Slashdot Mirror
Longhorn Skinning A Reality
AlphaAlien writes "AlphaAlien of HardwareGeeks.com has figured out how to skin all of Microsoft's upcoming Windows release codenamed Longhorn. We can now skin Longhorn in the same manner we can skin Windows XP. Here's a picture of a very early copy of the first ever non-Microsoft skin for Longhorn. The only possible issue at this point is that Microsoft appears to be planning to move away from BMP based skinning altogethor and move to PNG based skins in which case any skins made for Longhorn at this point in time will not work far into the future. Also the patch to allow the skins to be loaded may not work many builds from the present as well. But for now we'll be able to hack away at the skinning engine at our leisure. in co-operation with BetasIRC.net we will be releasing the first few longhorn skins and a guide on how to get started on creating your own Longhorn skins."
That, more than anything, tells me a lot about how people feel about Microsoft's operating systems. Past, present, and future.
To paraphrase Douglas Adams: "It is no accident that there is no single word in any language that means, 'As pretty as the Longhorn OS.'"
It's good to see Microsoft supporting free file formats! Along with using PNG, I predict that future versions of Microsoft Windows will use OGG .
- Jax
Skinned Longhorn = Circumsized OS?
-el
Perhaps PNG support in IE will have been improved then; this is good news for web designers.
( http://entropymine.com/jason/testbed/pngtrans/ )
I want to skin my windows crash screens, can I do that too? It'd be great to skin the crash screen to look just like the regular o/s, so I get the impression that everything is fine.
stuff |
I hope this means they will support full PNG transparancy in new versions of IE in preparation for this new feature - that would make it worthwhile for other purposes too.
...for me isn't how pretty I can get an OS to look, but how well it works. If I can put all kinds of skins on Longhorn, but it runs as slow as molasses and crashes at the drop of a hat, then MS will have wasted their time developing this thing. On the other hand if Longhorn turns out to be a nice, stable, functional OS that happens to be skinnable then Linux will have some real competition (which is good for both OS's).
get started on creating your own Longhorn skins.
How about I get the OS first?
I'm no fan of M$, but I'd hope that, for once in their product line, their actually concentrating on getting the guts right before making it pretty.
Not likely, but I can hope.. :-)
Besides, I guess that at this point there's still large chunks of XP code in Longhorn so it's not surprizing that it's not looking all that different yet.
With my copy of XP the first thing I did was put the Start menu back to windows 2000 format and turn the blue task bar into the classic gray one.
I don't get it. This is news about a feature in an OS that's not available yet, and when it's available, that feature will have changed? Excuse me, but what the heck is this about? (I'm not trying to sound like a troll - I'm really confused)
Underholdning.info
1. Buy Sun, use as tool to claim *nix compatability
2. Release some unimportant software under open/shared source license
3. Allow skinning of crappy m$ OS windowing environment
4. Spread more patently false FUD about how Linux suX0rs, make outrageous claims saying m$ is better
5. Have m$ OS be able to look like Linux
6. $$$!
Is this feature really going to be popular? Honestly, I'd love to hear what makes customizable skins so desirable.
>> "What would the robut do? Frame someone!"
While this is all very nice and pretty, if this is based on the PDC build of Longhorn (which is painfully slow on any of my systems, but that's besides the point...) then it doesn't have the new fangled hardware accelerated bits that are going to be part of Longhorn (Indigo? or is that something else). The GUI that comes with the Longhorn betas is just a testing one that won't be useful in the final release, so I can't really see what use skinning the gui in the beta that'll never actually be used is....
well... maybe... juuuuuust maybe. Those new resource files will replace the standard ones, having them cached, and all will be well. If you think the default XP themes are hard-coded into the source... I have a bridge I'd like to sell you...
Viva La Revolucion! Buy a Mac!
Yes.. it WILL be vector... so this is a complete waste of time...
The two rules for success are:
1) Never tell them everything you know.
I don't want Windows to waste my CPU cycles with hardware-accelerated graphics crap. I don't need fading menus and rotating icons.
The whole point of hardware accelerated GUIs are that they save CPU cycles by offlaoding GUI rendering to the graphics card, hardware designed for rendering graphics.
