DesktopX 3.1 Reviewed

Ars Technica takes a look

http://arstechnica.com/reviews/apps/desktopx.ars
from WinCustomize Forums

Ars Technica has a pretty balanced review of DesktopX 3.1.  They have put both the good, the bad, and the ugly of the popular desktop enhancement utility from Stardock.  Their advice to Stardock is to a) Include better content, b) Clarify widgets and objects more closely and c) Have more configuration options available.  Overall they seemed to like it.  Check it out for yourself.

Here are our nits with the article:

  1. DesktopX widgets don't have a "signficant memory" overhead.  In an age where Notepad uses 8 megs, the 2 to 3 megabyte run-time for a DesktopX widget is pretty trivial. Certainly less than most (if not all) the competing programs.
  2. While we're glad Ars did a review of DesktopX (finally), it was a 1 page review compared to the several page review of Konfabulator that was several pages long.  Moreover, the Konfabulator review went over every included widget.  DesktopX widgets may not necessarily be as "pretty" (matter of taste) but they do show off the functionality.  For instance, an arcade widget is included that plays most of the classic arcade games of old.  No other widget type program can do that.  It would have been nice to have that mentioned.
  3. DesktopX supports animation in ways that no other similar program can remotely touch.
  4. A mention of DesktopX Pro would have been cool.  You can create some pretty fantastic things.  Stardock uses DesktopX to do the interface for GalCiv II, the Aquarium Desktop, and Natural Desktop.

In the meantime, DesktopX 3.2 is in development.  The most major feature is probably the ability to have your scripts be seperate from the object if you so desire (for developers).  For users, it'll mostly be bug fixes and some new content.

Still we think their criticisms are generally fair -- the line between objects and widgets is pretty blurred and the default content, while not bad, could always be better.  We are always faced with the challenge between impressive default content and default download size.

18,043 views 39 replies
Reply #1 from WinCustomize Forums Top
Pretty accurate review imho. I have always found desktopX to be a seriously under-designed product. I mean it's a great concept but it just isnt working right. I'm sure there is so much more that could be done with it.
Add to this so many reliability problems... Objects supposedly fixed but migrating around the screen... not particularly consumer friendly... Its just not good or reliable enough for me to use day in day out. I have one widget on my desktop and that is it.

I think the whole concept needs a rethink and redesign. The potential is enormous but it just aint working as is.
Reply #2 from WinCustomize Forums Top
I wish Stardock would keep moving forward with DesktopX and make it into something worth purchasing rather than posting articles trying to defend their product based on a review from another site. Just my 2 cents. Konfabulator is a bit better, and free.
Sins of a Solar Empire II
Reply #3 from WinCustomize Forums Top
For the record - " Stardock is moving forward at an alarming pace !" Programs are a very hard subject - esp. when something is wrong. I see that Brad is doing as much as he possible to get the problems fixed. DX has always been a bit of a problem. For it has a lot of programming and wee need to consider that other free programs are just that. FREE - they do not look at problems - for 1 they are made to be simple and only work as they are at that.

DX has come a very long way and still has a long way to go. I say give the programmers a good amount of time to give the best results for the program. It will soon be reached - with some happy medium.

This and the way that things are being handled are good and normal. Hell we are only human and make a lot of mistakes. So if everyone would take a better look at time involved with cost in mind as to where the program goes - they will see it is moving in a good direction. But alot of that depends on the users too. With a better response from the users as to what they see as wrong and more direct of an approach for error reports and just plain info for a problem. The programmers will get a better idea of what and where there is an answer. Thus being less work arounds and more results.
Keep in mind - what would I want to know about the problem and how would I find it?

I hope that everyone will get into the groove for trying to see thru things a bit more and give it a better try at making things much easier for everyone - esp. the programmer that has to try to figure what is what.

Thanks and HAPPY HOLIDAYS
Reply #4 from WinCustomize Forums Top
It's funny that it was DX that got me interested in Stardock products, and the way I found Wincustomize.
I purchased DX (and CursorXP, I think) and within an hour or two realized I was going to need Windowblinds and Iconpackager to get the full effect, so I upgraded to the full Object Desktop.
While I have WB and IP applied full time, I rarely ever use DX anymore. Whenever I'd get something set up just how I wanted it, a reboot or even a log-off would screw it all up again. And yes, for me, running a full theme, or a group of objects (widgets?) took a sizable bite out of the RAM. If you're running any kind of resource-intensive application, you've got to quit out of DX.
Reply #5 from WinCustomize Forums Top

I wish Stardock would keep moving forward with DesktopX and make it into something worth purchasing rather than posting articles trying to defend their product based on a review from another site. Just my 2 cents. Konfabulator is a bit better, and free.

