Slashdot Mirror
Alternative Desktops for Win32?
BRock97 asks: "After having made Linux the default desktop on my laptop, I have gotten into the mode of wanting to make all my desktops pretty, including my Win32 gaming machine. There are commercial programs out there (such as Object Desktop), but at a price tag of $50, I want to do a little more research before I toss down that chunk of change for eye candy, which leads to my question. Anyone use such freely available shell replacements such as geoshell or LiteStep? Comments on stability, speed, and such? The themes look impressive and the available modules (especially for LiteStep) looks extensive. For that matter, anyone use Object Desktop" Microsoft offers some UI tweaking tools, but I'm not aware of that many all-desktop replacements out there. Are any other projects in the works aside from the ones listed? How difficult are such projects to work on given Microsoft's attitude on control of the Win32 desktop?
Run KDE or Gnome or any of the other desktop environments.
My friend does this on his laptop. It is a very effective solution.
I've used Litestep on Windows 2000. I loved it with the exception of two things. 1) a bad theme rendered it nearly unusable. I logged in as another user and reinstalled to fix it, but I later learned of a way I could have fixed it without reinstalling. Partially my fault. 2) The Start menu never seemed to update as I installed new software. It was as if it generated a static menu from the start menu during install.
There were many things I really liked about it: multiple desktops, transparent menus, smaller interface features waste less screen space, right-click access to the start menu, etc. I eventually ditched it though mostly because of the start menu issue.
Although I haven't tried it out, LiteStep looks pretty impressive.
If you like WindowMaker, give it a try.
utter rubbish
Windows XP contains theme support. You can get themes here. However, to actually use themes not signed by microsoft, you need an additional shareware program that costs $20 for long-term activation (this program is not written by MS). Seems to work pretty well, although the themes don't apply equally to all apps.
Dan
I tended to open system.ini and change the link:
shell=Explorer.exe
to
shell=progman.exe
for that nostalgic win3.1 look, with the added bounus that ur machine boot loads faster, and since progman dont load/run all the stuff in reg, it has less crap loaded, and to me is far more stable.
ofcoure i found a better way, and now run debian, but i still do this on uni machine. as well as set the background to c:\windows\logos.sys (stretched) just to confuse the luser who uses the machine after me >:)
I see some comments about liteStep's installation. for one, I couldn't find anything on LiteStep, and geoshell's install was effortless. I'm very happy with it.
Talisman seems to be pretty cool, my girlfriend likes it alot, and it appears to be fairly customizable. I haven't used it all that much(GNOME user :P), but it seems pretty easy to play with and they offer a 30 day trial download. Of course, if you don't want to pay...geoshell works nicely.
perl -e 'printf("mmm %x\n", 3735928559)'
If you just have a windows computer for games, just run the games in full screen mode and you won't have to look at windows at all.
Hell, just make a desktop full of shortcuts and st the 'taskbar' to auto-hide, and you'll won't have to look at microsofts crappy GUI wigets again.
Moneyed corporations, non-working 'poor' and criminal prisoners are turning productive citizens into tax-slaves.
I've been using LiteStep for 4 years now...(or since b23 was the first time I tried it.)
Anyways...I have used it NON-Stop everyday that I've had access to a computer (Even at school)
I find that, while setting up LiteStep can be abit hard or overwhelming at first. Great people have been able to help greatly by making distributions. such as Omar's LiteStep Installer and other great works such as that.
And as far as support... the community is great, IRC and the mailing list are awsome. And almost everyone is friendly and willing to help. Give it a try..
I've used LiteStep for about 2 years, off and on. It's extremely versitile, customizable, and a great replacement to the explorer shell. With all these bonuses, come drawbacks though.
.rc files which the themes can't touch. They simple pull the info from said files and use them for the formatting. This applies to popup, hotkey, and variable setups. Before this, one would have to install multiple instances of LiteStep and use a shell selector to switch between the themes. Now LS has modularity and can switch themes on the fly.
.24.7 and a new dev. team dedicated to continuing to improve on LiteStep.
