Animated wallpapers no longer just for the Vista elite

Animated wallpapers have been one of the "Extras" that Microsoft has touted as a selling point for customers of its priciest Windows Vista SKU. But now Stardock is bringing animated wallpapers to the Vista masses.

Stardock, a Gold Certified Microsoft partner, worked with Microsoft on DreamScene — a desktop-display feature that allows users to make looped, full-motion video their desktop wallpaper (as opposed to using static images only for background wallpaper). After a number of delays, Microsoft finally released DreamScene in September 2007.

Stardock helped to create much of the initial wallpaper content for DreamScene and then went on to release DeskScapes 1.0 for Vista Ultimate users interested in enhancing DreamScene. With DeskScapes 2.0, Stardock has decided to make animated wallpapers avaialble to users of Vista Business, Home Premium and Ultimate users. The Standard edition of the product will be available as a free download; an enhanced version with additional features and "premium" content also will be availbale for $19.95.

View: Full Article @ Mary Jo Foleys Blog

Report a problem with article
Previous Story

AMD Radeon HD 3800 Launch Almost Upon Us

Next Story

SCO guilty of lying about Unix code in Linux in Germany

46 Comments

Commenting is disabled on this article.

huh i dont evan need Vista ultimate to run animated wallpapers all i do is make animated Gif images and use them on WINDOWS XP PRO they work and look realy good if they are done right (and i dont get 50% cpu usage maybe 10% GPU usage but thats it)

Eye candy?
I saw Ubuntu desktops on youtube. First thing that pops my head, this really blew off Vista or Mac's interface.
Then google it. OMG it's linux, so much for me who have never even touch a linux os.
But it's a must have try, so I dual booted it with xp and vista.

Now I'm using ubuntu with most of the stunning eye candy and endless interface turned off and me really overwhelmed with the open source softwares i'm using now.

So literally, Eye Candies led me to a much productive me, or should i say, me who now saves lot of money from softwares.

Still not a pure linux user though, i use vista ultimate at work, and use apple for entertainment, ipod touch. hehehe

No arguments should happen, it's a choice. Just turn it off if you don't want it FCOL IT'S FREE!

Linux sux specially since they still depend on x-windows stuffs, for windows a new ahem window is just a new thread (or even a single new reference) , in linux a window is more bulky stuff (a whole process), not a real deal when you keep open a few windows but a burden when you want to keep many open windows at once.

Also linux sux in the interface cause the pointless war between gnome vs kde vs the rest... in Windows and in OSX there are one kind of interface and almost every aplication can runs without worry about the current interface, in linux there are gnome specific, kde specific and such.

Magallanes said,
Linux sux specially since they still depend on x-windows stuffs, for windows a new ahem window is just a new thread (or even a single new reference) , in linux a window is more bulky stuff (a whole process), not a real deal when you keep open a few windows but a burden when you want to keep many open windows at once.

Also linux sux in the interface cause the pointless war between gnome vs kde vs the rest... in Windows and in OSX there are one kind of interface and almost every aplication can runs without worry about the current interface, in linux there are gnome specific, kde specific and such.

I've experienced those, "war", and there's always a workaround.
Processes? linux is the fastest. IMO
I have the same hardware for xp vista and ubuntu. And it so obvious that ubuntu is faster.
the speed using WINE on non-native linux apps only pars with it running Windows.
hmm... now i sounded like a fanboy.

Take your "$19.95 for extra features and premium content" and shove it.

Sounds just like Vista Ultimate.

It's interesting, I suppose. I do like the animated desktop feature, although it's not flawless and I hate the humongous delays that I experience whenever I change mine.

Ah well.

Is there any way to 'extract' *.dream files into WMV or MPEG? Im not going to install another program to do something the OS does natively.

Well hopefully this will encourage Microsoft to put some more effort into making more Ultimate Extras, it's been a bit of a disappointment so far, and this is their platform.

Animated wallpapers doesn't really apply to me since i don't use it but i want to complain with the others about this because i need to complain about something.

