danilloOc, it's possible to run Aston and explorer: just don't deattach Explorer process in Shell Swapper. Surely, there would still be a single shell: Aston.

BakerStreet: forgive me, buddy, but you seem to have troubles with reading. I'm not going to write the same over and over again. I don't know, what was the reason of such troubles, but as they ramained on at least three absolutely different computer configurations, WB and Windows versions I'm not going to look for the lreason. I. DON'T. NEED. IT. The same is with some other apps: Litestep or Geoshell may work OK if you dance near them with a tambourine. I want a program work flawlessly just after installation. If this never happens, I stop using it. Simple? I don't want to look for the bugs in a program I don't use. That's normal.
When using programs I prefer stability and productivity over beauty. That's why I give up using software...
And again: show me the version of WB, that works flawlessly on MY PC and I might change my opinion. Until then your arguments are no way better, than mine.

I might soon try to write an article, comparing WB, patched MSStyles (TGT Soft products) and other border skinning engines with the latest versions of available software, so there are still chances that I might accept WB.

"I don't want to look for the bugs in a program I don't use. That's normal."

If you aren't interested in WB, then you have no reason to critique it. If you don't take the time to find out if your "bugs" are really bugs or not, then you have no RIGHT to critique it. You can try to sound all l33t and say:

"When using programs I prefer stability and productivity over beauty. That's why I give up using software..."

but the fact is you haven't tried to find out what was wrong, so you have no idea if it is stable or not. I really don't have much hope for any such article you'd write, honestly, since you can't even get WB running well. Stop blaming the machine.

Don't fall back on the "I don't need the app, so I don't use it" crap and then try to blame bugs. You don't need it, so you don't take the time to find out what the REAL problem is.

The WB themes itself can be buggy, believe me.

It doesn't mean that WB itself is buggy.

Bunch of friends? Everyone I know that uses WB ( as in "real world" ), which totals to about 4 people, never had problems with WB at all.

My main beef is that the statement here is a cheap jab at Windowblinds, anyway. You can't compare it to a shell, it is a totally different app. The mention of Windowblinds was needless and shows the author's ignorance, I think.

sacrat-Thanks for the info.

Sacrat: You really damage your credibility when you just go after WindowBlinds. It's so gratuitious.  WindowBlinds crashing your whole computer? Sheehs, you must have serious problems.  You mentioned earlier you hadn't even tried WindowBlinds in a long time. 

Did you know WindowBlinds is Microsoft certified? Do you know what it requires to get MS certified? It's not just filling out some form. It has to go through a battery of testing and compatibility analysis by an independent organization.  There are also countless reviews of WindowBlinds 4 available on thet net including PC Magazine which gave it 4 stars and said "It does NOT slow down your computer".  There are benchmarks on the net from various websites including UGO's game site which states that WindowBinds not only doesn't slow down your machine but it's noticeably faster for games than using msstyles.

Everyone is entitled to an opinion. That isn't what this is about.  But an opinion is only as valuable as the data behind it.  When you trash WindowBlinds, you ultimately make your views on Aston less valuable too because people won't take what you say on other subjects seriously.

Let's see, companies who use third party made .msstyles: NONE.

Companies who license WindowBlinds to provide third party visual styles:

Microsoft, nVidia, ATI, Nintendo, Good Year, and dozens of others.

Do you think those companies would license WindowBlinds if it was buggy or slow?  Heck, EVERY Alienware PC this Fall will come with WindowBlinds preinstalled.

From my personal experience I have found that many, many "buggy" programs are really the result of poor computer maintenance. I am by no means saying there are not bad and terribly bug riddled programs out there. But when I hear few people ranting about the "instabilities" of a program while there are many of us using it without a single hitch I can't help but think perhaps the problem lies in the user and not the program.

