VistaGlazz 1.1

Late January 2007, Microsoft released Windows Vista. Unfortunately as in Windows XP, custom styles are not supported by the system. Programs like WindowBlinds offer a workaround but degrade performance [citation needed]. With VistaGlazz you can patch your system to use custom styles (think of it as an uxtheme patcher for Vista) and you can keep your windows transparent when maximized.

Changelog of the new version:

  • Support for Windows Vista Service Pack 1
  • Enhanced patching process
  • Enhanced information messages and dialogs
  • Removal of patch anyway functionality
  • Disclaimer limited to first run
  • Help file included
Download: Download VistaGlazz 1.1
Screenshot: Patch system | Patch style
View: Product details

Report a problem with article
Previous Story

PDC 2008 Live Blog Day 3 Microsoft Research keynote

Next Story

Exclusive: Internal Sprint memo outlines ETF rate changes

34 Comments

Commenting is disabled on this article.

There's not a single statement that says this application is for Windows XP. Can someone clarify that this software is made for Windows XP? My impression is that this software is for XP-base but I would be assuming things here.

What is this, Wikipedia? "Programs like WindowBlinds offer a workaround but degrade performance [citation needed]." LOL!

I really don't care about performance loss from Windowblinds, my system can handle it easily enough. I just can't bear to use it for more than a few hours at a time because it doesn't properly skin everything, still, after all these years of development. Just one of many examples, because this is the one that really irritates me daily: I use Media Player Classic, and I usually watch a video in the corner of my screen while I'm playing a game. Turn off captions and titlebar with aero and I get a beautiful glass border. Use a Windowblinds skin and I'm greeted by Windows classic borders. Most of the issues I have with Windowblinds are so incredibly tiny that it's really nagging to mention them, but with native skins... there are no issues whatsoever. The downside to native skins of course (and especially right now) is that there isn't much variety and most of them are just (poor) hacks of aero. Anyhoo... I use both, and both have their merits. Unfortunately neither are perfect and I spend most of my time using aero. Fortunately, unlike XP, the native skin is somewhat nice and doesn't make my eyes want to bleed.

This poor horse is still getting beaten?

http://www.extremetech.com/article2/0,2845,2219726,00.asp

A minor resource hogging effect was one of the chief complaints with WindowBlinds 5.x. We ran several performance tests, both synthetic, gaming, and real-world encoding and rendering tests, with and without WindowBlinds 6 installed, and the results of each test were so close to identical that we're not even going to bother running charts. To do so would be an exercise in redundancy.

i dont understand why the phrase "[citation needed]" was needed in the description. Who's going to post the citation, the software developer?

the description is clearly taken from the website and hence it's an advertisement. why doesnt the software section always write 'advertisement' when it posts new software? unless of course the posters actually reviews the software.

I'm sorry if the part about WindowsBlinds offends people. What I tried to point out is that a system call hook or similar method used by WindowsBlinds could "degrade" performance and could never outperform a normal system call. Unless WindowsBlinds decides to write their own Window Manager for Vista and making it more efficient than Microsoft's. Our program is freeware, this is in no way meant as an advertisement.

I'll try to make it SP2 compatible once the DLLs of SP2 are RTM. There's not much sense in making it compatible with all the different beta builds.

Enjoy the program!

You should learn a little more about how WindowBlinds works. It does not degrade performance and it works just like uxtheme does.

You must be on the CRACK too if you think an external .exe running a task to do the job of a native .dll is lighter or resources. Especially if this wonder-program is adding to the shell :blink:

Programs like WindowBlinds offer a workaround but degrade performance.

What the hell? Please stop attacking other products and advertising yours as the better ones. Just insert "Some programs offer a workaround but degrade performance" and don't specify which ones.

KavazovAngel said,
Programs like WindowBlinds offer a workaround but degrade performance.


What the hell? Please stop attacking other products and advertising yours as the better ones. Just insert "Some programs offer a workaround but degrade performance" and don't specify which ones.


Given the fact that it is Windowblinds that degrades performance there is no need to insert "Some programs" why sugar coat the truth. If you like your system slow and prone to crash-reboot then use Stardock programs but some people like there PC to work correctly and that means not installing crapware aka Windowblinds.

bryonhowley said,
Given the fact that it is Windowblinds that degrades performance there is no need to insert "Some programs" why sugar coat the truth. If you like your system slow and prone to crash-reboot then use Stardock programs but some people like there PC to work correctly and that means not installing crapware aka Windowblinds.

Thanks for the trolling.

+1 Loofy. I use all of Stardock's programs 20 hours a day and I'm one of the most productive men on Earth, thank you very much.

No slow-downs, no crashes, etc.

Chrono951 said,
Its about time. Although since SP2 is now on its way, this release will be obsolete soon anyway.

SP2 won't be out for at least 5 months...

My point is that although VistaGlazz is great, taking 6 months to update the software for a SP release seems a little too long. If you think about it, I only get to use the software for 5 months, then not for 6 months, then maybe for 5 months, etc. Such huge delays in updates can desimate your fan base.

excalpius said,
Windowblinds does NOT degrade performance, so please stop spreading that malarkey. :)

The op may of been still remembering the old Windows 98 and ME days when WindowsBlinds had to do all the work. Now it allows the native theme service to do alot of it and patches the theme files in memory on the fly. The performance loss is negligible but present. I actually bought the program since it offers some enhancements to the native theme engine.

Aahz said,
If it adds a service or requires an *.exe to run then yes it does, in fact, impact performance.

With that logic, then drivers (yes some drivers are technically services) and *every* program you run will "impact performance"

I've been a WB fan for years and honestly don't see a framerate loss in any of my games.

AnalogRival said,
*every* program you run will "impact performance"

I think that you're onto something there.

The reason that people prefer to patch system files rather than run a third party application is because of the inherent overhead and performance impact associated with added services and always-on applications.

bryonhowley said,
Windowblinds does degrade performance...

No, it doesn't. In fact, under XP, WindowBlinds is FASTER than native XP themes due to WindowBlinds' acceleration. Under Vista, I expect it's a wash.

You can support projects like VistaGlazz and Uxtheme patching on their own merits. You don't need to spread dis/misinformation about commercial alternatives.

shinji257 said,
The op may of been still remembering the old Windows 98 and ME days when WindowsBlinds had to do all the work...
the OP is simply quoting VistaGlazz' homepage message. and for the record, even if it's just a little, it does degrade performance. I've tried it myself.

xan K said,
the OP is simply quoting VistaGlazz' homepage message. and for the record, even if it's just a little, it does degrade performance. I've tried it myself.

It's self-serving BS and I'm calling them on it.