Transparent, see through, blurred, GLASS in VISTA BASIC!


Recommended Posts

Well that was a constructive comment :/

Electrik Jesus: How did you get your desktop icons like that?

constructive.. why would i be constructive, when you losers try to get aero by bugs, instead of just buying it or warezing it if thats what you want

@Electrik Jesus- how did you get a completely transparent task bar..yours really looks great. did you use a custom msstyle. please let me know. i GOTTTA mhave this . THX in advance.

I used the Vista MaxClear theme with the longhorn retrophase shellstyle.

I will be soon working on "The Next 3" for Vista now that I can see what the skin will look like with transparency.

constructive.. why would i be constructive, when you losers try to get aero by bugs, instead of just buying it or warezing it if thats what you want

For starters, Most people you come across get a bad vibe from you... I wonder why.

Secondly, not everyone has the money or the system specs for Vista Ultimate. I for instance am running this with 502mb ram and an 8mb shared memory Gfx card.

So why not.

Link me to where I can buy Aero from Microsoft and only Aero... (dont try to be smart and post a link of premium).

This isn't anything different to everything else that's discussed here imo.

Thing is flip3d and the thumbnails aren't bloatware in ANY way and media center's services can be disabled if you want them to be. Price might be able to be considered a valid concern (despite the difference being relatively small). Avoiding features, especially ones that go right along with the one you want, not so much.

For starters, Most people you come across get a bad vibe from you... I wonder why.

Secondly, not everyone has the money or the system specs for Vista Ultimate. I for instance am running this with 502mb ram and an 8mb shared memory Gfx card.

So why not.

You don't need Ultimate for what's being discussed in this thread.

Home Basic come bundled on my laptop so the price difference is pretty big for something which is a small upgrade IMO. Media Center is something I dont even want on my laptop, my HD is packed as it is...

Electrik Jesus: How did you get your desktop icons as tiles??

I'm only interested in this thread because of the hack aspect of it. I run Business N so it's no big deal really to me otherwise. If there's a way to get aero running in Vista Basic then more power to those users that are stuck with it.

cant you just use a Vista theme like one of the millions for xp?

Not without third party apps like WB. Theres no Vista VSs around with a basic shell that looks like Vista Aero that I know of. I can't believe how butt ugly Vista Basic looks though, I hate when it knocks out of Aero for compatibility reasons and I see it. Why they couldn't just make it look like an XP VS Vista clone when in Basic, eugh.

Here is a screen shot for all of you that still doubt Vista Basic Home can't do transparency.

post-165061-1182194805_thumb.jpg

Just to confirm, did you knock this screenshot up using my method for getting Aero on Vista Basic? Also, the windows aren't resizable without loosing the transparency, right? I don't run Basic so can't test this. I didn't actually know if it worked, I just guessed it did after noticing the quirk while using Pitaschio, heh.

first off before I get to the pitaschio thing, I play simcity4 in the windowed mode... guess what happens if I hit the maximized button...(aero without having to do that dual screen stuff, but it's only with the game :(

okay I tried pitaschio and it works. although I don't like how it renders the maximize button on the window moot.

It does transparency and the windows behave exactly like how the windows on the dual screen thing acted, no shadows no resizing,....

By that, you're actually infringing the company's rights and nullifying limitations set by the company to differentiate the different versions of Windows, and that's unethical and wrong isn't it?

PS: Not that I support MS, on the contrary.

It's not unethical or wrong, and it certainly doesn't violate Microsoft's right to artificially cripple a basic version of their OS. There's no law which says we can't customise the OS to imitate/re-enable features which were removed to create obvious differences between different versions of Vista.

It's no different to modifying an engine on a low-end car model which has been artificially crippled to create differences in performance between models.

I'm assuming the vistaglazz patch just adds some things from Aero somewhere else to get the glass effect? If so, I'm thinking this is all you're gonna get if you're a Basic user (Since the code/whatever won't be anywhere else).

This is simply easy, if you want to use Aero in Vista Basic, it is done by modifying just TWO values in the Windows Registry, and restarting the service labeled:

uxsms ( Desktop Window Manager ), in Vista Basic

This will make Windows Vista Home Basic, have Aero, With Glass, and All the cool effects as seen In Home Premium and Ultimate, without any 3rd party applications

Start, and type in "regedit" without the quotes.

