep is kinda neat with how it isn't running on top of but replacing explorer, so not only is it not taking more resources to run, it takes less, and fully customizeable. Too bad I barely know how to use it
Thomas Thomassen
Reply #7 Sunday, March 6, 2005 5:41 PM
Reply #7 Sunday, March 6, 2005 5:41 PM
IUPUI: You'll find that it's most likely your laptops built-in graphics card that causes the slowdown. The products from SD doesn't not require the latest of computers to run smoothly, but a ok graphics card. I'm guessing that the laptops graphicscard didn't have hardware acceleration. Running on a computer with hardware acceleration and you shouldn't notice much performance difference.
Phoon
Reply #8 Sunday, March 6, 2005 5:43 PM
Funny, I have tried WB and Icon Packager on every laptop I have used. Ranging from a PII-400 to a P4-1.4Ghz. Never have I had a problem, nor have I hear mass rumors of problems.
Methinks me smells stylexp advocates about..
Reply #8 Sunday, March 6, 2005 5:43 PM
| The problem with adding 3rd party software (esp Windowblinds and Iconpackager, etc) is that unless you have a super fast gaming system, the system significantly slows down. When I had this software on my desktop system, it ran OK, but When I switched to a laptop, the system just crawls along. |
Funny, I have tried WB and Icon Packager on every laptop I have used. Ranging from a PII-400 to a P4-1.4Ghz. Never have I had a problem, nor have I hear mass rumors of problems.
Methinks me smells stylexp advocates about..
IUPUI
Reply #9 Sunday, March 6, 2005 6:09 PM
Reply #9 Sunday, March 6, 2005 6:09 PM
Nope, I actually never heard of stylexp. My built in Graphics card (on my laptop supports Graphics acceleration) and it is set to full Acceleration.
JourneyMan Phoon sounds like he is paranoid (do you believe in UFO's too??) Maybe that's why my laptop is running slow, The Aliens are monitoring what I'm doing. Get real.
As I said, WindowBlinds worked fine on my desktop, but not my laptop. If I was an advocate for any other program, I would have said that these programs suck on all my computers and then talk about how great the other programs were. I didn't say that. What I said was that it ran slow only on my laptop. I actually have tried it on two laptops (an IBM Thinkpad T-42 and my Gateway computer 4525GZ). Matter of fact I said that I don't understand why we need to buy any software for skinning, why can't people design skins for WindowsXP and not for all these programs.
I just downloaded the newest versions of my graphics drivers and the newest versions (again) of Windowblinds, and Iconpackager, and I will try it again...
JourneyMan Phoon sounds like he is paranoid (do you believe in UFO's too??) Maybe that's why my laptop is running slow, The Aliens are monitoring what I'm doing. Get real.
As I said, WindowBlinds worked fine on my desktop, but not my laptop. If I was an advocate for any other program, I would have said that these programs suck on all my computers and then talk about how great the other programs were. I didn't say that. What I said was that it ran slow only on my laptop. I actually have tried it on two laptops (an IBM Thinkpad T-42 and my Gateway computer 4525GZ). Matter of fact I said that I don't understand why we need to buy any software for skinning, why can't people design skins for WindowsXP and not for all these programs.
I just downloaded the newest versions of my graphics drivers and the newest versions (again) of Windowblinds, and Iconpackager, and I will try it again...
Lantec
Reply #10 Sunday, March 6, 2005 6:15 PM
Reply #10 Sunday, March 6, 2005 6:15 PM
Yeah Phoon, I agree... I've had a version on each of my last three laptops and if anything they ran faster than with the native theme support. Of course I turn off themes in the services manager (services.msc). Doesn't help to run both systems at once. 
Frogboy
Reply #11 Sunday, March 6, 2005 6:43 PM
Reply #11 Sunday, March 6, 2005 6:43 PM
| The problem with adding 3rd party software (esp Windowblinds and Iconpackager, etc) is that unless you have a super fast gaming system, the system significantly slows down |
That's nonsense. IconPackager doesn't affect performance at all, it's not even applicable to such a comparison. And WindowBlinds, by contrast, is faster than what's built in.
The logic you use is the same kind of logic that would lead one to conclude that they should stick with the integrated video adapter on their motherbard because adding a third party video card such as an ATI or nVidia will "significantly slow down the system".