I just need the perfect animated wallpaper, not too distracting and not too bland. "Sylock Red" is good example. I want to see some nice animated wallpapers from some vector graphics programs. I haven't seen the dynamic stuff but ill give it a try.

I have Microsoft Dreamscene on my Windows Vista Home Premium :P
It is a small hack, in which you copy 2 small files and then you will have the exact same Dreamscene thing for your any Windows Vista version. Too bad for Microsoft.

i love how so many people come here and post just to trash the notion of animated wallpapers.
they just post how it's lame, its fluff, its a waste of CPU/Memory, etc. who cares! then don't use it. its not like you HAVE to use animated wallpapers, so why do you feel the need to come in here and be all negative to people who would find it interesting!?

phiberoptik said,
Wow now users can waste cpu/gpu/ram on OS's other then Vista!

I can only assume you forgot the word "Ultimate" on the end there, but in any case ... it's for them to decide what they do with their PCs.

Get off your high horse, and understand that people like eye-candy.

Get off your high horse, and understand that people like eye-candy.

There's eye candy, and then there's eye candy. The rotating desktop cube in Compiz is for example useful to conceptualize multiple desktops in a natural way, but DreamScene is purely about a "fun distraction". And distracting it is. :S

yurithedragon said,
when they say "Animated" do they mean like moving images like .gifs and the like?

Nope, full video, MPG or WMV, and some other dynamic stuff too.

Lant said,
Stuff like domains, IIS and wanting all the media programs pushed some of us to get Ultimate.

exactly. Ultimate = Home Premium + Business

and that is why I have it (not because of some extras)

Agreed. Ultimate is not useless, it can for example serve as a terminal services server while still letting you have the home-use oriented content, like Media Center. It's really NOT hard to imagine usage scenarios for that product. Actually, among the most far fetched ones to me are those involving animated wallpapers. I can really not see people getting it just for that junk.

abulfares said,

exactly. Ultimate = Home Premium + Business

and that is why I have it (not because of some extras)

Wrong.

Ultimate = Home Premium + Enterprise.

Enterprise have the BitLocker Drive Encryption whereas Business doesn't.

Animated wallpaper is a big waste. I turned it off after two days.

Just because you can do something doesn't mean you should.

ANova said,

Actually it does, along with 50%+ CPU usage.

Umm, there's a flaw in your statement. I can see 50% usage on a single core P4 or Athlon XP CPU, but what about if you're using a Q6600 quad core? I've built a quad rig for my buddy and had Dreamscene running and it was NO WHERE NEAR 50% usage. Maybe around 5-10%. It all depends on your hardware specs.

RAID 0 said,

Umm, there's a flaw in your statement. I can see 50% usage on a single core P4 or Athlon XP CPU, but what about if you're using a Q6600 quad core? I've build a quad rig for my buddy and had Dreamscene running and it was NO WHERE NEAR 50% usage. Maybe around 5-10%. It all depends on your hardware specs.

Flaw? lol. Whether you have an 800 MHz P3 or a Q6600 running at 4.0 GHz it still requires the same amount of processor cycles to calculate, depending on what kind of codec the video uses and how much is happening in the video. Sure, a quad core processor can handle it but it's still a waste, especially for a single core user.

ANova said,

Flaw? lol. Whether you have an 800 MHz P3 or a Q6600 running at 4.0 GHz it still requires the same amount of processor cycles to calculate, depending on what kind of codec the video uses and how much is happening in the video. Sure, a quad core processor can handle it but it's still a waste, especially for a single core user.

Answer me this... What's 50% of 800? What's 50% of 4,000? Are they the same? You said "It uses 50% of the CPU". That is an incorrect statement.

What do you mean by "Sure, a quad core processor can handle it but it's still a waste, especially for a single core user"??? So the quad core has only one core in operation? Or the quad core only has one user at it's core?
/joking

You also said "it still requires the same amount of processor cycles to calculate..." that too, is invalid. The architecture differences between the P4 and the Core series of chips are vast and that does not mean it takes the same amount of cycles to calculate. Shorter pipelines in the Core chips are better for video/gaming so it does not take the same amount of cycles to render. K?