Better in what way?  It depends on what defines better as.  Konfabulator has better widget content IMO than DesktopX.  But Konfabulator can't do much of what DesktopX can do.  If all DesktopX did was widgets then from a user's pov, Konfabulator is a better product (though I'd say DesktopX would be a better development tool).  But DesktopX can (and is mostly used) to build desktops (hence the name -- DesktopX).

DesktopX continues to move forward with new releases.  It's not a perfect program by any means. It still, again in my view, hasn't quite decided what it is supposed to be for.  Looking at download counts, I am convinced that the # of people who actually want to use widgets is relatively small compared to the people who want to create customized desktops.  But I could be wrong.

Reply #6 from WinCustomize Forums Top

While I have WB and IP applied full time, I rarely ever use DX anymore. Whenever I'd get something set up just how I wanted it, a reboot or even a log-off would screw it all up again. And yes, for me, running a full theme, or a group of objects (widgets?) took a sizable bite out of the RAM. If you're running any kind of resource-intensive application, you've got to quit out of DX.

I think you touch on something here.  I don't run DesktopX full-time either.  I do use some content created by DesktopX full-time (I run Natural Desktop all the time for instancE) and I use a couple of DesktopX widgets.  But DesktopX, as an environment, isn't something I currently tend to run.  It does need work IMO to be compelling as an environment but as a content creation system, it totally rocks. 

Reply #7 from WinCustomize Forums Top
I use both konfabulator and Desktopx -- mainly the packaged programs that came with konfabulator because I couldn't find a CPU and RAM meter that I really liked with DesktopX, and the weather one as well. Other than that, I find that most of the widgets I see on Konfabulator are RSS feeds I won't use...the widgets are more varied on Desktopx.
The article mentioned the need for "mobility" options -- like the options we have to place on object on the desktop level or always on top? It's already there. It seems to me they did point out the shortcomings of the program, but they missed the mark on what the program does offer.
Reply #8 from WinCustomize Forums Top
I'll clarify -- I think they missed the mark on all that the program has to offer.
Reply #9 from WinCustomize Forums Top
Main reason I dropped DesktopX and went for Konfabulator is becuase I'm running Litestep and DesktopX won't run without explorer. Though I guess I'm just one of the rare ones that don't use windowsblind here
Reply #10 from WinCustomize Forums Top
Once again, the marketing at Konfabulator comes on top of stardock's. it's not the software that counts it's how it looks and how it's "sold" to the masses. Although DesktopX is a pretty good piece of software it was never hyped like Konfab was. Therefore, the common user will stick with what he knows, and they know Everything else than DesktopX.

Though I guess I'm just one of the rare ones that don't use windowsblind here


Don't worry, I don't use it
Reply #11 from WinCustomize Forums Top
I'm trying to time when I re-subscribe to Object Desktop so i get the most of my non-existant money... I guess I will bebuying it in a couple of weeks. I think everything (except Object Bar 2.0) is finally up to date and stuff... I can't wait no longer (besides, I can't use any of the new DX desktop because my current version of DesktopX doesn't understand the file extensions... I can't even use some of the widgets now... got darn it!!)




DX is like the official app for all of my websites. With it ability to interact with the computer, making a web browser, and other juk like animation and moving opjects aound your desktop with a click of a button, DX is the best tool out.


I can't wait to start working on my Child Safety DX theme!!!
Reply #12 from WinCustomize Forums Top
I love DX. I use it daily. The problem is, there's not a lot to choose from here. The potential is huge but nobody seems to want to take advantage of it. I'm currently using Chadamus' "Aero's Revenge" with Gef's "Aero XP" widgets. This is a beautiful combination and you have your choice of wallpaper and WB. As far as DX themes go, mostly everything else is pretty bland. DX could have the look and feel of the best of LiteStep but I don't know why it doesn't.
Reply #13 from WinCustomize Forums Top
What Stardcock needs is a marketing campaign! Even bad products sell this way, I dont see why a product like Object Desktop has to suffer for that. Have you seen the "IT" ads from Ebay? That's good marketing!
Reply #14 from WinCustomize Forums Top
Oh yeah I forgot one thing...
Konfabulator markets is stuff better. So DesktopX is like a small wonder when compared to Konfab.

No offense to Brad or the person who designed the GUI for Desktop Gadgets website... but COME ON!! I almost spilled my glass whe I saw the site.


DX is the better app. I don't think it does too much. it does what it suppossed to do. It the best app for designers and especially for developers.

