Talk:WindowBlinds

This article was nominated for deletion on 11 October 2009 (UTC). The result of the discussion was nomination withdrawn.

Computing Low‑importance

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Computing, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of computers, computing, and information technology on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.ComputingWikipedia:WikiProject ComputingTemplate:WikiProject ComputingComputing articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Software: Computing Low‑importance

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Software, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of software on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.SoftwareWikipedia:WikiProject SoftwareTemplate:WikiProject Softwaresoftware articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.
	This article is supported by WikiProject Computing.

Microsoft Windows: Computing Mid‑importance

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Microsoft Windows, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Microsoft Windows on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Microsoft WindowsWikipedia:WikiProject Microsoft WindowsTemplate:WikiProject Microsoft WindowsMicrosoft Windows articles
Mid	This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.
	This article is supported by WikiProject Computing.

Phrasing[edit]

The competitors portion of the article seems to get problematic when discussing WindowBlinds VS. Style XP flame wars. --Konfab user 06:39, 28 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

This

Most programs are still around, but with the introduction of Windows XP they became fairly irrelevant— few users wished to skin for a less-capable platform.

struck me as a little POV, so I got rid of it. —Saric (Talk) 18:25, 30 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

It could have been phrased a little better, but the sentiment is true enough. You simply don't see eFX or Chroma skins around anymore. Nobody wants to use them when they only do the window borders and half the controls. I'm sure things will be similar for Vista, albeit a little slower because XP doesn't suck as much compared to Vista as 98 did compared to XP. GreenReaper 04:09, 1 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

POV[edit]

I have a concern about part of this article.

The rise of msstyles skinning has led to an increase in the number of skins with styles described as "clean" and "smooth", particularly those imitating the above operating system themes. This is partly due to the constraints of the msstyle platform, which place strict limitations on the width of borders and number and position of buttons. Some msstyle skin designers have moved to WindowBlinds, and others have permitted ports of their skins, leading to a similar change in WindowBlinds skin design.

I was just discussing this article with some friends, and this paragraph strikes me as very POV, partcularly the second sentence. The move towards minimalism was driven by aesthetics, not limitations. Certainly people are welcome to their opinions as to how the style of groups such as 4imp evolved, but opinions don't belong in Wikipedia. It would be different if there was a reference to -- just an example -- Heylove remarking that her style was developed as a result of msstyle limitations, but as it is the paragraph is just speculation. I think a complete rewrite or removal is called for. --64.199.239.197 17:22, 2 August 2006 (UTC) Status[reply]

Hmm. Do you happen to have such a reference? I know from private conversation with a few people (but of course I can't use them as published means :-) that it was the limitations that shifted some skinners onto WindowBlinds - they felt there was a limit to their ability to execute their vision using msstyles.

The style of early msstyles would seem to me to be primarily due to the newness of the msstyles skinning community (which perhaps had fewer "pure artists" interested in doing complicated stuff that wouldn't be universally popular). I wasn't quite around for it, but I'm given to understand that the WindowBlinds community borrowed heavily from available Kaleidoscope themes when it was starting out in '97/'98. Put simply, early msstyles looked a lot like XP (and, in some cases, the Mac), so people made more of the same. Certainly, there was a general move towards a different sense of aesthetics on WinCustomize at the same time as msstyles were developing (in part because WindowBlinds skinners are hardly immune from that which is popular elsewhere), but it was not as pronounced. You would go onto xpthemes.com and easily a third of the msstyles available would be recoloured versions of the XP themes, maybe with slightly different buttons. This is an opinion, to be sure, but you see for yourself just by looking at the skins that were around then. :-)

This section is rather outdated, as recent msstyles have tended towards the complex over time. Perhaps it would be better to characterize it as a gradual transition from the styles initially available, passing through various modifications, "inspirations", and then on to truly original works? GreenReaper 20:26, 2 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I would suggest the following rewrite.

Along with the popularity of OS-themed skins, recent years have seen an increased demand for original interfaces which follow a similarly professional design philosophy. Many artists have captured the sleek, smooth style of modern operating systems in their own completely original designs, offering skins which easily rival the quality and completeness of even the most modern of GUIs. Similarly, the "minimalistic" approach to interface design has gained a tremendous following, largely bolstered by the support of the screenshot scene. Skins with a clean, simplistic aesthetic have been well received in both msstyle and WindowBlinds formats.

I think this bypasses a couple of POV issues (mainly that minimalism was the result of msstyle limitations, which is my main disagreement), and it reflects the skinning scene -- both DIYers and WindowBlinds skinners -- in a much more positive light. --64.199.239.197 21:26, 2 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Sounds good to me. So merged. GreenReaper 15:24, 4 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

to be fair[edit]

To be fair to the user community, it should be discussed here that WindowBlinds got a number of critics on known sites such as download.com or pcworld.com, especially about problems of stability or crashes during use and uninstalling, low compatibility with some software, and as open door to spyware when installing tierce source skins. (Originbob 23:40, 1 February 2007 (UTC))[reply]

What's tierce source - third party? If the program's crashy or incompatible, you should be able to find reviews that say that - there's plenty of them out there. No reviewer worth their salt would pass up the opportunity to ding a few marks for crashes. :-) Be sure to check the date and version of the software reviewed - from my biased perspective, I'd say it's fair to say that early versions of it had stability problems, but they've fallen off markedly since the 4.x series - not coincidentally, since Windows 9x started fading away. GreenReaper 00:38, 2 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Tales of an IT technician[edit]

I was told by an IT technician windowblinds was spyware, maybe this should be present on the page Lawnmowers Rock! 01:26, 15 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Doesn't sound much like a reliable source to me. Stardock is a reputable software company that wants people to pay for their programs with money rather than by installing ad-servers and spy programs into your system. We hate that stuff too. Of course, if he got a pirated version, someone else might have decided to make some money off it . . . GreenReaper 05:14, 15 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Fair use rationale for Image:Aquaxp.png[edit]

Image:Aquaxp.png is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in this Wikipedia article constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.

Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to insure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If there is other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page. Note that any fair use images uploaded after 4 May, 2006, and lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.

BetacommandBot 06:56, 27 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Image copyright problem with Image:Stardockcompanylogo.png[edit]

The image Image:Stardockcompanylogo.png is used in this article under a claim of fair use, but it does not have an adequate explanation for why it meets the requirements for such images when used here. In particular, for each page the image is used on, it must have an explanation linking to that page which explains why it needs to be used on that page. Please check

That there is a non-free use rationale on the image's description page for the use in this article.
That this article is linked to from the image description page.

This is an automated notice by FairuseBot. For assistance on the image use policy, see Wikipedia:Media copyright questions. --08:11, 31 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]