In the Registry Editor, navigate to
HKEY_CURRENT_USER/Software/Microsoft/Windows/DWM

Change Composition to 1
Change CompositionPolicy to 2

CLose the registry editor, Start, and type CMD, press enter

Type
net stop uxsms

then type

net start uxsms

If it does not automatically load with Aero, then Right click the Desktop, Personalization, Windows Color and Appearance, and select Windows Aero.

This is simply easy, if you want to use Aero in Vista Basic, it is done by modifying just TWO values in the Windows Registry, and restarting the service labeled:

uxsms ( Desktop Window Manager ), in Vista Basic

This will make Windows Vista Home Basic, have Aero, With Glass, and All the cool effects as seen In Home Premium and Ultimate, without any 3rd party applications

Start, and type in "regedit" without the quotes.

In the Registry Editor, navigate to
HKEY_CURRENT_USER/Software/Microsoft/Windows/DWM

Change Composition to 1
Change CompositionPolicy to 2

CLose the registry editor, Start, and type CMD, press enter

Type
net stop uxsms

then type

net start uxsms

If it does not automatically load with Aero, then Right click the Desktop, Personalization, Windows Color and Appearance, and select Windows Aero.

ummm...it didn't do anything.

and I don't see Aero under Windows Color and Appearance.

I'll just stick with the glazz app for now. That seems to work.

It's not unethical or wrong, and it certainly doesn't violate Microsoft's right to artificially cripple a basic version of their OS. There's no law which says we can't customise the OS to imitate/re-enable features which were removed to create obvious differences between different versions of Vista.

It's no different to modifying an engine on a low-end car model which has been artificially crippled to create differences in performance between models.

I'm not clear on whether it is unethical or not, but it is most certainly a breach of the EULA to modify portions of Windows. Yes, the uxtheme patch is also a violation of the EULA, and so is the Mess.be MessPatch, and so on, and so on...

It's just that Neowin chooses to ignore that the uxtheme patch is a breach of the EULA. From the looks of it, Microsoft is turning a blind eye, too- but I think they'll take a different stance on what you're trying to achieve here.

I'm not clear on whether it is unethical or not, but it is most certainly a breach of the EULA to modify portions of Windows. Yes, the uxtheme patch is also a violation of the EULA, and so is the Mess.be MessPatch, and so on, and so on...

It's just that Neowin chooses to ignore that the uxtheme patch is a breach of the EULA. From the looks of it, Microsoft is turning a blind eye, too- but I think they'll take a different stance on what you're trying to achieve here.

oh please stop with this sanctimonious drivel. if the mods wish to lock or delete this thread they have it within their means to. otherwise, live what you preach and stop trying to argue how selectively breaking the EULA via patching is somehow morally and legally superior than what the OP is trying to do.

This topic is now closed to further replies.
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
  • Posts

