Are there any 3rd party Vista themes that aren't copies of old Vis

By megadima
in Tips, Tweaks & Customization

 Share

Recommended Posts

Proficient

Mad_Griffith

Posted
Posted

you've got to be patient, the VS has been out just for a month in the retail market. :)

Anyway, my actual dream is to have a new version of Luna Element for Windows Vista. I'd really like em3 to start working on it soon, but I know this is very unlikely to happen... he's already given us another masterpiece (LE5.1) lately, so we'll have to wait.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Grand Master

Island Dog

Posted
Posted
Just wondering... I just got Vista but one thing I really miss is the customization of all the Visual Styles and Windowblinds themes...

As the other poster said, Windowblinds is in beta for Object Desktop subscribers, and it will be released shortly. It's running current WB skins very well, and it's possible to convert XP .msstyles for use with Windowblinds.

:)

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Experienced

Aero Ultimate

Posted
Posted
convert XP .msstyles for use with Windowblinds.

I'd rather have it the other way round so you don't need that WB stuff. There was a good reason for WB before Win2k, but since Windows supports themes by itself, WB is totally pointless and superfluous.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Grand Master

Island Dog

Posted
Posted
I'd rather have it the other way round so you don't need that WB stuff. There was a good reason for WB before Win2k, but since Windows supports themes by itself, WB is totally pointless and superfluous.

Actually not. With Windowblinds you can change the colors of your themes on the fly, you have effects such as per-pixel alpha blending, you don't have to hack your files to get them to work, and much more.

Regardless of that, converting existing .msstyles to use with Windowblinds is the only way you are going to get old .msstyles to work with Vista.

;)

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Grand Master

Danrarbc

Posted
Posted
I'd rather have it the other way round so you don't need that WB stuff. There was a good reason for WB before Win2k, but since Windows supports themes by itself, WB is totally pointless and superfluous.

Third party themes themselves are totally pointless and superfluous. After all, they only change the look. But we all do it anyway.

And XP doesn't even come close to being able to do what WB5+ can do, so it's not as if WB is just offering a rehash of something already in the OS - and right now WB offers the ability to use XP themes in Vista without having to do the long port process, in both cases it's offering something Windows itself doesn't.

Now you can argue all you want about whether or not the things WB does are something you find worthy, but you can't deny they are features Windows does in fact not offer by itself.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Neowinian

rock_and_roll_baby

Posted
Posted

when i recieved my copy of windows vista, i was really dissapointed because i was unable to use the UI Windows Aero, but when windowblinds 5.5 comes out of beta, if you have windows vista and want the Aero theme then download the MilLork Vista Theme 1.0 Final. i have been through alot of themes looking for one that is virtually the same as windows Aero, so if you are like me and want to use Aero, then wait for windowblinds to come out of beta and then download it and the theme and there you go hehe

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Mentor

phot0nic

Posted
Posted
I'd rather have it the other way round so you don't need that WB stuff. There was a good reason for WB before Win2k, but since Windows supports themes by itself, WB is totally pointless and superfluous.

Except what you don't seem to understand is that WB themes skin ALOT more of the GUI than msstyles do. Even if you could convert a WB to msstyles, you would be losing most of the skin's features, and many elements of the skin. In fact, I can't even use msstyles anymore (converted to WB or not) because none of them are complete enough for my tastes. I hate how half of the GUI is unskinned with msstyles. It makes perfect sense to convert msstyles to WB, but NO sense to convert the other way around.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Collaborator

Joe P

Posted
Posted
you've got to be patient, the VS has been out just for a month in the retail market. :)

Anyway, my actual dream is to have a new version of Luna Element for Windows Vista. I'd really like em3 to start working on it soon, but I know this is very unlikely to happen... he's already given us another masterpiece (LE5.1) lately, so we'll have to wait.

Yeah, Luna Element is pretty rad.

I think that LE5 is better than LE5.1 though, I just can't seem to adjust to it..

Still, would like a few more Vista visual styles sometime soon, getting bored of the generic aero.. :p

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Neowinian

TF_TigerTech

Posted
Posted
What I miss in Vista is that there is no Windows XP theme! It only has classic theme wich is odd :)

I just bought a new laptop with vista on it and noticed the same thing... thought MS would of thought about skinning and make it a big part of the OS...

Virgin Post!!!! TY TY

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Neowinian

Logic Bomb

Posted
Posted
You like Luna? You are a failure.

Luna is fine, be quiet. It is certainly clearer and cleaner than Aero. I am also surprised they didn't include it. Politics probably.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Contributor

jwelsh405

Posted
Posted

Since this is on the topic of vista themes. All I would say is be patient. I also use mac os x and the theming on that seems to have died. no good themes at all they are all grey or black and seem to use the same basic layout. I hope with vista i will get better theming quick. I have to admit though the vista gui is already better then apple a+ for vista on that. I would bet that the creator of the visual styles or i will call them themes are already going at it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
This topic is now closed to further replies.
 Share
Go to topic listing

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.