Windowblinds 5 takes less memory then Windows Default?

[#Michael]

  Leddy said:

I don't really need to. The transparency obviously eats through your graphics card while the default XP skinning engine doesn't.

Memory isn't the only system resource, you know. CPU usage and GPU usage are both system resources.

586790657[/snapback]

What else is your gfx card mem supposed to be used for? The point of WB5 is for the gfx mem to be use more instead of the computer ram. If you don't want a transparent skin, don't use one...simple as that.

I fail to see what the argument is.

[Leddy]

Well, it detracts from the amount of resources i can use if i start a game.

On your same argument, i can say "what's the point of having free system resources when you can use it?"

So sorry, i don't see what YOUR argument is.

The question posed in the topic was "does windowblinds 5 take less memory than windows default [skinning engine]?", and the answer is NO, it takes more if you use it for its purpose, that is, Glass skins.

[imtoomuch]

  AthleticTrainer1981 said:

Try turning on hyperpaint and turning off your theme service.  That will noticeably speed things up.

586790620[/snapback]

Hyperpaint is on and the theme service is disabled.

[#Michael]

  Leddy said:

Well, it detracts from the amount of resources i can use if i start a game.

On your same argument, i can say "what's the point of having free system resources when you can use it?"

So sorry, i don't see what YOUR argument is.

The question posed in the topic was "does windowblinds 5 take less memory than windows default [skinning engine]?", and the answer is NO, it takes more if you use it for its purpose, that is, Glass skins.

586790692[/snapback]

I wouldn't know about a game....I don't play them. I use my machine for gfx design, movies, internet.

I haven't had a problem with photoshop, nero, windvd, or any mem intensive program stuff like that. I do keep my machine running very efficent though.

[Zxian]

  AthleticTrainer1981 said:

Well let's see, wb5 beta runs on my laptop which is a p3 700 at 256mb of ram and a 12 mb video card.  Hardly modern by any means and yet I don't get any performance hit.  Seems to me that it maybe you need to look at how well your computer is performaning.

586790170[/snapback]

Meaning what? I've got all the latest drivers for my laptop. No viruses/malware. So, playing games and such works just fine (at least older games work dandy, WarCraftIII and such - wouldn't even think of HL2, etc), but WindowBlinds doesn't? Hmm...

  AthleticTrainer1981 said:

Try turning on hyperpaint and turning off your theme service.  That will noticeably speed things up.

586790620[/snapback]

Googled for answers already and found that.

On my desktop, it's not as noticable, but there is a definate performance difference. Athlon XP 2000+, 1GB PC3200 RAM, 32MB GeforceII MX200. Sure, the card is a little old, but apparently it's newer than yours it.

Compare the difference between classic and WindowBlinds and then again between classic and MSStyles. On my laptop, there's barely a difference, but on my parents laptop (similar specs as yours, PIII 750MHz, 128MB RAM, 8MB vid card), the MSStyles slows things down a bit. I'd hate to see what WB does there.

[javagreen]

  Zxian said:

On my desktop, it's not as noticable, but there is a definate performance difference. Athlon XP 2000+, 1GB PC3200 RAM, 32MB GeforceII MX200. Sure, the card is a little old, but apparently it's newer than yours it.

586791465[/snapback]

My main desktop is exactly the same configuration as yours, the only difference being my RAM which is SLOWER than yours... I have RAM running @ 266 MHZ and yet I fail to see any sort of performance hit.. maybe it is machine specific.. but I still fail to understand how people can claim to notice a performance "hit" despite having a 64 bit processor, 1 or more GB of DDR2 Ram .. way better GFX cards,,, SATA drives etc...

I have used WB right from version 1.0 and dropped it when it reached 3.0 because at version 3 it really sucked (for me atleast) .. and then I moved back to Wb when the 4.x versions were released.. and now here I am on the WB5 beta 2 and its incredibly fast..

I dont play games but I do a lot of Photoshop work and very heavy internet surfing, music stuff etc and the only performance "hit" I notice is in Photoshop .. which has more to do with my PC being quite inadequate to handle Photoshop CS2 in a proper fashion .. and not because of Windowblinds ;)

[CeL_dAmAgE]

I don't know how it could use "less" resources, maybe the same, but less? No.... :no:

[Zxian]

  javagreen said:

I have used WB right from version 1.0 and dropped it when it reached 3.0 because at version 3 it really sucked (for me atleast) .. and then I moved back to Wb when the 4.x versions were released.. and now here I am on the WB5 beta 2 and its incredibly fast..

