Talk:Windows DreamScene
 | A fact from Windows DreamScene appeared on Wikipedia's Main Page in the Did you know column on 18 January 2007. The text of the entry was as follows:
|  |
 | This article is rated Start-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||||
| ||||||||||||||
I really fail to understand why we can't add a section something like "Popular sites for dreamscene content" Everybody knows that wiki is all over the internet, and usually the first stop after google to find relevant locations for links. I know wiki doesn't want to be a linklist, but seriously I don't see what it would hurt for a few links to be posted about where to get Dreamscene files, but thats just me. Dreamscene will never be popular or gain notoriety without knowledge of it.
Maybe wikipedia should reconsider just how important, or at least how dominant of information they are in terms of internet searches, there is nearly a wiki article for anything and everything that exists, but the rules governing articles' completeness are vastly overvalued, if you look at it in terms of what easily accessible information should be.
I am really frustrated by the lack of completeness with some many technology articles on wiki, Dreamscene included. I'm curious why making information available to people is considered advertising, connecting buyers to seller, of a product is advertising. Merely making the information available about where to find Dreamscenes, freely accessible digital files, which are not retail products, hardly qualifies, at least in the country I'm from.
"Describing Wikipedia, founder James Wales said in an interview with tech site Slashdot: “Imagine a world in which every single person on the planet is given free access to the sum of all human knowledge. That’s what we’re doing.”
No it's not, you are giving access to information actively being censored by guilds of editors who gang up on anyone looking to provide additional information but what isn't consistent with what the editors think should be in the article, for whatever reason. The sum of all human knowledge includes anything that can be expressed in written form and not removed by overzealous repeat and recycled editing. Sorry but wiki won't be around too much longer as a relevant or dominant provider and organizer of information if that doesn't change. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Jimbobdick (talk • contribs) 20:43, 11 June 2008 (UTC)
JBD
Advertisement[edit]
With all the goodwill in the world, I cannot see why this article warants a place on the front page. Sorry, this looks like advertising.
196.14.160.18 14:44, 18 January 2007 (UTC)
- If you think the article's non-neutral, you're welcome to fix it. Alternatively, I'm sure people regularly create or expand plenty of articles on features of Linux or Mac OS that would be suitable for you to nominate for Did you know?. GreenReaper 15:04, 18 January 2007 (UTC)
Shame[edit]
It's a shame this sort of thing is only available for people who have the unnecessarily expensive Vista Ultimate. --Alreajk —Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.184.230.130 (talk) 03:08, 2 December 2007 (UTC)
- Go troll somewhere else. DreamScene is only available to Ultimate users BECAUSE they paid a premium. It's like complaining that your Kia doesn't have a V12 engine when there are people buying Aston Martins and paying more money.(Myscrnnm (talk) 20:44, 30 May 2008 (UTC))
- As this article says, that's not actually true! Whilst officially it is only available on Vista Ultimate, there is a well known hack to run it on other versions of Vista and Windows 7. Casey boy (talk) 19:22, 29 October 2009 (UTC)
Very small addition with Dreamscene.[edit]
If installed, you get two additional scaling options for the wallpaper. Maintain Aspect Ration and Crop To Fit Screen. The former will fit it into the desktop while maintaining the correct scale. The latter will enlarge it so the whole desktop is filled, except that it maintains the correct scale, so part of it will be off the screen. It's useful because you can have portrait images on the screen at high resolution without it being cropped. But certainly not enough to make Ultimate worth paying for. I have no citations for this. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 58.169.214.184 (talk) 13:02, 6 April 2008 (UTC)
DeskScapes is Free[edit]
Why does the article say "chargeable" ? Can someone fix that? I am not familiar with HTML, or wikipedia editing policies.
http://www.stardock.com/products/deskscapes/downloads.asp
There are 2 Versions.
Version 1.0 is for Vista Ultimate and free of charge
Version 2.0 ist for all other Vista Versions and NOT free of charge. you must pay for it.
06.01.09 - Elementardrache —Preceding unsigned comment added by 78.52.43.89 (talk) 20:15, 6 January 2009 (UTC)
7[edit]
DreamScene can be added into Windows 7 through patchers, so it will probably included in the final. 82.25.109.223 (talk) 14:14, 28 February 2009 (UTC)
- Nope, it never made it. Shame. But the patches still work in the final build. Casey boy (talk) 19:23, 29 October 2009 (UTC)
Alternatives[edit]
How about a list of alternative software that does this—and this sort of thing—since many people who do not have Vista Ultimate may be interested in this feature and wondering about it?
I first saw a program that would let you put an animation as your wallpaper for Windows 3 back in ’94/’95. I cannot remember what it was, but since then there have been several others. Let’s see… Video Desktop, Dremples, DreamRender, VLC wallpaper mode… —Preceding unsigned comment added by 99.249.40.227 (talk) 23:57, 24 March 2009 (UTC)