Blog: Elitism, porting, and yes more widget stuff

from WinCustomize Forums

One of the things that worries me about the skinning community is its occasional flirtation with elitism. I see this most pronounced with the treatment sometimes awarded to those who port skins from other platforms or programs. So I want to say it outright - porting skins is important too. Many skinners get their start porting skins in various forms.  Dangeruss's first skins were ports.  My first skins were ports.  Alexandrie's first skins were ports. And so were many others.

While SkinStudio does make it much easier to port certain skin formats than they otherwise would be, a proper port still requires quite a bit of work.  When someone ports a .msstyle to WindowBlinds there is still more work to be done. There's a lot of stuff in WindowBlinds that good ports have to add onto.  And that takes work.  It also takes work to go through and make sure everything is done quite right.  It's not as trivial as one might think.  I have ported quite a few skins to WindowBlinds that I liked on other platforms.  I know that since WindowBlinds runs faster and skins non-theme aware programs, that I want to run my visual styles on WindowBlinds.

We now have a check box that asks if a skin has been ported. So we can make sure such ports don't end up at the top of a contest or something. But otherwise, give some props to the people who help bring you skins. Don't discourage skinning in any form.

One of the big news items this week was the dual releases of Konfabulator 1.8 for Windows and DesktopX 2.3.  Konfabulator has definitely been winning the marketing war.  By implying that Apple's development of Dashboard prompted them to move to Windows, they were able to garner a great deal of mainstream media coverage. While untrue, that's not was got me. What's gotten my goat was the implication that Windows doesn't have something like Konfabulator. It does and has for years before Konfabulator existed on any platform.  Putting DesktopX aside for a moment, programs like Samurize, Kapsules, and Avedesk already exist, are free, have large followings, and aren't so obscure that the media should be unaware of them. 

What that will translate into I'm not sure.  The widget market is pretty saturated as-is.  I know what DesktopX's sales are. Whether the widget market is commercially viable in the long term remains to be seen. 

Well, that's about all I have time for right now.  I've got to help get ObjectDock 1.05 announced out there...

5,871 views 13 replies
Reply #1 from WinCustomize Forums Top
I've read several things about DesktopX. Most people seem to agree that it is, technologically, the most advanced desktop enhancement software out there. Those who are informed of DX and all the other options and STILL choose Konfabulator all tend to say things like "it is just so sleek..."

The problem isn't the software, because DX is winning that race. The problem is the look and feel. I'd consider maybe redesigning the look of DesktopX, and maybe create some new, prettier widgets.
Reply #2 from WinCustomize Forums Top

Neither DesktopX or Konfabulator unto themselves have much UI. 


It's basically about the content. Konfabulator's default widgets are fantastic.

Siege of Centauri
Reply #3 from WinCustomize Forums Top
One of the reasons Konfabulator is so sleek is that it can't be used to create your own widgets, or at least that's what I think. It's basically opening, closing, and modifying the settings of widgets.
A few months ago, the widgets of DesktopX couldn't compete with Konfabulator, but nowadays, I see tons of widgets that rival the best Konfabulator ones.
Reply #4 from WinCustomize Forums Top
Disclosure: I haven't tried out Konfabulator.

However, from every news item / post that I've read, the biggest point made in Konfab's favor is the "sleek" look, "fantastic" widgets that are available for Konfab. As a somewhat new user to DesktopX, I would agree that finding the widgets that both looked nice and functioned well was not as easy as I would have thought it to be.

So why not ADD a library to WC2K5 for the best DesktopX widgets? The criteria for such a library would be Stardock Certified, X number of downloads, and a minimum rating. Use that library to point new DesktopX users to it first (or for that matter, include that library as a part of the DesktopX install). By implementing that, you have initial widgets that are just as fantastic and sleek as the ones for Konfabulator.

Just my two cents... (and that's enough of widgets for a while.)
Reply #5 from WinCustomize Forums Top

You can already do that with the existing libraries - you can choose to look at only certified widgets, objects, and themes.


If Konfabulator's library wasn't so well done, I'd offer to create a Konfabulator section here for them.


Competition between widget programs is not just good for consumers but it's good for customization.

Reply #8 from WinCustomize Forums Top
I guess that was what I was trying to put forward: "A 'best of' sub-library". Yes, you can filter to just Stardock Certified, and then you can have those displayed in order of downloads, or in order of ratings... My idea is that a "Best of" filter be the first set of widgets (or skins) that a user could see.

That "Best Of" filter could be a movable target - such that new (or better) widgets/skins push out the older (and maybe not so good) ones. My suggestion for that filter was a "Stardock Certified, X number of downloads,and a minimum rating" - but make the number of downloads/ratings in a certain time period - a month, two months?

This would create content that refreshed itself over time, and also points new users to the *best* content as judged by the set criteria.

Ok, now I'm up to four cents...
Reply #9 from WinCustomize Forums Top

On W2K5 you'll have recommendations that will take care of that.


So you'll be able to look at what the top skinners are recommending to tohers.

Reply #11 from WinCustomize Forums Top
I have to say, be careful about what you exclude ports from. For competitions based on "best original skin", it's fair enough, but if it comes top in (say) a competition for the most downloads then a port should rightly be honoured for that - otherwise the "port" tag will just turn into a second-class designator.