I don't know a ton about computers, but know enough to keep my system running really smooth. And to be honest the only problem I have ever had with Windowblinds was a few graphical glitches here and there before I updated from the Catalyst 4.4. I cannot recall it ever having crashed my computer and it runs incredibly smooth. Oh, and folks simply stare, wide eyed, when they see my computer. Always gets the comments.

Sometimes you just have to take responsibility for making a program work well on your own system. I know I have.

XX: I know. I had repeatable system crashes with a single theme. Others worked better. Still, if an application crashes because of a theme, it's the guilt of the app developer as well.

BakerStreet: don't say anything you know nothing about

Draginol:
First. What do you mean under a "long time"? In my opinion a week of extensive usage and tests for 16 hours a day is more, than enough.

Second. As a person, personally involed in numerous experiments by definition (I managed to graduate as a quantum electronics physicist) I don't believe anyone just saying, that something works good. It might be Microsoft certified. Good to you if it helps promoting WB. And no matter to me if I still see bugs. "It does NOT slow down your computer". Huh. These articles have nothing said about the testing metodics/computer/OS/configurations. Again: it might work for someone, but as i managed not to get into this "someone" group, I stay with my opinion.

Third. Again. I give you an offer, which can gudge us. Give me a copy of Windows Blinds you consider bugless/fast/etc and I'll conduct several tests on PCs I have access to. After that I'll post the resulting data: OS/PC configuration (which might be from quite good to outdated), testing metodics, user opinions and whatever else you consider useful. If in these tests I'll notice no bugs and glitches I'll write this in my blog and even apologize to you (as you felt offented by my possibly-out-of-the-date-claims). So overall there would be results of a reproducible tests, which are more useful for both sides, than endless arguments for and against.

... I'm thinking I know a *little* bit about skinning... MAYBE even a bit more than you. ... ya think?

sacrat: Here's the problem, I don't feel I need to prove to you that WindowBlinds is very stable and fast because I already have countless magazine reviews from this year to make that claim for me.  I've got Alienware preparing to preload it on every machine.  I've got ATI using it for their ATI desktop, I've got nVidia doing the same thing.  Microsoft uses it for their XBox desktop. And it's been through Microsoft's certification lab to receive official certifiation from Microsoft(i.e. the same kind of process drivers go through).

It's not my credibility on the line here. 

Let me give you an example: If everyone else says DOOM 3 is a great game and is very stable but ONE reviewer keeps insisting that it's buggy and crummy, what do you think the result is going to be? People are going to take that one reviewer's view witha grain of salt.

Incidentally, I've never heard of a "quantum electronics physicist".  I'd be curious to know where you got this "degree" from. 

I think quantum electronics is a post-grad physics specialization.

At this point anyone that is interested enough in aesthetics that they would skin their windows isn't gonna worry about 20 megs of RAM. I think the windowblinds discussion here was made pointless with the statement:

"I don't write any bugreports because I don't like this application and don't use it"

Someone who is interested in the program to work will track down their application conflicts and not mind a pittance of RAM. Anyone that doesn't have enough interest to make sure the bugs aren't environment-specific has no business writing a review.

At this at this stage of the game that it's safe to say that WindowBlinds works pretty flawlessly on essentially all configurations.  Someone runnng into problems these days (i.e. 2004) is almost certainly running into a bug in a skin or has some video driver issue.

There are lots of people out there, for instance, who run into problems playing pretty much any PC game released these days. But that doesn't make the game buggy.  You will always have some percentage of users who have problems running a given piece of software.

My ThinkPad T40 for instance, ALWAYS blue screens when it comes out of hibernation.  I could blame the Thinkpad and say that hibernation doesn't work on Thinkpads. But in all relaity, there is probably some driver or something interfering with it.  If I want to write a review on Thinkpads and claim that the hibernation doesn't work right, then I need to establish that this is a wide spread, reproduceable problem. It wouldn't be responsible to make such a serious charge against Thinkpads without doing research.

The fact that so many companies pre-load WindowBlinds should be a good indication that it is very robust.