Personally, I think DX should be in schools everywhere that does IT work and web design. Everyone from MIT to DeVry Univeristy should know about it. Its the perfect app for web developers, coders, app makers, marketers, and customization freaks EVERYWHERE.

I'm trying to get it added to my old school (Electronic Design and Multimedia) at CUNY but I haven't really been back to the college yet to talk to anyone. Plus, I need a laptop to show them what it does and I don't have one yet. LOL
Reply #15 from WinCustomize Forums Top
But DesktopX can (and is mostly used) to build desktops (hence the name -- DesktopX).


Then why is the version to create stand-alone desktops sooo much? I mean if I brought the Pro edition (which I have) for $69.95, and it is suppose to be the professional edition, why do I need to buy an "Enterprise Edition" to create stand-alone desktops if the program is designed to create desktops. Since it is DesktopX, not WidgetX or GadgetX.

I know Stardock's stand in the past was that they didn't want to market a $70 product that someone could use to make a $20 a piece desktop and sell it, but isn't that was other developer software makers do? Like Microsoft, Visual Basic is under $100, but can be used to create programs that could be sold for a lot more. I don't see why a product should be priced according to what the developer/user "could" make from the product. Since this product is "...to build desktops (hence the name -- DesktopX...".

I don't want to sound like I don't like DesktopX I do, I just would like to be able to create Desktops to for stand-alone use without the price tag. (Oh, I would also like documentation that is written for BOTH Javascript and VBScript. The developer's docs only use VBScript examples, it would be nice if they were in both to compare and contrast each lanaguge. I am new to both scripting languages and want to learn Javascript, but there are no examples in the devl docs.)
Reply #16 from WinCustomize Forums Top
Have you seen the "IT" ads from Ebay?


Yeah, those "IT" ads are pretty cool. I read about them on Ad Rant or MarketingVOX.
Reply #17 from WinCustomize Forums Top

Main reason I dropped DesktopX and went for Konfabulator is becuase I'm running Litestep and DesktopX won't run without explorer.

DesktopX widgets run without Explorer just fine.

Reply #18 from WinCustomize Forums Top
I use DX and Konfab. What is perfect? I've had Photoshop crash on me! I don't skin but I am pretty good at figuring out how to use DX etc. I love DX and I usually have it and Konfab running together. I can't make a comment about creating Objects, widgets or themes but if anyone has trouble running DX "stuff" they can usually find solutions in the forum section here either by searching or posting.
Reply #19 from WinCustomize Forums Top

I know Stardock's stand in the past was that they didn't want to market a $70 product that someone could use to make a $20 a piece desktop and sell it, but isn't that was other developer software makers do? Like Microsoft, Visual Basic is under $100, but can be used to create programs that could be sold for a lot more. I don't see why a product should be priced according to what the developer/user "could" make from the product. Since this product is "...to build desktops (hence the name -- DesktopX...".

Well let's put it like this: Stardock used DesktopX Enterprise to create Aquarium Desktop which as made over $50k this year alone.  Try making that with Visaul Basic.

Reply #20 from WinCustomize Forums Top
While I have WB and IP applied full time, I rarely ever use DX anymore. Whenever I'd get something set up just how I wanted it, a reboot or even a log-off would screw it all up again. And yes, for me, running a full theme, or a group of objects (widgets?) took a sizable bite out of the RAM. If you're running any kind of resource-intensive application, you've got to quit out of DX.



I am in the same boat. I am a software engineer and I run quite a load of applications when I am running full bore. WP/CP/IP(sometimes rightclick) are the only ODN products I run full time. Sometimes I run DX when I have a "light" day of development, but then getting a theme configured for my particular usage and needs hasnt been easy. Creating my own themes hasnt been any better. I run through several programming languages (VS/VS.NET/JAVA/PHP/scripting/etc.... so I try to make my themes flexible. For whatever reason it just doesnt pan out with DX loaded full time. Still a wonderful product and I have enjoyed it for a few years now. Yet memory constraints and memory leaks are a problem. Oh did I mention I run db servers off and on on my machine? heheh so I do load my machine pretty heavily. Why sometimes I even have to turn off my IIS apps. LOL All in all I do enjoiy ODNT and will continue to support it.

The review I found to have it points but I think they miss a point. That point being that the Stardock products are also supported by a community of very talented graphic types. Who provide a cornucopia selections to make my desktop look good and function well(given my own heavy use).

IMHO and my 2 cents...
Reply #21 from WinCustomize Forums Top
Well let's put it like this: Stardock used DesktopX Enterprise to create Aquarium Desktop which as made over $50k this year alone. Try making that with Visaul Basic.