586791539[/snapback]

I was using WB4.6 at the time, and I found that regardless of the theme I was using, things were just slower. I haven't tried WB5 though. Maybe when it goes final I'll give it a whirl.

As for why this is, I have no idea. As for the use of the graphics card, I don't know about the graphics memory, but I know that in terms of what actually does the number crunching when you move a window, with both MSStyles and WB, it's the CPU. The only thing that can change that is Avalon. Otherwise, we're stuck with the CPU doing the rendering in our Windows environments.

[toadeater]

  AthleticTrainer1981 said:

Well this is what my machine uses with WB4.6 loaded:

586788775[/snapback]

Ok, now add the memory usage of wblind.dll to that, which is the replacement for uxtheme.dll. wbload.exe is the GUI loader. There is also a wbhelp.dll that's part of Windowblinds, but I'm not sure if that's always memory-resident.

Try using this program instead of Windows Task Manager to check all process that Windowblinds loads:

http://www.iarsn.com/taskinfo.html

Here's what I got for uxtheme.dll:

[phot0nic]

well, for starters, those results aren't the same for all computers.... I have run that same program on my old computer and have seen UxTheme.dll rise much higher than that before.

Also, even if those numbers were the same for all computers, Windowblinds supports hardware acceleration, and uxtheme.dll doesn't.... you just have to turn it on.

Despite the numbers, on slower computers that I have tried both on, show Windowblinds working better. I mean, my default computer's... average... but my laptop sucks. I noticed a significant improvement when I installed Windowblinds. The windows were sluggish when dragging them using uxtheme.dll.. it was so annoying, I got to the point of unchecking "show window contents while dragging".. but, the theme I was using was cool and I couldn't get it to work for Windowblinds. Later on, I installed windowblinds, restored the "window contents" option, and viola! the windows weren't sluggish any more. This exact same thing happened on my mother's computer that I set up. It would only work well if there was outling dragging, or she was using the classic theme.... then I installed Windowblinds, and it was no longer an issue.

The fact is, I have installed the uxtheme.dll patch and Windowblinds on many computers (I prefer to install windowblinds, but if the user wants an msstyle I can't convert properly... oh well), and I have never noticed Windowblinds slowing things down. However, on semi-rare occasions I have noticed uxtheme.dll slowing the computer down....

so yeah... that's why I stick with Windowblinds...that and it can do more. I hate using msstyles because they don't skin enough... I have to use a program like Y'z Toolbar (or reshack) for toolbars, the logoff/shutdown dialogs aren't skinned, and some program just aren't skinned all together...

Oh well, to each his own I supposed. I just want more artists to switch to Windowblinds so we get better WB native themes.

[toadeater]

  Hitchhiker427 said:

well, for starters, those results aren't the same for all computers....  I have run that same program on my old computer and have seen UxTheme.dll rise much higher than that before. 

Also, even if those numbers were the same for all computers, Windowblinds supports hardware acceleration, and uxtheme.dll doesn't.... you just have to turn it on.

True about the acceleration, but the memory usage is not less than uxtheme.dll.

What I really don't like about Windowblinds is that it's less stable than uxtheme.dll. Some DirectX apps (namely games and movie players) have weird things happening to them with Windowblinds installed, even if you exclude them from being skinned. I've used Windowblinds since it was first released, and tried a few recent versions of it, but it still caused problems I normally wouldn't have with uxtheme.dll.

Also, the lack of themes is indeed another issue. Since Stardock profits from WB, maybe they should pay to get some more high-quality, complete themes made.

[phot0nic]

I dunno, like I said, I've seen uxtheme.dll take significantly more memory than what you posted (using either the same or a similar program), and I've definately seen it use more than what AthleticTrainer showed his Windowblinds usage to be.... so once more, it depends on the computer. Also, (not that I've seen anywhere close to this, but...) Blackviper.com (a fairly reliable source) states that the themeing service can use from 4 MB to 12 MB of memory.... so, take that or leave it..

