What's wrong with this conclusion?

from WinCustomize Forums
Until the release of Windows XP, skinning and Windows customization in general was kind of a niche thing. But with Windows XP, Microsoft made the OS much friendlier to skinning. Not only does it come with a visual style engine based on the WindowBlinds design that allows WindowBlinds visual styles to run much smoother, but the robustness of the OS in general has allowed users to experiment with customization safely.
We took a poll on WinCustomize as to what OS people are using and the results pretty much mirror the web logs:

80% of users are were running Windows 2000 or Windows XP (with most of them being Windows XP). The other 20% were mostly running either Windows 98 or Windows ME. The consensus seems pretty clear, those who customize their PCs tend to find Windows XP as the best OS to do it on.
3,360 views 13 replies
Reply #1 from WinCustomize Forums Top
Wrong. It's the other way around. Those that see XP's "styles" have a stepstone to wind up here.
Reply #2 from WinCustomize Forums Top
Read it carefully... The only thing you can conclude from this poll is the following:

The majority of users who ANSWERED the poll use Windows XP.

You can't argue (based only on the results of this poll) that Windows XP is the preferred OS for skinning, or that people who customize their PC's find Windows XP to be the best OS to do it on. For all we know, it could be a coincidence because Windows XP happens to be the latest in the migration path of Microsoft's OS, and is being sold on all new computers (and has been for the past year or so).

Sure, Microsoft may be making it easier to skin, but let's not start falling into bad science here and making poorly drawn conclusions.
Fences - Organize your desktop icons today!
Reply #3 from WinCustomize Forums Top
Exactly my point Craeonics. You can't just argue that people who prefer to customize their computer find Windows XP the best to do it on, they just happen to own Windows XP when they come here. I'm not trying to nitpick, but to point out that such internet polls should not be used for advertising or promotion when they are based on such bad science (as I know that microsoft and wincustomize have a somewhat cozy relationship, which has resulted in Microsoft not really providing their own skins, even though they included skinning capability with their XP-look versus classic look).
Reply #6 from WinCustomize Forums Top
By the way, polling is crud any way. Anyone who's taken some statistic classes can tell you. The data can be twisted and turned in any way the marketeers want.
Reply #7 from WinCustomize Forums Top
So, Crae....have you stopped beating your wife?

[example of a 'twisted' question]...
Reply #8 from WinCustomize Forums Top
Yes, the first post was a quote from the Wincustomize newsletter. I should have made that clear, but I thought that everyone kept abreast of the newsletter. Sorry about the confusion.
Reply #9 from WinCustomize Forums Top
The poll matches the web logs. Are you going to argue that the weblogs aren't accurate either? Or how about the fact that the majority of new purchasers of Object Desktop are running Windows XP?

Most users do not run Windows XP. Thereofre, it is not unrasonable to conclude that people who run Windows XP who try customizing it have a better experience than those running say Windows 98. Not to mention the fact that it is true. (Win98 is less robust).

Powered by SkinBrowser!
Reply #10 from WinCustomize Forums Top
Or perhaps another conclusion from both the logs and those who participated in the poll could be that people who are into skinning are also into computers and have a greater tendency (more than the average PC user) to upgrade their PC's and the OS. The "cutting edge" sort of folk.

XP no doubt is better than 9x for skinning and other things. I use 98 for now but don't underestimate the value of WB, etc for users of that OS, even with its limitations. It's very cool.

BTW, I think my user agent says I'm running a Mac Power PC.
Reply #11 from WinCustomize Forums Top
How about this: Sales of skinnable software (ours anyway) significantly increased with the release of Windows XP and have continued at that higher level.

My belief is that previously with their Windows ME or 98 machines, a user downloaded say WindowBlinds and had some problem with it. Thought it was buggy or slow or whatever and hence wouldn't register.

However, same user gets Windows XP, tries it out and miraculously WindowBlinds is no longer a
"bloated, bug infested piece crap" but instead a fast, effective and reliable visual style applyer and then buys it.



Powered by SkinBrowser!
Reply #12 from WinCustomize Forums Top
Now that's probably quite true. (Although a lot of 98 users run tons of programs on start up and then have no idea why they're low on resources and performance is slow. A problem not so readily encountered in the NT family, of course.)

I was frankly surprised how well WB, WebBlinds and OB do on my PC. Not just because of W98 but also my old hardware. Perhaps I'm an anomaly in that I'm more inclined to attribute problems with a program (which runs well for many others) to my old set up rather than the software.
Reply #13 from WinCustomize Forums Top
You probably know what you're doing though. You're probably the guy your family and friends call when they're computer won't boot (because they left a floppy in or something!).

When I visit my family and friends, I'm almost always amazed how how consistently wretched their computers are set up.

Their system tray expands half way across the start bar on their Windows 98 machine with some tacky wallpaper going and a gazillion desktop icons. Needless to say, I'd not put any desktop enhancement software on such a setup.

Powered by SkinBrowser!