Microsoft finally adopts PNG? Microsoft becomes friendly with Sun? Microsoft releases WiX as open source...on SourceForge, no less? What the hell kind of bizzaro world did I wake up in today???
Quick, someone check Bill Gates for a stylish alternate-universe goatee!
Slashdot posting a positive article about a Windows OS? [regardless of the fact its years away from release, and still in extremely early alpha stages]. Slashdot, this is so unlike you. Where are the backhand comments against M$? Where are the links with Better Operating systems? I'm ashamed of you. Where's your prejudice? Where's your bias?
The Braying and Neighing of Barnyard Animals Follows.
My droning, long hours in highschool agriculture class covered the Longhorn cattle. Transporting anything with horns that big was dangerous and cumbersome. "Polled" or hornless cattle came into fashion in the cattle industry in short order.
Why has Microsoft's marketing team picked the name of an animal that was proven in the marketplace to be 1. difficult to transport (picture horns sticking out of cattle cars or OS boxes sticking out of Fed Ex trucks) 2. difficult to maneuver without being gored?
I guess Longhorn isn't as new of an OS as we might have been led to think This is all beginning to sound rather familiar if you get my "point" :P
Harpo Tunnel Syndrome--my wrist feels funny.
<obvious>
Well, this might come as a shock to you, but I'll cite some examples:
Simply because you like your speakers in black, doesn't mean everyone does. I, for once, prefer mahogny.
And as computers become a common thing, you might expect people to want to alter their looks and maybe even behaviour to suit whatever needs they may have.
</obvious>
If you really needed this answer, I think you spend way too much time alone in your room, boy. (Perhaps <obvious> as well...)
Not Buzzword 2.0 compliant. Please speak english.
Microsoft does make it possible to create new themes. People do create them, in fact there are thousands and thousands of them out there.
No reason to lie.
Actually, harware-accelerated does not mean fancy schmancy. It just makes it a LOT easier to be fancy on lower end hardware. However, I wouldn't mind Windows Classic to be hardware accelerated, myself.
And the whole point of a server is to provide....services to other computers, not to provide pretty eye candy for some newbie admin.
This is one of the things Microsoft doesn't get. When I build a Sun or Linux production server, the only software on it is the software needed to provide the services the server was built for. Web servers don't neeed GUIs, browsers, or media playsers. Database servers don't need GUIs, , browsers, or media playsers. Application servers don't need GUIs, browsers, or media playsers. I might use a GUI to attach and manage them, but the servers themselves don't need one.
This type of thinking will continue to be Microsoft's security and performance nightmare. If there is a security hole in Mozilla, I don't need to worry about it on my production servers because it ain't there. If there is a security problem with Apache, I don't need to worry about it except on the webserver because it ain't on the app server or DB server. It doesn't take up memory, diskspace or CPU cycles either.
Even offloaded CPU cycles take up CPU cycles at some point, either to issue the instructions or to move on to the next ones. Something has to tell the server the mouse just oved over that pretty icon and to use a few CPU cycles to tell the graphic card to make it flutter in the breeze.
I rarely read replies, it's my opinion and if you thought about your opinion a little more, I'm OK with that.
It's been established previously in this thread: the supposed Longhorn skinning is ugly. Artistically speaking, it has some commendable points. That said, we who use and understand computers are generally rooted in logic and efficiency, and this set of schemes disregards that.
I'm a firm believer in F/OSS and use Linux always. I still maintain a Windows partiton on the lappy for Uni-related projects &c. I'm very much partial to the Windows 2000 desktop. It's barren enough to be effecient, and complex enough to be useful.
All stability issues aside, Microsoft has a strong advantage against Linux DE's largely because they implement functionality with the 'newly acquired user' in mind. KDE is a magnificent testiment to modern programming, and that team has accomplished UI capabilities I never thought I'd see in a UNIX environment. IT IS STILL MISSING that edge, that edge that beginners can grab a-hold of and incorporate into their daily lives.
I'm off on a tangent, which is inherent when a textbox maintains only some ~24 lines of previous text. Many appologies. Long and the short: if you are a power user, fuck the themes. Gnome and KDE have truly done programming wonders. But, like the currently efficient battery-gas driven cars, I'd rather move quickly, than be hampered by an ugly designed monstrosity (EV1?).
