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
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
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 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.
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
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.
Last edited by Smigit on 14 Nov 2007 - 05:46
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.
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.
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
?
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.
Which it doesn't.
Which it doesn't.
Actually it does, along with 50%+ CPU usage.
Which it doesn't.
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.
Which it doesn't.
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 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.
Which it doesn't.
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 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.
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?
Last edited by RAID 0 on 14 Nov 2007 - 06:33
lol, I find talking of quad cores to run DreamScene with little system impact hilarious
lol, I find talking of quad cores to run DreamScene with little system impact hilarious
Yeah, I guess it is funny that it has "little system impact".
Just because you can do something doesn't mean you should.
exactly. Ultimate = Home Premium + Business
and that is why I have it (not because of some extras)
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.
Nope, full video, MPG or WMV, and some other dynamic stuff too.
well this player has been doing that for a good 5 years
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.
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.
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!?
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 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.
<snipped - rule 2>
Last edited by PureLegend on 13 Nov 2007 - 20:57
but it's quite amusing to flame useless/outdated/flamebait news.
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.
More like paying beta tester elite.
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!
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.
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.
Commenting has either been disabled on this article or you are not logged in. Click here to login or register, its free!
Note: Anonymous commenting is disabled in order to keep the quality of responses to a high standard.