Is WindowBlinds worth using you think?

Forum for anything else which doesn't fit in the above forums. Site feedback, random talk, whatever, are welcome.
Post Reply
marzsyndrome
Posts: 239
Joined: Sun May 28, 2006 6:01 am

Is WindowBlinds worth using you think?

Post by marzsyndrome » Wed Apr 02, 2008 8:53 pm

I always wondered why many people tend to release themes in this format only. And apparently it can do things like replicate the transparent glass effect of Vista.


I always feared it was some kind of bloated application however. Am I correct?

User avatar
Kelsenellenelvian
Moderator
Posts: 4383
Joined: Tue Nov 30, 2004 8:32 pm
Location: Pocatello, ID
Contact:

Post by Kelsenellenelvian » Wed Apr 02, 2008 9:00 pm

It is pretty system intensive. Takes up quite a bit of ram and does cost you MONEY!

User avatar
roirraW "edor"
Posts: 761
Joined: Sun Oct 15, 2006 2:25 pm

Post by roirraW "edor" » Wed Apr 02, 2008 9:04 pm

I only briefly fooled with themes a LONG time ago (2002-2003?) and I used at least some products by the same manufacturer as WindowBlinds. I think that only Microsoft can release official themes for Windows XP (or higher) and therefore in order for people to create their own, they have to resort to third party programs like this. I could be wrong, but that's my impression.

As I said, I did fool with themes relatively briefly as although it could be neat, actually I did think that it was an awful resource hog and not really worth it.

I've always been a function over form kind of person, however. I'd rather something work faster than look better/fancier. There are others who are more extreme in this aspect than I, but I go as far as only running classic Windows mode under XP with hardly any visual tweaks turned on except when they're practical, except for the Start Menu which I do use the full XP style because I find it more convenient than the old style Start Menu.

jamesdean
Posts: 94
Joined: Fri May 26, 2006 2:40 am

Post by jamesdean » Wed Apr 02, 2008 9:42 pm

Ive used WindowBlinds in the past, it didnt seem heavy or anything.

If you really want themes with transparency or you really like WB themes in general, then go for it.

User avatar
5eraph
Site Admin
Posts: 4618
Joined: Tue Jul 05, 2005 9:38 pm
Location: Riverview, MI USA

Post by 5eraph » Wed Apr 02, 2008 10:09 pm

I tried it back in 2004 before SP2. The effects were nice, but it made my system unstable. I'm sure that's changed by now. Unfortunately, I'm no longer interested in shell mods. I'm happy with Royale Noir.

User avatar
ricktendo64
Posts: 3213
Joined: Mon May 22, 2006 12:27 am
Location: Honduras

Post by ricktendo64 » Thu Apr 03, 2008 3:20 am

You are all wrong (older versions maybe.) Version 6 is pretty fast, no speed difference noticeable

techtype
Posts: 268
Joined: Mon Aug 15, 2005 5:46 pm

Post by techtype » Thu Apr 03, 2008 4:55 am

ricktendo64 wrote:You are all wrong (older versions maybe.) Version 6 is pretty fast, no speed difference noticeable
Agreed, very light and speeds up older hardware slightly in some cases even when transparency is used.

User avatar
ricktendo64
Posts: 3213
Joined: Mon May 22, 2006 12:27 am
Location: Honduras

Post by ricktendo64 » Thu Apr 03, 2008 4:50 pm

CAUTION: I do notice one thing tho, when using tools like nLite I get some errors when integrating
Cannot find blabla.inf

User avatar
beats
Posts: 772
Joined: Tue Nov 27, 2007 4:11 am
Location: Netherlands

Post by beats » Fri Apr 04, 2008 5:12 am

Is WindowBlinds worth using you think?
No, not for me. I like my classic desktop. But YMMV of course. ;)

User avatar
roirraW "edor"
Posts: 761
Joined: Sun Oct 15, 2006 2:25 pm

Post by roirraW "edor" » Fri Apr 04, 2008 5:21 am

That was my next guess, Ricktendo, that maybe it was just the old versions I had used way back which were so slow and resource hogs. Good to hear they've improved it.

User avatar
moataz
Posts: 133
Joined: Tue Nov 21, 2006 4:03 am
Location: Egypt
Contact:

Post by moataz » Mon Jun 02, 2008 4:53 am

I think True Transparency now can be an good alternate for Window Blinds.
XP Light, 8.1 Right Developer

newsposter
Posts: 1131
Joined: Wed Sep 14, 2005 11:31 am

Post by newsposter » Mon Jun 02, 2008 8:21 am

The original StarDock was a resource hog. Hugely so.

Lately though, their commercial products are pretty good.

I like objectdock (I'm an old XWindows/KDE guy) and desktopX.

The 'price is right' on their whole suite. $50- gets you all of the customization programs, $70- get you that and the utilties to create custom media/layouts from scratch. As far as their on-going 'subscription' model goes I have only been paying the sub fee every second year or so. I don't download all that much from WinCustomize.com so having 24/7/356 access to that isn't that important to me.

I've used 2-3 'freeware' desktop/objectbar products in the last 5 years, all of them faded away to nothing once the primary developer lost interest. Then I finally popped for the Stardock stuff and haven't looked back. Not to say that anyone or any package available here or on MSFN or WinCert is likely to fade away, but I like consistant availability of my toolsets.

User avatar
Zacam
Moderator
Posts: 615
Joined: Tue Sep 13, 2005 7:46 pm
Location: Portland, OR

Post by Zacam » Mon Jun 02, 2008 9:30 pm

I just retheme by hand the default Luna to what I want and then I run Litestep. Problem solved.

Glowy buttons that can radiate a glow past the window/object? Whatever. Pointless bling. Semi-transparent stuff? Just as accomplish-able in windows with freeware that hasn't needed updates in next to forever, all of which take less resources combined than the stardock suite. Bonus from Litestep: Total shell placement AND interaction control.

Downside: It isn't for everbody. No solution is. Go with what works.

Post Reply