A forward thanks to you who have the forsight to buy an environmentally efficient car.
-pararox-
See I totally thought this article would be about cattle mutilation, I hear it's up this year.
Never confuse volume with power.
By default maybe. KDE (don't know much about Gnome: yeah, I always got the impression everything (buttons) was clunky too, but that was ~3.5 years ago when I used it) window themes can be super thin and minimalistic. It's easy and very versatile to customise how you want literally every aspect of your desktop to look with the Kcontrol centre.
I don't know why they make default setups look so ugly either. Perhaps it's to prompt the user to change it to suit them.
"You know you don't act like a scientist, you're more like a game show host." Dana Barret
> People do create them, in fact there are thousands and thousands [themexp.org] of them out there.
Just a friendly warning, but themexp.org is filled with all kinds of lousy spyware. Their frontpage links to a javascript on http://webpdp.gator.com/4/placement/475/, which presumably tries to install GAIN under IE. They also have the audacity to wrap (!) all the themes that they offer in spyware. That's not nice.
Stay clear of this worthless site and get your themes on good sites like Neowin or DeviantART instead.
My technial knowledge of this is limitied, but IIRC Styles XP feigns the system into thinking these 3rd party themes are part of the original msstyles set shipped with Windows XP.
From a forum post on the web:
You do know that green isn't a primary color, right?
RGB is the three additive primary colors (and monitors use additive primary colors since they emit light, not subtractive).
XP uses by default in G and B in its color scheme.
Wikipedia article about primary colors
Beware: In C++, your friends can see your privates!
And the whole point of a server is to provide....services to other computers, not to provide pretty eye candy for some newbie admin.
And the OS release commonly reffered to in media as "Longhorn" is a client OS release, where eye-candy is appropriate and in some sense needed to catch-up/differentiate from OS X.
Longhorn server is a different story. I've heard rumors of Microsoft moving towards a componentized approach to OS install. Something similar to building Windows Embedded images, where you've got about 10,000 various modules which comprise the OS and a package manager making sure dependencies are satisfied. If that's true, system builders will have far greater flexibility in purposing their servers. Monad shell seems to be the solution Microsoft is banking on to provide robusts CLI. That being said, GUI still has its place on the server for newbie admins. Even Linux distributions are putting more and more work into adding GUI tools to configure various services. Like it or not, newbie admins make up a large population of small business place and these people will buy/use whatever makes their lives easier. GUI is a crutch very much needed in that space and there's too much money at stake to not provide that crutch.
Why is PNG a good format to use? This has already been discussed on slashdot but for those of you that are new to: PNGs
First PNG is an open standard that doesn't rely on proprietary formats like LZW for compression like in Gif that is owned by Unisys. PNG has a better compresses algorithm than GIF anyway.
PNG is a loss-less compression method meaning that you open and save and get back to original data. Think of it like a ZIP file, you can always get the data back from a ZIP files as you stored it in.
PNG supports three main image types: true color, grayscale and palette-based. Good for Normal Pictures, Documents and Web Based Images.
Windowblinds is the most popular Windows skinning app, and Stardock has created a pretty strong skinning/customization community for Windows users.
I think they'll be ready for Longhorn.
This is one of the things Microsoft doesn't get. When I build a Sun or Linux production server, the only software on it is the software needed to provide the services the server was built for. Web servers don't neeed GUIs, browsers, or media playsers. Database servers don't need GUIs, , browsers, or media playsers. Application servers don't need GUIs, browsers, or media playsers. I might use a GUI to attach and manage them, but the servers themselves don't need one.
Me thinks you never used Windows 2003 Server. Windows 2003 Server comes locked down to begin with...So the browser cant go anywhere except trusted sites. It, last time I played with it, didnt come with media player (but even if it did you got issues if thats your problem with the server). If you're playing movies on your servers then maybe someone should talk to your boss about having too much time on your hands. Generally servers sit in a data center where its meant to be rarely used at the console. There is a GUI because its called "Windows" not "Text".
This type of thinking will continue to be Microsoft's security and performance nightmare. If there is a security hole in Mozilla, I don't need to worry about it on my production servers because it ain't there. If there is a security problem with Apache, I don't need to worry about it except on the webserver because it ain't on the app server or DB server. It doesn't take up memory, diskspace or CPU cycles either.