Also, about stability. Once more, I've noticed the opposite. The only times I've seen windowblinds act unstable is when I've been switching to and from a bunch of themes... but a restart of the computer fixes that right up.

Also, I have seen many problems with Microsoft's skinning engine. Windowblinds has been FAR more stable for me.... I've never got portions of the VS not paint correctly with Windowblinds, and I've never had black or white squares replace GUI elements for me when I've used Windowblinds, however, I've seen all of this on msstyles... and on some computers, I've seen alot of this with msstyles... and by msstyles, I also include Luna. I would not say Windowblinds is unstable in comparision at all (maybe beta 5, never tried it).

But yeah, they need better themes. Stardock isn't exactly a wealthy company from what I've heard. They put their profits into their products and wincustomize.... and they're losing money. So, that's probably why they don't pay skinners. But maybe, version 5 with lure in more skinners.

[StevoJD]

I very much doubt that WindowBlinds 5 take less resources than the normal Windows XP skinning engine. I installed WindowBlinds 5 a couple of weeks ago and after using it for about 12 hours, I was trying to open paint but a message saying, "Not enough system resources left." message came up. I was using Kol's transparent VistaXP theme. When WindowBlinds 5 Beta 2 came out, I tested to see how much ram it was taking up, I had 211mb available ram, then after unloading WindowBlinds and restarting I had 240mb unused. I highly doubt that the resource problem was because of my specs, I have 512mb (PC2 3200 2x 256mb), and a Pentium 4 at 3.06ghz, a Intel 910GL video card (If it plays Half-Life 2 fine it should be able to utilize WindowBlinds 5 perfectly).

I've also asked most people, and WindowBlinds to them is a ram and resource hog. I could be wrong, but my take is that WindowBlinds 5 makes Windows pretty, but it lowers performance. I prefer performance than the pretty.

[Pink Floyd Veteran]

to me and to many users too, memory is far from being an issue with the amount of ram kids have these days

this is a matter of what kind of themes you like. I prefer by far themes made for VS. Right now, there is no WB themes that I like

[#Michael]

  inuyasha said:

I very much doubt that WindowBlinds 5 take less resources than the normal Windows XP skinning engine. I installed WindowBlinds 5 a couple of weeks ago and after using it for about 12 hours, I was trying to open paint but a message saying, "Not enough system resources left." message came up. I was using Kol's transparent VistaXP theme. When WindowBlinds 5 Beta 2 came out, I tested to see how much ram it was taking up, I had 211mb available ram, then after unloading WindowBlinds and restarting I had 240mb unused. I highly doubt that the resource problem was because of my specs, I have 512mb (PC2 3200 2x 256mb), and a Pentium 4 at 3.06ghz, a Intel 910GL video card (If it plays Half-Life 2 fine it should be able to utilize WindowBlinds 5 perfectly).

I've also asked most people, and WindowBlinds to them is a ram and resource hog. I could be wrong, but my take is that WindowBlinds 5 makes Windows pretty, but it lowers performance. I prefer performance than the pretty.

586807106[/snapback]

Sounds to me like you have a system problem if you can't open paint with over 200 mb of ram available.

The fact is I am using WB5 b3 right now on my laptop (a p3 256 mb with an ati mobility 8mb) and it runs just fine with no performance hit. Take it for what it is. Now I keep this laptop very lean, only running the very basic services needed to run XP.

For those of you with a p4 with HT tech that say you have a lag I think you need to look at your system config, turn off your theme service, turn on hyperpaint and then take a look at what services you have running. My bet is your system is borked to hell with stuff running that doesn't need to be.

@inuyasha: you are right. WB does make XP pretty. That is what it is supposed to do. That is what msstyles is supposed to do also but it is my take that WB does it better. That's the point of a VS, if you don't like it don't use them and go back to using windows classic.

[toadeater]

  Hitchhiker427 said:

I dunno, like I said, I've seen uxtheme.dll take significantly more memory than what you posted (using either the same or a similar program), and I've definately seen it use more than what AthleticTrainer showed his Windowblinds usage to be.... so once more, it depends on the computer.  Also, (not that I've seen anywhere close to this, but...) Blackviper.com (a fairly reliable source) states that the themeing service can use from 4 MB to 12 MB of memory.... so, take that or leave it..

