WindowBlinds 3, RC2 available for EVERYONE

[Brad Wardell [Stardock]]

The first all version of WindowBlinds 3 (Release candidate, still a beta)
that runs on all versions of Windows is now available at
www.windowblinds.net.

Let us know if you have ANY PROBLEMS.

Specifically:

1) WindowBlinds 3 should feel significantly faster than WindowBlinds 2.2
2) WindowBlinds 3 should work a lot better on Windows 98/ME/2000 than 2.2
3) WindowBlinds 3 should use significantly less memory than 2.2

Additionally, it is much more closely integrated with Windows 98/ME/2000.
On Windows XP, it's totally integrated (it's native on XP) and should be
faster and FEEL faster than Luna (Windows XP style). It already uses less
memory (about a megabyte and that's with the theme service still on which is
not necessary if you stick with WB skins).

There are also a ton of cool new features in version 3. This is definitely
the biggest upgrade we've ever done. We want to run RC2 through its paces
and assuming all goes well, release v3 next week officially.

Here is a link to the new WB3 guide:
http://www.stardock.com/products/windowblinds/wb3/wb3_guide_final.htm

WindowBlinds 3, like Quicktime and other programs comes in its "free"
shareware form where it'll work forever and it's enhanced form which has a
ton of additional features.

Here is a link to the benefits:
http://www.stardock.com/products/windowblinds/benefits/benefits.html

Note to shareware users:
Because WindowBlinds is designed based on the framework in Windows XP,
you'll find that on Windows 98/ME/2000 that things are a little different
than they were with 2.2. Not quite as mnay things are skinned. We
designated specific applications as "Theme aware" apps (XP users know what I
mean but suffice to say, most apps are not theme aware). These apps are
fully skinned other than the scrollbar which we don't skin on any platform
in the shareware version (the enhanced version does). Non theme aware apps
still have their title bars skinned (like on XP). The enhanced version will
skin everything. And even on Windows XP, the enhanced version will skin
non-theme aware apps fully. Which is a bit ironic because if you want
Windows XP to look like Windows XP completely you need WindowBlinds 3 with a
Windows XP skin ;).

Again though, if you run into ANY problems, please let us know. If you
don't find this version to be faster on XP than XP style itself, let us know
(obviously on a complex skin it won't be as fast, we do not violate the laws
of thermaldynamics at this company - presently). If you run 32bit color, be
wary of overdoing it with Hyperpaint because it can actually be a major hog
on performance because the overhead in transferring data to your video card
memory exceeds any potential benefit.

But for Win98/ME/2000 this version SHOULD be the best, most stable, more
relaible, fastest, easiest to use version of WindowBlinds ever made. Let us
know if you aren't finding this to be the case.

Information we'll need:
CPU speed
Color depth
Video card and driver version if possible
Apps being used
Skin used

And as much specifics as you can get. We need your help on this.
Screenshots in the .binaries are are a godsend. Mephisto's screenshot of a
problem he had with AOL's IM allowed us to quickly address this issue.

[PhilIP]

"Brad Wardell [Stardock]" <bwar...@stardock.com> a écrit dans le message
news: Hibhw0Ma...@prospero.stardock.com...

> The first all version of WindowBlinds 3 (Release candidate, still a beta)
> that runs on all versions of Windows is now available at
> www.windowblinds.net.
>
> Let us know if you have ANY PROBLEMS.
>
> Specifically:
>
> 1) WindowBlinds 3 should feel significantly faster than WindowBlinds 2.2
> 2) WindowBlinds 3 should work a lot better on Windows 98/ME/2000 than 2.2
> 3) WindowBlinds 3 should use significantly less memory than 2.2

1) well, mayb ...
2) yep it seems the first WB ever existing which one i've no issues with
"heavy Equipement" menu backgrounds is Wbrc1d - i've posted some scrennshots
on the binaries group to show what i got before, since about a week ...(so i
asked stardock to checked what they've been changed between the WB rc1b and
the WB rc 1d but no answer...)
3) nope, exactly the same, about 5-8 % of system resources (and the same for
Window FX !!!)

Win 98 SE
1152 X 864 in 16bits (or 32 bits)
Hercules 3D Prophet II MX dual display with NVIDIA V14.10 (the V 21.81 makes
the 4 edges "eated for about 1 or 2 pixels when maximized, and upper
versions are not avaible for that card..)
Window FX (just for the "set to maximize feature), boxbar, Norton
SystemWorks and Internet Security 200, babylon, tclockex, ezpop or boxip
mostly Heavy Equipment, PixTudio, Polymer skins

[Neil Banfield]

PhilIP wrote:

> "Brad Wardell [Stardock]" <bwar...@stardock.com> a écrit dans le message
> news: Hibhw0Ma...@prospero.stardock.com...
> > The first all version of WindowBlinds 3 (Release candidate, still a beta)
> > that runs on all versions of Windows is now available at
> > www.windowblinds.net.
> >
> > Let us know if you have ANY PROBLEMS.
> >
> > Specifically:
> >
> > 1) WindowBlinds 3 should feel significantly faster than WindowBlinds 2.2
> > 2) WindowBlinds 3 should work a lot better on Windows 98/ME/2000 than 2.2
> > 3) WindowBlinds 3 should use significantly less memory than 2.2
>
> 1) well, mayb ...
> 2) yep it seems the first WB ever existing which one i've no issues with
> "heavy Equipement" menu backgrounds is Wbrc1d - i've posted some scrennshots
> on the binaries group to show what i got before, since about a week ...(so i
> asked stardock to checked what they've been changed between the WB rc1b and
> the WB rc 1d but no answer...)
> 3) nope, exactly the same, about 5-8 % of system resources (and the same for
> Window FX !!!)

System resources != Memory.

Brad means it will use less physical memory, he did not mention GDI or User
resources.

I am interested in the WindowFX mention though. That should not be using
anywhere near 5-8% resources.

Neil

[PhilIP]

"Neil Banfield" <Ne...@stardock.com> a écrit dans le message news:
3BEBBAE4...@stardock.com...

well, i know he told about memory, but with 384 Mo RAM, i can't see if it's
really significiant and in fact it's not a big problem :-)))
but System Resources are a real one ...

>
> I am interested in the WindowFX mention though. That should not be using
> anywhere near 5-8% resources.

i run tclockex (http://users.iafrica.com/d/da/dalen/) which can monitor
permanently different param and easily mention it (just try that frre soft
to see what i mean..) so i can see how much resources are using each app by
loading them one by one...and it's about 5-8% for Window FX on my system,
depending probably which skin is loaded ??

>
>
> Neil
>

[Mark L]

Hi

I use TClockEx too and it's system monitoring accuracy stinks out loud, I
verified this by using a different program called TaskInfo2000 at the same
time, and THAT showed a more realistic set of figures....yes, I know these
"utilities" place their own load on resources blah, blah...but at the end of
the day I could see for myself that TClockEx was WAY off beam.
--
C4pt41n P4r4n01d (a.k.a Ja Moov)

"PhilIP" <ANTISPA...@wanadoo.fr> wrote in message
news:7L$nDsSaB...@prospero.stardock.com...

[Sera Phina]

Would it be possible to obtain a key for Windowblinds 3 somehow still? it's for my retro computer.