BakerStreet: OK. MAYBE. As you said
BTW, where can I find your works? Just to take a look.
If you manage to reread the whole thread, you might find, that these bugs were found on several completely different machines, so I'd not call them "environment-specific". And I DO care about 20 Mb of RAM, even having half a gig of it.

Draginol: "A million of flies can't get wrong". Huh?
You're also wrong thinking, that I'm the only person, thinking, that WB is buggy. I am not. Just look outside your world.
Quantum electronics. OK. It might be easier for you to get it as non-linear optics and lasers. I graduated from SarFTI, the institute which prepares specialists for RFNC-VNIIEF institute, ILFI. In particular this involves works for ISKRA lasers. Googling will tell you more.
"There are lots of people out there, for instance, who run into problems playing pretty much any PC game released these days. But that doesn't make the game buggy. You will always have some percentage of users who have problems running a given piece of software."
Surely. A sample: I install a game and it crashes in five minutes. Is this game buggy? If I install a patch and it works flawlessly (which usually happens), then I'd say it's not. But if I install a patch, another one and so on and it crashes not every five minutes, but every hour, the game IS buggy. Got the point? If I come to my neighbor and install the same game, apply the same patch and it doesn't run, are we both wrong? And what if there're tens or hundreds of such "neighbors"?
The last time.... I tested numerous versions of WB on numerous machines, OSes, configurations and haven't seen in person anyone saying, that it worked completely flawlessly. While writing my article about OS customization I strongly tested it for a week. For the first day I was happy, but later noticed some annoying glitches (mentioned above). In my personal experience WB is more buggy, than MSStyles, which's still far from being perfect (people running Explorer once a day won't probably even notice that).
I offered you a honest test. You didn't reply. So just coun't me in a "problem group" (which exists for most kinds of software).

Sacrat: That's nonsentical arguing there.

There are lots of people who have problems with Windows XP. Does that make it a piece of crap? No. It's all about the numbers.  WindowBlinds sells tens of thousands of copies each year directly to end users (not counting the mass license sales to corporations). These are people who have tried it out and chosen to pay for it. It sells so well because it works.  It has millions of users because for nearly all of them, it works well.  Alternative shells, by contrast, tend to be much more problematic (an Aston is no exception). They require a lot of tweaking to get to work right on your system and they tend to make compromises, be resolution dependent, etc.   That's why AstonShell doesn't have nearly as many users. Alternative shells are more problematic by their nature because of all the tweaking.

You are entitled to your opinion that WindowBlinds is really "buggy". No one is arguing you're not.  But at the same time, people who see your claims are likely going to tkae your other opinions with a grain of salt.  I know I do.  I saw your screenshots in the other thread. Not very impressive for someone making bold universal claims of bugginess (every one but the foreign language issue you could have fixed yourself by tweaking the settings -- something that takes a lot less time than tweaking the average Aston theme). I also might point out that you aren't listed in our database as being a customer (you're in the database but only as a downloader, you've not bought anything).  So tell me, how much experience do you really have with WindowBlinds? Dozens of machines? Were these warez copies?

So yes, I consider you part of the "problem group". Every app will have a percentage of users who can't use it.  Games do. Apps do. OSes do.  When the largest corporations, however, are mass licensing your software to distribute to their customers and others do as well, after thorough testing I might add, I think it's reasonable to conclude that most people must find the softwrae to work fine.

The world isn't a perfect place though. The problem with being in "the problem group here" is that this is a Stardock site. I don't consider your criticism of WindowBlinds to be valid (especially now that I've seen your screenshots) because you seem to have an axe to grind. You may disagree but ultimately, if you want to start slamming Stardock's software, this ain't the place to do it. We make no claims of fairness or objectivity here.

Constructive criticism is welcome but a screenshot saying "Look, WindowBlinds sucks, see how on this obscure shareware app running Windows Russian how the custom menu feature that I turned on that was off by default creates a slight cosmetic glitch? Yea, that's what I mean but total crap!" Give me a break.