I still don't understand why the cost of the product has anything to do with the amount of money someone can make using it. Another example, you can get a licensed copy of Visual C++ from Microsoft for under $100 and create a program like DesktopX. I am not saying it would be easy, but you could do it. (This might be a better example, since C++ is more robust than Visual Basic, or basic for that matter.) And then make a lot more $100 in sales with the item(s) created with that Microsoft product. Microsoft doesn't seem to care. They are a provider of the developer tool, same as Stardock is for DesktopX. Microsoft doesn't care if a developer makes more than they did for the product, since they achieved their goal. To sell their product. (Visual C++)

Also, how many others could get over $50K for Aquarium Desktop if they created it. It might be possible, but the main reason that Stardock could is because they are Stardock. They are like Microsoft in the Object Desktop customization world like Microsoft is in the Windows world. Their is no competing with Stardock for the most part in the world of DesktopX and Windowblinds, etc.
Reply #22 from WinCustomize Forums Top

I still don't understand why the cost of the product has anything to do with the amount of money someone can make using it. Another example, you can get a licensed copy of Visual C++ from Microsoft for under $100 and create a program like DesktopX.

By that argument, then Maya should cost $100.  You could get Visual Studio for $100 and develop Maya.  The cost of authoring tools is defintely related to how much value they can justify.  

To use Aquarium Desktop as an example-- with all the Aquarium screen savers out there, why has no one else made a decent aquarium desktop? The answer is that it's very very difficult to have fluid animation, alpha blending, and per-object scripting and DesktopX can do that. 

Now that we have a site (DesktopGadgets.com) for people to sell cool stuff, we don't want someone to simply pay $70 and be competing with us on products that generate alot of revenue.

I would bet that Stardock made more on DesktopX-generated content than Konfabulator did in sales to end users.  What we've learned, over the years, is that DesktopX is currently better suited as a development environment than as an end user application.

I don't know what the future has in store for DesktopX.  Windows Vista is going to change the dynamic a great deal.  Moreover, with Konfabulator free, it is a lot harder to justify putting time into the widget-creation elements of DesktopX (other than for DesktopX Pro). 

Simply put, DesktopX has tended to try to be 3 different things -- a widget creator, a desktop extender, and a quasi-alternative shell.  And those 3 things are so different that I think it makes it a) too hard to use for many people and b) stretches the QA resources on it too far so that it ends up being not quite satisfying in any of the 3 areas.

 

Reply #23 from WinCustomize Forums Top
So what do you think DX should be, Brad. You are the boss and owner of Stardock, and while I'm sure that you want to take the desires of your customers and WC Members into consideration, there may come a time when you simply have to say, "From now on DX will exclusively be a [FILL IN THE BLANK] tool." Which in turn will simplify development, bug correction, and tweaking. Just my two cents.
Reply #24 from WinCustomize Forums Top
I'm an idiot when it comes to coding but I have uesd DesktopX to build some useful objects for myself (using the excellent documentation and sample opbjects provided). But I don't see it as having a future as an application development platform. Not competing agains MS anyway. And with Vista (and Sparkle, etc.) coming . . . with the associated tools from MS to make use of it . . I just don't see it.

I've never build a whole DX desktop. ANd I almost never use any of the truely awesome samples available at WC. They don't suit the way I work and take too long (IMHO) to reconfigure. I may download and go "Wow!" but then they're gone and I'm back to my (WindowBlinds, ObjectDock+ enhaced) desktop. Who are the current clients/users of DesktopX desktops(extenders or alternative shells)? What company is packaging/deploying these things? If they are there . . go for it. You found the niche, target them with DesktopX. If DesktopGadgets is brining in the big bucks . . . go there.

I think the market for a widget editor/engine is going to get very tight and the margins are going to get very thin. MS gadgets and konfabulator are going to be very hard to compete against; bigger budgets, more staff, everything.
Reply #25 from WinCustomize Forums Top
Now that we have a site (DesktopGadgets.com) for people to sell cool stuff, we don't want someone to simply pay $70 and be competing with us on products that generate alot of revenue.


But isn't that kind of like Microsoft saying that they don't want to sell a development environment for $400 or $500 and have someone make a browser or word processor that competes with them?

If you're selling a software development tool, you're basically selling to a market that's got a history, and the history seems to say that these kinds of tools just aren't that expensive, compared to what they can create.

The example of Maya is in a different market, with a different history and different price points, as far as I know.

I agree with Stupendous Man, in that it seems like the ambiguous nature of DesktopX is for you to clarify, Brad. I still think it's a great product and I enjoy using it. I do VC++ development with a DX desktop loaded all of the time now, and I wouldn't want to do without it.