Phoon
Reply #12 Sunday, March 6, 2005 7:04 PM
thats why..
In order to use a .msstyle without using a hacked version of uxtheme.dll (which is what style XP does), you must use a 3rd party program. Thats the way windows is designed and there are only 2 ways around it.
Paranoid.. no. But when you jump in here blaming the software that this community supports and develops for you are only asking for problems.
I will repeat.. the problems you are having are not typical of Windowblinds or Icon Packager at all. As Frogboy stated,
Your approach to the entire situation is quite typical of devout stylexp advocates weather you realize it or not.
Reply #12 Sunday, March 6, 2005 7:04 PM
| why can't people design skins for WindowsXP and not for all these programs. |
| The .msstyles that exists in XP where meant only to be created by Microsoft |
thats why..
In order to use a .msstyle without using a hacked version of uxtheme.dll (which is what style XP does), you must use a 3rd party program. Thats the way windows is designed and there are only 2 ways around it.
Paranoid.. no. But when you jump in here blaming the software that this community supports and develops for you are only asking for problems.
I will repeat.. the problems you are having are not typical of Windowblinds or Icon Packager at all. As Frogboy stated,
| That's nonsense. IconPackager doesn't affect performance at all, it's not even applicable to such a comparison. And WindowBlinds, by contrast, is faster than what's built in. |
Your approach to the entire situation is quite typical of devout stylexp advocates weather you realize it or not.
IUPUI
Reply #13 Sunday, March 6, 2005 7:08 PM
Reply #13 Sunday, March 6, 2005 7:08 PM
So Frogboy - your logic says that all third party software will make my computer faster?
Do you realize that when you are adding an add on Graphics card you are adding another processor into your computer? Yes it's a video Processor, but it is still a type of CPU. Duh that's a HARDWARE improvement not just a software improvement. So your analogy is just plain dumb. Comparing Apples to Oranges again???
First of all How can memory resident software make a system faster? It's taking up system resourses (averages around 15% of my CPU Time - as viewed in The Windows Task Manager {wbload.exe in case you don't know} - The only thing that takes more CPU time is the Idle Process)
All I have claimed is that when I added these software packages, My system slowed down significantly. BTW I reinstalled them, and My computer slowed down again. It takes all my software over twice as long to load as without it. Adobe Photoshop is the worst, but I can see a difference in Firefox, MS Word, MS Access. Also when WB is loaded, Sony's sonicstage doesn't run. I would imagine it's because Sony creates an overlay for their window.
When I disable The Themes Services (which I didn't even realize about - Thanks Developer Lantec), The wbload.exe CPU Time drops to about 1%. It looks like WB conflicts with some computers graphics systems or the themes manager in WIndowsXP on some systems thus causing more CPU time to battle it out. Don't know why, maybe Stardock can tell us why.
With Themes disabled I back to using WB
Thanks Lantec for the help.
Do you realize that when you are adding an add on Graphics card you are adding another processor into your computer? Yes it's a video Processor, but it is still a type of CPU. Duh that's a HARDWARE improvement not just a software improvement. So your analogy is just plain dumb. Comparing Apples to Oranges again???
First of all How can memory resident software make a system faster? It's taking up system resourses (averages around 15% of my CPU Time - as viewed in The Windows Task Manager {wbload.exe in case you don't know} - The only thing that takes more CPU time is the Idle Process)
All I have claimed is that when I added these software packages, My system slowed down significantly. BTW I reinstalled them, and My computer slowed down again. It takes all my software over twice as long to load as without it. Adobe Photoshop is the worst, but I can see a difference in Firefox, MS Word, MS Access. Also when WB is loaded, Sony's sonicstage doesn't run. I would imagine it's because Sony creates an overlay for their window.
When I disable The Themes Services (which I didn't even realize about - Thanks Developer Lantec), The wbload.exe CPU Time drops to about 1%. It looks like WB conflicts with some computers graphics systems or the themes manager in WIndowsXP on some systems thus causing more CPU time to battle it out. Don't know why, maybe Stardock can tell us why.
With Themes disabled I back to using WB
Thanks Lantec for the help.