The biggest problem comes with the step.rc and individualization of themes. Simply put, the author creates a theme to his tastes, with his layouts, with his setup. When another person installs this theme, they are required to use his layout, or modify it themself. So basically, you have to understand how to use the step.rc to fix any quirks you don't like about it. Thankfully, this process has gotten a lot easier with standardization of themes, though LSDistro and more recently OTS. The entire setup is moved away into personal
Another problem is the community itself, which has had it's ups and downs in the past few years. Currently, the main LiteStep site is down and the LiteStep theming community has floundered. This is the second time this has happend in the last few years and it sets us back when it comes to innovative theme development. We've also seen a bunch of our influential users/developers drop out of the scene from stupid users abusing them.
As long as you can get over the learning curve of modifying a step.rc file and you can adapt to the new shell enviroment, you should do fine with LiteStep. However, until litestep.net comes back up, don't expect to find a ton of themes or help setting it up.
On the horizion, we're looking at litestep.net coming up in a few months or so, as well as the much antisipated release of version
As much as I don't have to use Windows at all these days, I haven't used LiteStep in a while, but when I did, it made Windows tolerable, multiple desktops, a dock, among other things, made the Windows desktop much more usable. The only drawback was the awkwardness of editing configuration files in Windows; why I didn't download Emacs or Vim for Windows and save myself the aggravation of Notepad, I can't remember...
--Shahms
Let's hope that there's intelligent life somewhere out in space 'Cause there's bugger-all down here on Earth.
Regarding the question about how MS deals with these shells: Well, the simple answer is that they don't. It keeps us off their back :). In fact, many of the well known win32 shell developers work or have worked at Microsoft. Alternative shells work just fine under Windows.
Now, there are actually a ton of shells (see the list) out there for Windows, and most are open source in some way or other. The most popular (and one of the oldest) win32 shells is Litestep, which is GPL'd.
For a somewhat decent overview of shells from a windows user's point of view, check out forum topic on deviantART. Alternative Windows Shells basically just replace the Explorer.exe file as the Windows shell... usually also resulting in the replacement of the well known taskbar, start menu, and desktop. Instead, you can use the tools provided by the shell to build your own interface. Shells are very similar to X desktop environments. They do not replace the Windows like a WM does. For general news and info regarding Windows shells, check out the following sites:
Desktopian.org also covers Windows and shells news in-depth, along with some *nix related news.
Litestep is the oldest shell still in active development. It is by far the most popular shell (with an estimated 10,000+ users) and the most customizable shell (outside of Graphite). You can create almost whatever interface you want, thanks to the 300+ 3rd party modules for the shell. Litestep also has great support through the LS Mailing List and the IRC channels (#fpn, #ls2k, and #ls_help on irc.openprojects.net). Make sure to check out the following sites for Litestep:
- Graphic Language
- JoeBlade
- Litestep.net
- ShellFront
- LS Documentation
- LS FAQ
- The Module List - Module List with descriptions (a little out of date and incomplete, but better for most people)
- the Litestep Installer - a must to get Litestep installed and configured. Make sure to download 'OTS compatible' themes.
Litestep started in 1997 as a port of AfterSTEP to Windows. Since then, it's taken on a serious life of its own. It can do almost anything. Whether you're a minimalist, you love bar themes, you just want to get rid of the desktop icons and add to the popup, or you want your desktop to do everything under the sun, Litestep can do it. And if LS can't do something you want it to, then its active development core will probably create a module to do it soonThe second most popular replacement shell is geOShell, which is largely a minimalist's shell. It has a GUI configuration for most things. geOShell's main site is geoshellx.com. All information can be found there. They are also supported through the geoshellx.com forums and their IRC channel (#geoshell on irc.openprojects.net).
Most win32 shells out there today are either derived from Litestep or geOShell in some way or other. However, there have been two blackbox 'ports' recently to Windows:
- bluebox
- bb4win
Both of these shells natively support blackbox themes are very fast and light to run.It's impossible for me to explain everything here. However, for any *nix users who need to run Windows as well, these shells offer a great alternative to that drab and boring Explorer desktop. Win32 alternative shells even let you have your X desktop on Windows.
Now, the advantage to Object Desktop (namely DesktopX and objectbar is that it doesn't require that you replace your shell (which is a registry key change in NT and a system.ini file edit in 9x). Configuration is accomplished by a GUI. DesktopX is extremely configurable. Keep in mind that running Object Desktop will use up excessive cpu and/or memory. They can do almost anything, but will also use up resources... unlike most shells.
