Recommended Posts

My sentiments exactly. Windowblinds, hell the entire Stardock suite, has come a long way in the last few years. It's all so much more stable and compatible than in years past. I can't tell any performance difference running Windowblinds 4.6 or using a custom style via a patched uxtheme.dll.

586583923[/snapback]

Oh, I can. Example : Dreamweaver (any version) cannot paint it's internal toobars correctly while using Windowblinds; they do not color right. Maybe it's a hyperpaint only problem, but it's really annoying.

That's just one example. There are many others.

Still it will be interesting to see Windowblinds 5 and how successful it is. This is critical opportunity for Stardock, as well as a good one, and they must execute well (ie no show stopping last minute bugs)

I can't wait for this to be released. I purchased my subscription just two weeks ago just so that I could have access to WB5. I hope KoL will have his updated VistaXP skin out soon after its release.

I tried using Windows Blinds for a while, but it ends up sucking up your RAM and slowing your PC down. I would advise you to use Aston Shell - http://astonshell.com/ . It is a complete remake of explorer.exe. Windows dosn't even boot explorer which will typically take up 20 to 30 mb of RAM. If you add windows blinds on to that it is a lot. Aston takes up about 10 mb and it boots fast and some of the skins look amazing. The only downside I've found so far is that it dosn't support dual screens to well, but you can se euse both, but that won't be a problem for most people.

you have no clue how much work has been done on WB5 do you?

ill quote this again:

In addiion, WindowBlinds 5 no longer has a "wbload.exe" and instead extends the painting of the Windows GUI in a more "native" way.  Or put another way, it has "zero foot print" in the same manner that the default bundled Windows themes (msstyles) use.

that means its gong to work like a normal VS.

so little resources, just a service.

you have no clue how much work has been done on WB5 do you?

ill quote this again:

that means its gong to work like a normal VS.

so little resources, just a service.

586621732[/snapback]

yep, great news :D isn't it?

This question may seem a bit dumb, so bare with me. If wb5 is now taking advantage of the advanced 3d graphics card and caching things on video memory, is this going to have any impact on 3d games?

I tried using Windows Blinds for a while, but it ends up sucking up your RAM and slowing your PC down. I would advise you to use Aston Shell - http://astonshell.com/ . It is a complete remake of explorer.exe. Windows dosn't even boot explorer which will typically take up 20 to 30 mb of RAM. If you add windows blinds on to that it is a lot. Aston takes up about 10 mb and it boots fast and some of the skins look amazing. The only downside I've found so far is that it dosn't support dual screens to well, but you can se euse both, but that won't be a problem for most people.

586621721[/snapback]

What was the last WindowBlinds that you tried??? version 3 hehe??? because version 4.6 only takes 600KB here.

I didnt like WB a few years ago but they have done a great job and now it run smooth. :yes:

I hate the fact that you have to uninstall WB to use normal VS's again. Or maybe I missed a setting or something. Unloading didn't help anyway.

586621878[/snapback]

nop you dont need to uninstall it. Just hold Control and click properties.

What was the last WindowBlinds that you tried??? version 3 hehe??? because version 4.6 only takes 600KB here.

I didnt like WB a few years ago but they have done a great job and now it run smooth.  :yes:

586621822[/snapback]

Yeah actually it probably was version 3 ;) I wonder if you can install WB over aston... that would probably sersioly muck it up. Anyone ever tried something called litestep? It was an explorer alternative aswell. Somthing messed up in there and i ended up with no explorer.exe and no litestep ie when you turn on the computer you get a blue screen, no icons no taskbar, the only thing i could access was task manager... that was bad lol

Yeah actually it probably was version 3 ;) I wonder if you can install WB over aston... that would probably sersioly muck it up. Anyone ever tried something called litestep? It was an explorer alternative aswell. Somthing messed up in there and i ended up with no explorer.exe and no litestep ie when you turn on the computer you get a blue screen, no icons no taskbar, the only thing i could access was task manager... that was bad lol

586622035[/snapback]

i was a heavy litestep user about a year ago. I used it with WBlinds and it was awesome. I don't believe i ever had any problems with it like you describe. I used aston too and I also used WB simultaneusly and it worked fine if i remember right. This was more recently...

This topic is now closed to further replies.
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.