IUPUI
Reply #14 Sunday, March 6, 2005 7:11 PM
Reply #14 Sunday, March 6, 2005 7:11 PM
What is this Style XP that you guys keep mentioning? Is it a competitor of Stardock or what. I really like WB, it's just that it slowed down my laptop. Lantec told me how to fix and and it works. What's the problem?
Jafo
Reply #15 Sunday, March 6, 2005 7:55 PM
Reply #15 Sunday, March 6, 2005 7:55 PM
You cannot skin XP without a 3rd party application, or a system 'hack'. The 'Built-in' skins are limited to WYSIWYG. The only solution to skinning the Windows themselves is to accept the risk of system issues and modify system files [in contravention of the MS EULA] or to adopt a 3rd party proggy such as Windowblinds [which is the preferred choice of MS].
If and when there is a performance hit on a particular System it is almost always a fault of the system...IE compatibility with graphic cards/drivers. If the need is for speed uber alles then run your XP laptop in traditional mode [like 98], or... do what most people choose to do...hunt down an update/better Vid driver....
Ryan126
Reply #17 Sunday, March 6, 2005 7:59 PM
Reply #17 Sunday, March 6, 2005 7:59 PM
Yes, UIPUI. Style XP is a program that also customizes the windows Look and Feel. It may be considered a competitor of WindowBlinds. And as for PC lagging, it didn't lag my computer too much. I'm not using any shell replacers right now.
Frogboy
Reply #18 Sunday, March 6, 2005 9:09 PM
Reply #18 Sunday, March 6, 2005 9:09 PM
| So Frogboy - your logic says that all third party software will make my computer faster? |
No, my logic is that simply because something doesn't come bundled with a product doesn't make it inherently inferior (in this case slower).
| Do you realize that when you are adding an add on Graphics card you are adding another processor into your computer? Yes it's a video Processor, but it is still a type of CPU. Duh that's a HARDWARE improvement not just a software improvement. So your analogy is just plain dumb. Comparing Apples to Oranges again??? |
You were the one arguing that anything that doesn't come with the OS must somehow slow down the computer. That's a broad generalization. I used a hardware example to demonstrate the principle that just because something comes with something doesn't mean it's faster.
How about if I use a software example: It used to be common practice for video drivers that came with the OS to not have any hardware acceleration features built in. You had to download and install third party video drivers in order to get the most out of your video card.
WindowBlinds takes advantage of video card acceleration far more than the default uxtheme "engine" does. It also has all kinds of other optimizations that are the natural result of over 3 years of improving over what came with Windows XP going on 4 years ago.
As for Style XP, it's a $20 program that patches the system file uxtheme.dll to crack the digital signing protection that is included with XP. There are plenty of free alternatives that do the same thing as that if all you're looking for is to use msstyles.
XX
Reply #19 Sunday, March 6, 2005 11:01 PM
Reply #19 Sunday, March 6, 2005 11:01 PM
IUPUI, my laptop has a crappy videocard. Windowblinds runs great on it.
Last time I had major problems with WB is in it's very early days.
Last time I had major problems with WB is in it's very early days.
Essencay
Reply #20 Monday, March 7, 2005 2:53 AM
WindowBlinds uses 00% CPU time here, always has. In fact, I'm running 57 processes and all of them are at 00% CPU time just about always, except when they are performing a task. Most folks when talking about memory resident programs talk in terms of memory usage not CPU usage
Reply #20 Monday, March 7, 2005 2:53 AM
| First of all How can memory resident software make a system faster? It's taking up system resourses (averages around 15% of my CPU Time - as viewed in The Windows Task Manager {wbload.exe in case you don't know} - The only thing that takes more CPU time is the Idle Process) |
WindowBlinds uses 00% CPU time here, always has. In fact, I'm running 57 processes and all of them are at 00% CPU time just about always, except when they are performing a task. Most folks when talking about memory resident programs talk in terms of memory usage not CPU usage
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 1 of 2 | |
|
|---|
Reply #1 Sunday, March 6, 2005 1:58 PM
To answer your main question. There are many answers. 1) Stardock and Wincustomize are hand and hand, 2) It's safer using the software then messing with the windows files and you can do alot more, 3) It's just prefered this way