Umm, there's a flaw in your statement. I can see 50% usage on a single core P4 or Athlon XP CPU, but what about if you're using a Q6600 quad core?

lol, I find talking of quad cores to run DreamScene with little system impact hilarious

Jugalator said,

lol, I find talking of quad cores to run DreamScene with little system impact hilarious :D

Yeah, I guess it is funny that it has "little system impact".

So now people who bought vista ultimate were screwed. lol even if you buy stardock separately that’s a better deal than buying ultimate.

Well. If you only bought Ultimate for Dreamscene and not for the combination of the business + home premium feature set, your brain was already fried anyway...

Even with no offer like this, there's no chance in hell I'd cash out a copy of Ultimate for an animated wallpaper I barely ever see behind my windows, at least one of them usually maximized.

Jugalator said,
Well. If you only bought Ultimate for Dreamscene and not for the combination of the business + home premium feature set, your brain was already fried anyway...

Even with no offer like this, there's no chance in hell I'd cash out a copy of Ultimate for an animated wallpaper I barely ever see behind my windows, at least one of them usually maximized.


I don't think anyone would be stupid enough to but Ultimate JUST for dreams but I'm sure those who have ultimate apreciated the fact they got something cool and unique. Now MS have asked ultimate buyers to bend over and grap their ankles

Now MS have asked ultimate buyers to bend over and grap their ankles

?

This product isn't from Microsoft. We're also a Microsoft certified partner, btw. But that doesn't necessarily build some sort of intimate connection to them.

JonathanVP said,
I used dreamscapes after it came out...pretty awesome on my Vista machine.

I'm sorry but I just can't respect the intelligence of someone who thinks this CRAP justifies Vista Ultimate. Most of you guys have no clue as to what REAL computing is suppose to be like. Let me give you guys a hint...It's made by Apple and it's a four footed cat like beast that's covered in spots and is found in the African jungles. Hmmm...now what could that be?

Still can't figure it out? Okay, here's the answer ---> Click Here

internetworld7 said,

I'm sorry but I just can't respect the intelligence of someone who thinks this CRAP justifies Vista Ultimate. Most of you guys have no clue as to what REAL computing is suppose to be like. Let me give you guys a hint...It's made by Apple and it's a four footed cat like beast that's covered in spots and is found in the African jungles. Hmmm...now what could that be?

Still can't figure it out? Okay, here's the answer ---> Click Here

I like Vista. I use it. I don't care about Apple's over-priced hardware. I agree that the OS X operating system is better in some ways... but I would miss my games, my Visual Basic .NET programming, among other things.

internetworld7 said,

I'm sorry but I just can't respect the intelligence of someone who thinks this CRAP justifies Vista Ultimate. Most of you guys have no clue as to what REAL computing is suppose to be like. Let me give you guys a hint...It's made by Apple and it's a four footed cat like beast that's covered in spots and is found in the African jungles. Hmmm...now what could that be?

Still can't figure it out? Okay, here's the answer ---> Click Here

I'm sorry but I just can't respect the intelligence of someone who thinks their opinion of what OS they like somehow renders other peoples opinion wrong. Just because someone uses Windows doesn't mean someone doesn't know what "real" computing is. I'd love to see a definition of "REAL computing" too.

So you like OS X, good for you. But that doesn't make other peoples choice of OS an inferior decision. Ohh and for the record, the original poster never said Ultimate Extras was his justification for getting Vista Ultimate. For all you know he owns a mac too.

I can't respect the opinion of someone who is REALLY narrow minded and has to defend their love of being a niche user by berating the other 96% of us. :)

As for me, my 17" macbook pro laptop runs Vista wonderfully and when I was playing my own custom space dreamscenes the other day, it was the Mac users who were coming up asking about that eye candy.