Wouldn't it be time to close this thread maybe? It was excessively talked about the original problem already, and this certainly shouldn't become a thread for all kinds of problems I guess. Well, jsut my opinion. Merry christmas everyone!
Exstacy: how much virtual memory have you assigned to your system? Maybe your HDD has run out of space or the swap file size is too small for your system. When you open your Taskmanager (ctrl+alt+del) and go to the system performance tab - what does it show for your virtual memory?
Well, I'm using a TV card and the provided program uses overlays which I can't disable... that kind of sucks and looks really weird if I'm running TV in the background. So if you could somehow find a fix, it'd certainly be appreciated.
Neil, wouldn't it work if instead of #000000, WB5 used just another (randomly generated?) color for it's color keying? If I'm not totally wrong, color keying works simply by replacing one color of the screen with an overlay, right? I once has a video program in which you could set the color used, and when I opened up Paint and filled the scrren with just that color, I could see the overlay there. I could be wrong though.
WinCustomize Forums
No one ever said warez was right, certainly. In fact, the word warez is *defined* as being wrong and illegal. That's not the point of any argument here, I suppose. Also, I doubt that Stardocks tried in any way to mess up their customer's computers. They'd have done it with more style then (lol, literally ^^) - what you think about a windows copy saying "Busted", "We got your IP logged" and "This is pure warez" for example? THAT would've been hilarious! <IMG src="http://images.star
Judging from comments on a board community I'm in (which also serves warez, but that's not why I'm there...), there's already a working crack out by now. Haven't tried it of course (yes, I got a certain sense of justice and it definitely would be like stealing), but many people claim that it works so I believe it's true. Just to show you two things: a) warez is not always bad and b) there's too many crackers out there for a software to really be "safe" from them. I respect them as peo
It's not about excluding it in per applications. If you knew a bit more about how computers work, you'd know also that some programs - especially AV scanners - put themselves very deep inside the system. Just like WB5 does by the way, by replacing Windows' dll files with their own. It is only natural that when two progras are very deep inside the system, they might think that only *they* are their themselves - and so try something in this "deep space" that works without other modifications,
Not? I certainly understood him as if the problem occured just when it occured for the warez users, too. So the additional copy protection or whatever else it is isn't compatible with Panda, but without it (meaning before 16th of december), they work together just perfectly. And even if it was any different - just because people who bought WB5 don't post here doesn't mean that they don't have a problem. There might be even other programs out there that don't work together with WB5, b
#69 (CRasH180) said it, for example. So the statement that only illegit users had this problem definitly *wasn't* true. It was caused by an antivirus software, okay, but then again: I bet there's not just a problem with Panda, but also with other programs. Computers are damn complex and no one can claim that something works fine anywhere. Of course it *should* - but I'm a programmer myself and often experienced that computers aren't always so logic.
Well, I'd certainly buy it if I knew someone with a credit card around. Problem is I don't, and I'm not even 18 yet, so the only kind of money transfer I can do is a normal bank transfer - which is a) more expensive because of additional fees and b) not an accepted way of paying here anyway... But it's okay, I don't want to whine here or anything. Basically I just wanted to mention that there's no reason to use the illegal warez copy because the trial does the job well. Hell, some pro
One more comment: plz ban that kiddo. OMG.
I don't know what it was, but I got one thing to contribute: obviously just turning your system clock back to a date before 16th of december is a workaround for this issue. I'm posting this here because some people who have actually bought the software claimed to have issues; if anyone from Stardock sees this as a workaround against their "copy protection", feel free to delete my post - it was only made in order to help some of the users here out. And before you ask, I'm using th
Free version... Figured out the problem though, somehow the installation didn't go right. Working well now
*bump* Can't anyone help me...?
Wrong forum before, for some weird reason.
Hi, I'm having a problem here using WB5... I'm on a fresh and new installation of Win XP with SP2 here. Apllying skins is no problem at all, everything really work fine - but whenever I restart my computer, the skin is just gone again and I have to re-apply it - which is of course going on my nerves. Has anyone experienced this problem yet and is there a way to fix this issue, to be able to just look at a nice, stylish WB5 skin right after starting Windows?
Stardock Forums