You do have some good points here...but what about OpenSSH? Thats on all your boxes and that has vulnerablities...or what about a Kernel vulnerablity? If you dont get what I mean, those two things are comparable to what you said to windows. Granted windows has a lot more ports open for more exploits but IIS isnt installed at all unless you install it on Windows 2003. I'll grant you that the Unix/Linux operating systems have less vulnerablities when compared to Windows. I could then make the case that Unix and Linux are both crappy software when it comes to vulnerablities when I compare it to like OS/2 or MacOS 9.
Even offloaded CPU cycles take up CPU cycles at some point, either to issue the instructions or to move on to the next ones. Something has to tell the server the mouse just oved over that pretty icon and to use a few CPU cycles to tell the graphic card to make it flutter in the breeze.
Yeah maybe for a desktop, but as its been with Microsoft's latest products, they dont use the nice eye candy for their server operating system, only the desktops.
I dont want to sound like I'm starting a war with you, but reading your post I can make a fairly educated guess that you've only used their desktop operating systems and not the Server versions (or atleast just Windows 2000) otherwise you'd know what I'm talking about.
Try this fix. It uses a CSS and some javascript to fix IE's handling of PNG images.
It sucks that one has to play these shennanigans to fix such basic functionality. It also begs the question if javascript can fix IE's mishandling... what's the hold up from Microsoft themselves?
I was under the impression that Longhorn would be using vector graphical extensively in its UI. Mind you, I don't follow Microsoft hype very closely so I may well be totally wrong.
AFAIK, Gnome and KDE are both going toward SVG vector graphic for icons/UI elements (correct me if I am wrong). Building a UI on bitmap graphic in 2004 seem quite retarded to me.
:wq
Skins are to user interfaces what Type-R and VTEC stickers are to Honda Civics.
There's MUCH more (including adding and removing RAM without rebooting--currently, Windows Server 2003 only lets you add RAM)...but you've read up on Longhorn before bashing it, right?
Note before I get called a Microsoftie--yes, I appreciate their technology. They have some of the smartest developers in the world working there. Yes, I also run Linux--Gentoo, to be exact.
Why is microsoft against the idea of the user customizing the look of his/her desktop?
This just doesnt seem like a big deal to me. Every other gui in the world allows the user to change the look. Why is microsoft afraid of letting the user do this?
I was under the impression that Longhorn would be using vector graphical extensively in its UI. Mind you, I don't follow Microsoft hype very closely so I may well be totally wrong.
:P
It will. This is one of the beta builds. I've seen at least three MSDN videos showcasing the technology...clearly, people on this site haven't been paying attention.
All the questions and comments similar to this one in this discussion really reveal how absolutely uninformed about Longhorn Slashdotters are as they meanwhile bash it. Common knowledge about Longhorn seems to have not yet reached Slashdot--no doubt because Slashdot would rather post silly anti-"M$" article when meanwhile, great strides are taking place in their technology. Someone here actually implied you'd need a DirectX9 level card just to run the thing--obviously he didn't know Longhorn supports several tiers of operation, going all the way down to standard 2D like Windows 2000. You can choose a tier manually or let Longhorn decide for you according to system specs. This is just one example of bizarre posts that completely reveal how ignorant people are of this OS--they call it "vaporware" as though there is no information released about it. People, there is tons of info already known that Microsoft has given away freely in the past year.
For crying out loud, visit WinSuperSite and read up a little bit!
Sounds like you have a bad laptop. The "Designed for Microsoft Windows XP" sticker doesn't really mean much. It basically means that it has XP drivers, and comes with XP installed. My Inspiron has one too, and I ran both 2k and XP on it before I switched to Linux. I didn't notice any difference in uptimes. In both cases, they basically ran until I had to restart to install something. Over a year, each locked up maybe twice, always caused by shitty Dell video drivers.
Karma: Contrapositive
That image doesn't look very skinned to me. It appears the colors have changed, and perhaps some minor UI elements have changed, but I can't really tell. It really just looks like Longhorn with different colors to me. Perhaps the skin is just very similar and I'd have to compare side by side. I couldn't find any details on how and what they did in the article.