Hope this helps. Many *nix users are completely unaware of the Windows open-source community and of shells in general. We hope this will eventually change.
fakelag.networks
However, I can not vouch for anything about Win9x, I've only just got an XP machine to play with and all I've done is change it back to the classic Win98 UI. If I could find a utility to slightly fade all windows that don't currently have the focus, that'd be enought for me for now.
I've been an obedient windows slave for years now, but I've decided, damnit, I'm going to stand up for myself! I, I, I'm going to THEME my desktop! There, I said it! And you can't stop me, Bill! Please - don't stop me, Bill ... (sob) I can't afford XP yet, bwah-hah-hah, I just can't afford it yet. I promise I'll have the money soon, I just need a little more time! Pleeaaaaase!
www.themexp.org
And it's free too.
"Well kids, you tried your best, and you failed. The lesson is, never try." -Homer Simpson
I do find the modules a little annoying and unstable sometimes but the Litestep core is solid as a rock (as far as i can tell). Ther are only two other things that bug me about Litestep.
Apart from that I highly recommend it to anyone who is a wee bit computer savvy and likes to be able to change EVERYTHING about their desktop.
PS I'm not really a coward, Slashdot just wouldn't let me sign up.
:: trankillity
Litestep is what I use when I boot into Windows; if it didn't exist I probably would've moved to Linux much earlier. It requires that you play around with rc files and spend a few months getting to know modules and their quirks before it works really well, but really there are no limits once you get it going. My question wouldn't have been about alternate shells for windows, my question would've been whether there are any unix desktop environments that come at all close to comparing to Litestep. I'm probably being a little unfair to the multitude of other shells out there but really once I got the hang of Litestep I found it had so many possibilities that I didn't feel inclined to try any others.
Windows PowerPro, is a pretty good no cost Windows shell replacement. It has a lot of features, but it seems to be more oriented towards productivity than aesthetics. I found it easy to install and configure. It has been around for years, and used to be called "Stiletto". There is a somewhat active mailing list.
Well, if you are already saddled with Windows XP, I hear that you can really skin it a *lot* more than previous releases. Google around.
It's 10 PM. Do you know if you're un-American?
Win XP's 'theming' IMHO is M$'s way of ripping off stuff from the Alternate Shell groups.
Everyone really should junk M$, but if you're saddled with it, get some cajones and install litestep.
Try LSDistro. It's almost painless, and you can uninstall it if you don't like it.
Screw you Bill Gates.
.solidity
I've been using LiteStep for a few years and now use it exclusively at work. Even got a few of my colleagues to use it. But don't ask for tech support, go to the community to get your answers.
The problem with LiteStep is that it has a fairly steep learning curve. This has improved with standards for themes (OTS) appearing and a good installer. There are heaps of distros out there but LSDistro and OTS are two of the best. OTS has generally replaced LSDistro these days and most new themes come out as OTS compatible.
Although these installers are in place and themes are more compatible, you still have to be willing to roll up your sleeves and dive into the configuration files to make a theme work the way you want it to. I've found that I generally download a theme and tweak it until I'm happy and then use that theme for ages.
Anyway litestep is one of the best shell replacements out there because:
If you can't figure out litestep then you should be using a computer. It is not that hard to learn as I saw in a earlier post and it is one of the oldest, I have been using it for almost 3 years.
I run it on a SGI 320 with windows 2000 for work.
Dr. Suess: 'Gandalf, Gandalf! Take the ring! I am too small to carry this thing!' 'I can not, will not hold the One.
I use litestep with lots and lots of modules and added functionality. there were quite a few bugs to work ou tbefore I got it to run consistantly stable but most of these are well documented.
as for stablity/preformance it is open source so it is under costant development. it uses less resources (even with all the added modules) then explorer. after the inital getting used to phase of it and working out the kinks it is more stable then explorer ever was for me.
First off I've been using lS for about 4 years. Yes it's a bit of a hassle to learn but my PC runs almost twice as fast than when I'm using Explorer. Once you get over the uneasyness of dealing with the configuration files it is pretty simple to use.
XP's theming abilities have absolutely nothing in common with alternative shells. the themes merely change the way the windows/widgets look, but the interface is still exactly the same, with the same taskbar/start menu/desktop shell. litestep/geoshell/etc replace the taskbar/start menu/desktop, but do nothing to the windows/widgets.
I have used alternate shells for some time, starting with LiteStep a couple years back. While I am inately a tweaker, I went to the geOShell camp about a year back, as geO is quite a bit quicker to get setup and usable.