Including the bitmap data in memory, yes it could.

  Quote

Also, about stability.  Once more, I've noticed the opposite.  The only times I've seen windowblinds act unstable is when I've been switching to and from a bunch of themes... but a restart of the computer fixes that right up. 

Windowblinds more stable than XP's own theming engine? No way. You don't get ANY problems with uxtheme.dll whatsoever. You don't have to exclude apps, you don't get problems with DirectX or resolution switching or dual monitors.

  Quote

  Windowblinds has been FAR more stable for me.... I've never got portions of the VS not paint correctly with Windowblinds, and I've never had black or white squares replace GUI elements for me when I've used Windowblinds, however, I've seen all of this on msstyles... and on some computers, I've seen alot of this with msstyles... and by msstyles, I also include Luna.  I would not say Windowblinds is unstable in comparision at all (maybe beta 5, never tried it).

Problems with the styles themselves is not what I'm talking about. Things like that are the author's fault for not properly making the style. I know that everyone using Windowblinds is aware of the incompatibilities it has with certain apps. For me personally, it caused some games not to function properly, even when they were excluded from being skinned.

  Quote

But yeah, they need better themes.  Stardock isn't exactly a wealthy company from what I've heard.  They put their profits into their products and wincustomize.... and they're losing money.  So, that's probably why they don't pay skinners.  But maybe, version 5 with lure in more skinners.

I don't know if they're losing money. They seem to be doing ok with their range of products, including the games they make. It's surprising that Windowblinds lasted this long at all. Windowblinds was created before Windows had any theming capability, back then Windowblinds was useful. Once XP got a theme service, Windowblinds pretty much its reason to exist, and that's the real problem. Now Stardock has to come up with a way to make it superior, so far I don't think they have.

Maybe Stardock should have sued MS for stealing their idea, now they don't have any choice but to make something better. That's going to be tough to do considering MS holds all the cards.

[Zxian]

  toadeater said:

Windowblinds more stable than XP's own theming engine? No way. You don't get ANY  problems with uxtheme.dll whatsoever. You don't have to exclude apps, you don't get problems with DirectX or resolution switching or dual monitors.

586809908[/snapback]

Yup. I remember my style for WB always messing with Winamp's scrollbars, despite being part of the "exclude" list. And I had to exclude VMware as well because the toolbars wouldn't show up otherwise (even if set to "skin titlebar only" or whatever). Problems with AveDesk as well, Outlook, blah blah blah. WindowBlinds always seemed to mess up my DirectDraw (going into the settings and restarting DirectDraw fixed the problems). With MSStyles, I don't have these problems.

[StevoJD]

  AthleticTrainer1981 said:

Sounds to me like you have a system problem if you can't open paint with over 200 mb of ram available.

The fact is I am using WB5 b3 right now on my laptop (a p3 256 mb with an ati mobility 8mb) and it runs just fine with no performance hit.  Take it for what it is.  Now I keep this laptop very lean, only running the very basic services needed to run XP. 

For those of you with a p4 with HT tech that say you have a lag I think you need to look at your system config, turn off your theme service, turn on hyperpaint and then take a look at what services you have running.  My bet is your system is borked to hell with stuff running that doesn't need to be.

@inuyasha: you are right.  WB does make XP pretty.  That is what it is supposed to do.  That is what msstyles is supposed to do also but it is my take that WB does it better.  That's the point of a VS, if you don't like it don't use them and go back to using windows classic.

586807336[/snapback]

I wasn't sure how much ram I had at the time of opening paint really, but I was using WindowBlinds 5 for about 14 hours. I'm not so sure about WindowBlinds, I couldn't open paint but I was able to open PhotoShop CS2 :p. So what's the verdict? Does WindowBlinds 5 take less resources and ram than the normal XP skinning engine?? Or the UXTHEME.dll. If it does, I'm using it forever, transparency is beautiful :p.

[phot0nic]

  Quote

Windowblinds more stable than XP's own theming engine? No way. You don't get ANY problems with uxtheme.dll whatsoever. You don't have to exclude apps, you don't get problems with DirectX or resolution switching or dual monitors.

Hey, tell that to the computers I've worked on. The only times Windowblinds has acted up on me is when I've switched a bunch of themes back and forth (to test things out), and things go back to normal on restart.