    • The quantum search for Time's origin had an equally mind-boggling conclusion by Sayan Sen Image by Steve Johnson via Pexels A theoretical study from researchers at the University of Surrey suggested that the direction of time may not be fundamentally fixed in certain quantum systems. The work, published in Scientific Reports, examined how the “arrow of time” could emerge from microscopic physics and found that time-reversal symmetry can remain intact even in models used to describe processes such as energy loss and thermalisation. The arrow of time refers to the observed one-way direction from past to future in everyday life. In macroscopic processes, this is easy to see. Spilled milk spreads across a table and does not gather back into a glass, and heat flows from hotter objects to colder ones. These processes shape the common sense idea that time moves in a single direction. However, at the level of fundamental physics, many equations do not prefer a direction of time. Time-reversal symmetry means that the same physical laws can describe a system whether time moves forward or backward. This has made it difficult to explain why irreversible behaviour appears in the large-scale world even when the underlying rules do not require it. Dr Andrea Rocco, Associate Professor in Physics and Mathematical Biology at the University of Surrey, described this contrast: "One way to explain this is when you look at a process like spilt milk spreading across a table, it's clear that time is moving forward. But if you were to play that in reverse, like a movie, you'd immediately know something was wrong – it would be hard to believe milk could just gather back into a glass. However, there are processes, such as the motion of a pendulum, that look just as believable in reverse. The puzzle is that, at the most fundamental level, the laws of physics resemble the pendulum; they do not account for irreversible processes. Our findings suggest that while our common experience tells us that time only moves one way, we are just unaware that the opposite direction would have been equally possible." The study focused on open quantum systems, which are quantum systems that interact with a surrounding environment. This environment, often described as a heat bath, can exchange energy and information with the system. The researchers used this framework to study how a direction of time might appear even when the underlying physics does not enforce one. A key part of the analysis involved the Markov approximation. This is a simplification used in many models where the system is assumed not to retain memory of its past states. The idea is that changes depend only on the current state, not on earlier history. This is commonly used when studying thermalisation, which is the process where a system settles into equilibrium with its environment. The study also used concepts such as master equations, including the Lindblad and Pauli equations, which describe how probabilities of different quantum states change over time. Another related model discussed was quantum Brownian motion, which describes the random-like movement of a quantum particle interacting continuously with its environment. In these descriptions, a “memory kernel” can appear, which is a mathematical term that accounts for how past states influence current behaviour. The researchers found that applying the Markov approximation did not break time-reversal symmetry. Even when the system interacted with an effectively infinite heat bath, the resulting equations of motion remained symmetric in time. This meant that the same mathematical description could, in principle, run forward or backward in time without contradiction. The study further showed that standard frameworks used in open quantum systems, including quantum Brownian motion and master equations like the Lindblad and Pauli forms, could be written in a time-symmetric way. These equations are typically used to describe processes that look irreversible, such as dissipation and thermalisation, but the results suggested they can also be interpreted as allowing evolution in both time directions. Thomas Guff, Research Fellow in Quantum Thermodynamics, said: "The surprising part of this project was that even after making the standard simplifying assumption to our equations describing open quantum systems, the equations still behaved the same way whether the system was moving forwards or backwards in time. When we carefully worked through the maths, we found that this behaviour had to be the case because a key part of the equation, the "memory kernel," is symmetrical in time. We also found a small but important detail which is usually overlooked – a time discontinuous factor emerged that kept the time-symmetry property intact. It’s unusual to see such a mathematical mechanism in a physics equation because it's not continuous, and it was very surprising to see it appear so naturally." The researchers also noted that deriving a one-way arrow of time from time-reversal symmetric microscopic dynamics remains an open problem across fields such as thermodynamics, statistical mechanics, particle physics, and cosmology. Their results suggested that some standard descriptions of irreversible behaviour in open quantum systems may be better understood using a time-symmetric formulation of Markovianity. According to the study, processes such as thermalisation, which are usually treated as irreversible, could in theory be described in a way that allows evolution in either time direction under the same rules. This does not imply that time reversal occurs in everyday life, but rather that the underlying equations do not strictly enforce a single direction. Overall, the findings suggested that the perceived direction of time may emerge from how physical systems are modelled and approximated, rather than from a fundamental asymmetry in the laws themselves. The researchers noted that this perspective could have implications for ongoing work in quantum mechanics, thermodynamics, and cosmology on the origin of time’s arrow. Source: University of Surrey, Nature This article was generated with some help from AI and reviewed by an editor. Under Section 107 of the Copyright Act 1976, this material is used for the purpose of news reporting. Fair use is a use permitted by copyright statute that might otherwise be infringing
    • A bit premature... 100% Marketing. Bizarre.
    • A $300 price hike is insane! No one is going to want to pay that much!
    • Since the 1st one flopped, there is really no reason to make another one. It's just losing money left and right.
  • Recent Achievements

    • Reacting Well
      BizSAR earned a badge
      Reacting Well
    • First Post
      AndreaB earned a badge
      First Post
    • Week One Done
      Huge Trailer earned a badge
      Week One Done
    • Week One Done
      Classifyskilleducation earned a badge
      Week One Done
    • One Month Later
      eurospharma62 earned a badge
      One Month Later
  • Popular Contributors

    1. 1
      +primortal
      580
    2. 2
      +Edouard
      182
    3. 3
      PsYcHoKiLLa
      75
    4. 4
      Michael Scrip
      71
    5. 5
      neufuse
      64
  • Tell a friend

    Love Neowin? Tell a friend!