LiteStep definitely deserves its praise, and is ultimately more tweakable and customizable. That said, that is why I quit using it for day to day use (I still fire it up from time to time), as I spent way too much time customizing my shell instead of getting "sutff" done.
I know that LiteStep is moving towards being a bit more organized like geO, and have always encouraged the community in that direction.
If you are looking for something without too much fuss that gives you alot of features though, at the least try geOShell.
I will give fair warning though to get authorization before using an alternate shell in the workplace.. I got fired from one help desk job because I installed geOShell and it was seen as "hacking" because it involved registry modifications and made my computer non-standard, but that is a long story for another time (lets just say that their IT dept sounded like the MCSE textbook.. not intelligent, experieced MCSEs, but the actual textbooks!!!).
... if the question wasnt specifically about Windows. No wonder linux is such crap, you're all a brain short of geniuses.
There's a surprising number of other shells out there besides just GeoShell and Litestep. Not just because I write it, but from what others tell me, Serenade is one of the most stable and user-friendly. As with anything under development, it's a work in progress, but it's very usable. You might consider checking it out at Courtah.net. There are some nice themes at Skinbase. SharpE is also a nice shell, but lacks some customization abilities. I don't prefer Litestep because I think it's too disorganized (but it's the foundation of the community), and Geoshell is a nice shell despite forcing you to configure everything through the registry. In short, try many of them out, just make sure you read the directions on how to get your old shell back _carefully_. Look on ShellFront or Desktopian for more info/links.
I've been using litestep for a few years, on Win95, 98, 2k... loved it on all of them. LS is basically a module loader plus some, but the community support has allowed modules for pretty much anything you want. There are a lot of LS clones, and different LS builds, but they all work great! One just needs to not mind tweaking with preferences and their own setup... Some great LS sites: www.joeblade.com www.shellfront.org www.litestep.net -- down for now
When I first started using Litestep, it was mainly because of the Linux wave that came along a few years ago. I struggled with Linux on my machine for a few months, then smashed everything and started over with Windows. But seeing the cool enlightenment and other interfaces made me search for a way to customize windows, and that brought me to ls. I think, for any user, it is the best replacement shell, simply because it is the most customisable. Get litestep from http://ls-ots.cjb.net
I've used Object Desktop for the past year, and I really like it... They continually update their product: that $50 is a year's subscription to every update for every product, including anything new that they might release during the year. Future subscriptions are cheaper, too! Most of the programs are very careful of the system resources they use, and offer seemingly endless customization. There's also a well-established skinning community creating variations on everything to make OD that much more useful. I'd say try it out... there are shareware versions of all the popular programs, including Windowblinds and DesktopX.
A lot of people here are stating that Litestep takes some work to configure. I would take a gander to the affect that the people saying that have always been Windows users. However, the Ask Slashdot question came from some one who uses Linux, thus I would assume they came from a world of .rc files and the like. It is true the traditional way to configure Litestep is hand editing text files. But with decent documentation which has previously been linked, and for someone who is comfortable editing text files, it is a pretty straight forward process.
For the GUI only people, there is also a nice installer which has also been previously linked.
If you want complete control over your desktop, go with Litestep. If you want less control and more hand holding, go with another alt shell. But remember, Litestep is only as stable as the modules (plugins) that you run. So if you have problems, 95% of the time it is going to be a module issue.
Enjoy your time in the Gates world, hopefully Litestep (or whatever shell you choose) will ease the pain.
As a long-time (3 years) developer of a Windows shell (Serenade, at http://www.courtah.net), I have come across many times when things just break with new versions of Windows, and things go awry. Things like grabbing the system tray are extremely annoying to do, and it seems like they change little aspects of it with every new version just to aggravate us. Also, starting with Windows 2000 they integrated things like the dialup-networking icon into the shell, so it goes away when you install another shell.
For those who don't believe there are hidden Windows API calls, there are. Such as SwitchToThisWindow which actually sets focus to a foreground window (as opposed to SetForegroundWindow which just flashes it in 2000/XP). Combined with obscure things necessary to get shell hooks working and creating icons for InstallShield installers etc, they've successfully made it a pain to program the shells. But so long as people continue to use Windows, we'll keep hacking away.