However, I have noticed plenty of problems with Luna. I've seen many problems with uxtheme.dll. For instance, I've seen the whole computer switch over to "classic" for no reason, I've seen black boxes, or white boxes where GUI elements should be (fixed after a restart)... and this isn't just one copmuter.. or *my* computers, but rather other computers I'm working on for other people. Some of which have just been reformated, so the the likelihood of major system errors is low.

So, it seems that everyone's experiences have been different.

Also, Zxian, as a note, I can't speak for games... I mean, I play a few with no problems, but I'm not much of a gamer.. sorry. Also, Windowblinds always ignores Winamp (as always has), and it's not even added to my exclude list, so I've seen no problems.... in fact, I've used all of the programs you mentioned and never had any problems.

Lastly, toadeater, I don't really think Stardock has alot to worry about. I mean, it's not like Microsoft and them are competitors, in fact they work together on some things (eg msstyles) and seem to get along well. And as for which is superior, according to Wincustomize (probably biased, I know, but they would have numbers to back some of the info) many people believe Windowblinds is superior to msstyles due to number of sales they've made. Frogboy posted earlier that the amount of people who used Windowblinds was greater than the amount of people who used custom msstyles (where he got the second number from I don't know, but take it for what it's worth). The fact is, whether it is all-in-all superior is a personal opinion, but it is more powerful, and is a fuller skinning solution than msstyles... and if I (or anyone else) don't experience problems with it, then... ehh.. why not use it?

[PrimoTurbo]

I always thought WindowBlinds was bloated, but after reading this thread I decided to try for the first time myself.

WindowBlinds 4.6 - Kol?s Longhorn 5203 Silver Normal skin. (Themes service disabled and Hyperpaint is on with windows resolution threshold in the middle setting)

Windows XP ? Default Luna Silver

I opened paint to paste the second screenshot and my memory spiked a little, just wanted to show what services I had running. As you can see it?s pretty clean.

I have not noticed ANY difference performance wise, and I think the Longhorn theme has much more effects then the default Luna. I?m quite impressed, if it doesn?t effect fps in 3d games I think I?ll continue using it since there is no difference and I?m sure a lower end theme could give you a performance boost in WB.

Sorry for the big screenshots, forgot to say the first two are taken after a fresh restart. I find that after using apps my memory spikes up and stays higher. So I tested it consistently.

[#Michael]

toadeater:

No matter what anyone says to you it is obvious that you don't like WB and don't want to use it. And that is fine. It isn't for everyone. A lot of people are happy with msstyles and its limitations with it.

The point is I am tired of trying to convince you of what I know to be true because I use it on a daily basis. MS hasn't improved on uxtheme in over 4 years and that is a huge let down while Stardock has continued to work and improved upon WB. And now with version 5 coming out it is light years ahead of what the uxtheme engine can do and can do it at the same mem useage level or less. If you choose to believe that or not is entirely up to you. You can't use a program like this for 14 hours and get a true idea of its potential.

And this is what my p3 700 laptop looks like with WB5 beta 3 on it:

[Zxian]

  AthleticTrainer1981 said:

The point is I am tired of trying to convince you of what I know to be true because I use it on a daily basis.  MS hasn't improved on uxtheme in over 4 years and that is a huge let down while Stardock has continued to work and improved upon WB.  And now with version 5 coming out it is light years ahead of what the uxtheme engine can do and can do it at the same mem useage level or less.  If you choose to believe that or not is entirely up to you.  You can't use a program like this for 14 hours and get a true idea of its potential.

586811966[/snapback]

Man... I really hate it when people think they are the be-all-and-end-all of knowledge. ("what I know to be true") You don't know the whole truth, ever. You cannot assume that you've covered every single possible case because that would take more time than you or I have on this planet.

The problem with this standpoint is that you have tested it on your system. Not every possible system configuration out there. I told you that on my laptop, WB causes havoc, while on my desktop it's not as bad, but I notice it. On the other hand, I've seen my friend's computer work just fine with WB (P4 3.2GHz, Radeon X800XL).

