Quote - (Gumbo- @ Apr 24 2007, 22:34) [snapback]588504602[/snapback]
I have used windows blinds numerous times. It could be the trial version of WB or the theme/skin that I was using that caused WB to take up more ram and CPU than my current XP Skinning Engine. I'll have to try the full version and try out other skins to determine whether it was the trial version that was affecting the performance or whether your statement about hardware usage is valid. Thanks for all the advice. I'm not disagreeing, I just want to know your source (and credibility of it) or how you came about this assumption because it differs from my past experiences.
That's odd. Did you disable the Windows skinning engine, or were you running both the default skinning engine and WB at the same time? This is the most common problem users have concerning system performance.
Quote - (Gumbo- @ Apr 24 2007, 22:34) [snapback]588504602[/snapback]
Also by patching my 'uxtheme.dll' files etc. what was that actually doing? I was under the impression that I was overwriting the XP version with the newer Vista files, enabling me to use the Vista msstyles.
No, not at all. The default uxtheme.dll only allows official Microsoft themes to be used. When you patched your XP uxtheme.dll, you're just giving it the ability to use third-party (unsigned themes).
You can't use Vista msstyles on XP. You can either find an XP msstyle that looks like Vista (no glass or other special features), or you can use WB. Likewise, you can't use XP msstyles on Vista (unless you port them to WB first... which is reasonably easy to do).
Your best bet is to either find an XP msstyle that looks kinda like Vista, or use WB.