While I had been one of Litesteps biggest supporters in the past. I feel that now it is lagging behind other desktop replacements for windows in terms of features. Having 300+ modules means nothing if they don't provide the features I want. I have been asking for some more features in the popup menu in terms of skinning.. but only one of the requested features got put in. All other additions seem to be stuff that I couldn't care less about. I guess that goes for litestep development in general. I've kinda lost faith that someone would step forward and code my requested-wanted features into a module or make a new module with the features. To me it seems, in general it's, "If you want a feature, don't hold your breath waiting for it, you may get lucky but again don't hold your breath". Plus it seems to be hip, or in or chic.. whatever to be minimalist and like blackbox'ish modules.. people seem to be more willing to make blackbox ports or modules than anything else... I might be alone here when I say I don't get too excited over blackbox ports.. I don't get excited over the real thing much less a port..
At the end of the day, for those serious about doing WORK on their box, the shell - however you dress it up - does not really matter. If I can boot alt shells 2.5 milliseconds faster than win 32 - do I really give a shit ? - What really matters is stability and, per se, the hardware and software config of the box/Users aptitude/knowldege. Whatever shell you run instead of Explorer, undrr Windows yer' still going to get bsod's..... fact. It's Widows - simple, live with it - or change it. Run Mandrake or Red Hat and things might be different - you may actually work faster,more securely, reliably and more enjoyably. In essence - do we really give a monkeys' if the taskbar looks good when u have to run that Excel doc out in 10 minutes because it HAS to be out or you're fired ? - Do we really give a monkeys' - when at work - that right clickin' instead of hitting the "start" button brings a different way to access your apps.? _ I sincerely "Don't know", sure - alternative shells CAN look good, subject to the authors' perception - - but at the end of the day - it IS windows after all. Got time on your hands to cusomize your desktop interface running Windows and join in a preceived community - fine, go ahead. Need to get the job done ? -, sorry - choose your Operating System first.
I've used geOshell for over a year and a half. Before I installed it, my old primary desktop system (P166, 96 megs EDO RAM, Win98SE) would have to be rebooted after no more than 3 or 4 days under constant use. With geOshell, I actually went over 6 weeks without rebooting. So, for stability, nothing beats geOshell (on a Win32 machine).
It uses a very small amout of system resources (I booted the above mentioned desktop system to 99% free resources) and is quite unobtrusive. Hitting Winkey + Z fades the user definable bars out of the way (mighty nice when you're playing a full screen game). The geObars are configurable with the use of plugins and are skinnable.
The only difficulty some people may have is that it does require some registry editing. Keep in mind, however, that editing is only done in geOshell's registry key and will not affect anything else in the OS or other applications.
Try it out. If you don't like it, all you need to do is change the shell from =geoshell.exe to =exploder.exe (or just double click the provided bat file to have it done for you).
Please don't humanize the morons around me. It makes me very uncomfortable.
I love LiteStep and use it all the time. Recently development has been slowed by hack attempts against the largest LS sites, but no worries: LS is already far more stable that the standard Windows GUI. I LOVE IT in short :)
now the obligatory LS links:
Desktopian
FPN
LiteStep.net
ShellFront
sig me a sog
98 Lite can install the 95 shell (pre IE merge) under newer versions of windows. It is much faster than later MS shells while keeping a known user interface. Ironically win98 is much more stable under 98Lite than stock. A good multiple desktop utility (John Liu's multidesk is my choice), MS's own tweak-ui and 98 Lite can yield a surprisingly useful windoze setup. Works so well I even paid for 98 Lite:) Liu gives away multiDesk, thanks John! Be sure to get the correct version of tweak-ui whichever flavor of 98 you use. Not as rebellious as LiteStep et al but is low hassle. Must go shower after actually suggesting the use of ms software...
There are many, many good alternative shells out there. I suggest installing ShellON, or another shell switching app, and try several. Shareware Shells: Object Desktop Winstep Aston Talisman (my fave...) SharpE (Excellent) Open Source: Geoshell (Like sharpE, only more useful) Litestep (A must) Game OS (for gaming) Serenade (pretty, but not for me) Blackbox (yeah, black box runs on windows too) BlueBox I think alot of you are missing the primary reason for switching shells-reclaiming system resources. I run a laptop as my primary system, and it starts overheating at idle because explorer sucks up most of the systems resources. It's like installing a sports exhaust system in your honda. It breathes alot freer, runs faster, and has more horespower. An looks good too.