You've got to think of the reason why Microsoft hasn't bothered with improving on UXTheme. Most people don't care. Look at the proportion of users who use WindowBlinds and MSStyles to those who use Windows XP. It's tiny. But wait a sec... Isn't Microsoft bringing out glass for Vista? Doesn't that work in the current Betas? Wasn't that out before WB5 Beta? Seems like Microsoft is working on UXTheme!!!! :o

For people who have had problems with UXtheme, I'm going to repeat what AthleticTrainer told me: "Seems to me that it maybe you need to look at how well your computer is performaning." Chances are that it's a video driver issue, not a UXTheme issue. Other people use the same styles that you do, and don't experience those problems. As for my problem earlier, I've never seen a system perform as poorly as mine did with WB when it was running with UXTheme. I'm not the only person who's noticed a difference in performance, so it seems that StarDock is the one with the work cut out, not Microsoft.

For one, the UXtheme patch works well enough for most people. It doesn't hurt system performance any more than the default Luna theme. Secondly, most people aren't going to shell out money for another program. Don't tell me that "It's just $20", because I'd rather save that $20 towards another toy.

[#Michael]

  Zxian said:

Man... I really hate it when people think they are the be-all-and-end-all of knowledge. ("what I know to be true") You don't know the whole truth, ever. You cannot assume that you've covered every single possible case because that would take more time than you or I have on this planet.

The problem with this standpoint is that you have tested it on your system. Not every possible system configuration out there. I told you that on my laptop, WB causes havoc, while on my desktop it's not as bad, but I notice it. On the other hand, I've seen my friend's computer work just fine with WB (P4 3.2GHz, Radeon X800XL).

You've got to think of the reason why Microsoft hasn't bothered with improving on UXTheme. Most people don't care. Look at the proportion of users who use WindowBlinds and MSStyles to those who use Windows XP. It's tiny. But wait a sec... Isn't Microsoft bringing out glass for Vista? Doesn't that work in the current Betas? Wasn't that out before WB5 Beta? Seems like Microsoft is working on UXTheme!!!!  :o

For people who have had problems with UXtheme, I'm going to repeat what AthleticTrainer told me: "Seems to me that it maybe you need to look at how well your computer is performaning." Chances are that it's a video driver issue, not a UXTheme issue. Other people use the same styles that you do, and don't experience those problems. As for my problem earlier, I've never seen a system perform as poorly as mine did with WB when it was running with UXTheme. I'm not the only person who's noticed a difference in performance, so it seems that StarDock is the one with the work cut out, not Microsoft.

For one, the UXtheme patch works well enough for most people. It doesn't hurt system performance any more than the default Luna theme. Secondly, most people aren't going to shell out money for another program. Don't tell me that "It's just $20", because I'd rather save that $20 towards another toy.

586814222[/snapback]

What I do know is that the msstyle/uxtheme is a stripped down version of WB 3. Stardock and MS had a working partnership during the Whistler alpha/beta cycles to develop the skinning engine for it. So what does that tell you? Why would MS work this company if they didn't know what they were doing? They are also a certified MS partner for this.

I could care less if you like the program. If you don't want to use it so what....don't use it....technically you already do. What MS is doing with Vista is going to be locked down with the final UI but already MS is working with them for WB 5 to work with it. So WB5 is going to work on it and be able to skin it. So far I don't see anything or anybody able to do that. Already they have stylevista out that can do it somewhat.

[Marlboro23]

From my experience, WindowBlinds DO take more resources than the default xp engine.

Some months ago i gave v4.6 a whirl, and it was pretty and all, but i noticed some things:

Ok,the memory usage was the pretty much same as uxtheme (i obviously disabled the unneeded engine), but i noticed some strange clock usage, specially when browsing/moving some explorer windows around. I noticed an unconstant 2%+- proccessor usage by wb's service/modules even at idle status as well, and i noticed some unresponsiveness while heavy file managing with explorer.

I tried the hyperpaint tip, changing skin etc. but nothing changed. so after awhile i returned back to uxtheme and things returned snappier.

Moral of the story? well, memory usage is not everything, imo the processor usage "in the wild" is a more important issue since we are talking about a resident module/service. Of course, maybe it's just my pc/configuration (athlon 643000+, 9800pro, 1gbddr400) but i remember noticing similar behaviour in my old pc (PIII 650,nvidia riva 8mb (lol), 300mb ram)

[joe_banana]

so when will windowsblinds 5 be out?