WindowBlinds Vs. StyleXP

OK, Ihad been using StyleXP for about a year and a half up until a couple of months ago. Then I switched over to WindowBlinds because its feature set was superior to that of SXP. The only thing I dislike about WB is the fact that the Start menu is sooooo slow to draw. I mostly use OD for navigating around to my apps etc., but occasionally I need to access the Start menu. It takes WB a few seconds to draw each menu and submenu (such as "All Programs"), whereas when running StyleXP the menus pop up instantly. In fact, when using WB I often get blank menus or menus that have only a border. Then after a moment they fill in with the background color and the menu items.

My PC specs are: dual Athlon 2000+, 3 GB RAM, WinXP, 120GB HD, Radeon 9700 Pro.

Is there something I need to do to get WB to perform faster? Ultimately, I'd rather use WB instead of SXP.

#107305

well i prefer stylexp :6

#107308

Neither I use the patch. If I did use one I would use WindowBlinds, you can do some neat things with it.

#107315

Topic Moved.

Windows GUI Customisation in there, please.

------------------------

Stevie BM

#107321

Originally posted by XJOSHATTACKX@Jan 29 2004, 02:46 PM

Neither I use the patch. If I did use one I would use WindowBlinds, you can do some neat things with it.

ditto, patching is my method of choice

#107323

Originally posted by static@Jan 29 2004, 12:35 PM

well i prefer stylexp :6

good for you.. now let's cut off that tongue.

#107325

Wow, DTOXX you've got an amazing computer. At least much better than mine.

I've been using SXP for about 2 years before the switch to WB. I'd say WB is much friendlier on memory usage. It's currently using only 1.5MB while SXP usually takes about 8 ~ 12MB. That's reason one for my preference.

The second being not having to run extra applications like winroll to get the same effect. It's pre-packaged with WB. So that's the nicer bit about it. And WB 4.2 seems to up the scale with the new animations and toolbar support as well.

The memory usage bit might be different for some systems, (I've heard people give different responses to this before... so, it depends. )

Anyway, just my thoughts. I prefer WB more.

#107334

Why why why would anyone use Style XP

#107336

well, i like wb, it have some nice features and you can change de layout (like the buttons on the left side of the top bar. but makes my pc a little slow (i have a athlon xp 1500+ whit 500mb of ran. and a g force 2 mx 440 (i know is not that good but it runs well) so that is why i use stylexp, cuse i'm my opnion is much faster than wb. and have some nice features too.

LuisAlonso

#107345

Gah, I don't think this discussion needs to be ressurected. Versus threads suck.

#107349

uxtheme patch here. i don't like installing extra programs.

if i really couldn't use the patch for some reason, i'd change the shell and reshack the windows.

#107353

Style XP, I dont like WindowBlinds for some reason, In fact I hate it, but if Three Drives Panther 4.0 gets ported to WindowsBlind.... I will use it

#107359

StyleXP.

I don't know why. :6

-cherrysoul

#107375

Originally posted by silencedge@Jan 29 2004, 03:26 PM

I've been using SXP for about 2 years before the switch to WB. I'd say WB is much friendlier on memory usage. It's currently using only 1.5MB while SXP usually takes about 8 ~ 12MB. That's reason one for my preference.

A replaced dll takes 0mb

Why doesn't anyone get it? You don't have to use StyleXP to use msstyles

#107376

Originally posted by Keith@Jan 29 2004, 02:37 PM

A replaced dll takes 0mb

Why doesn't anyone get it? You don't have to use StyleXP to use msstyles

That svchost.exe which runs the themes services takes more mem than wb

#107379

It makes it easier for constant change, Keith.

#107381

Originally posted by Keith@Jan 29 2004, 02:37 PM

A replaced dll takes 0mb

Why doesn't anyone get it? You don't have to use StyleXP to use msstyles

I'm losing my patience with comments like this.

It still takes MB's to run the themes service and load up all the bitmaps that are in a visual style. Not to mention resources to stretch\tile and blit those bitmaps to the window. So cut it out with the "patch uses no mb\resources" thing.

#107387

no no, he means patch vs. stylexp.

the patch alone requires only the themes service. stylexp, resourcewise, is pretty much the patch + extra resource usage (from running the app itself), so comparing these two, the patch is better resourcewise (this doesn't take into account the positive externalities from using stylexp).

#107392

WindowBlinds

Better feature set, does use less memory than the Theme service. I don't know how a PC of DTOXX's spec can draw the start menu so slow. My 2.4 P4, 1GB Ram and 9800 Pro draws it the same speed as classic. Come to think of it, my old P3 733 Laptop draws it as quickly as the standard XP theme service.

Have you tried the performance tab of WB and set it to use SmartPaint?

#107393

Style XP rocks! I have a TV-card K-World KW-TV878RF Pro with its native software. When I use WB, tuner application launches about a minute! :cry: And after this i couldn't make the tv-picture bigger! All runs excellent only with Style XP.

#107394

I have 1gb memory so its a moot point for me anyway :naughty:

#107396

Although i have a powerful system (AXP 3000+, 1GB DDR, 200 GB, r9800 pro), i don't like to have any extra processes running. So uxtheme patch is my choice.

#107402

For the last time

msstyles= one of the svchost.exe=resource

windowsblinds=wb.exe=resource

windows classics= ZERO resource

#107409

Originally posted by smoke@Jan 29 2004, 04:49 PM

I'm losing my patience with comments like this.

It still takes MB's to run the themes service and load up all the bitmaps that are in a visual style. Not to mention resources to stretch\tile and blit those bitmaps to the window. So cut it out with the "patch uses no mb\resources" thing.

actually your wrong (based on my experience) windowblinds is the resource hog. The visual styles don't take up any memory at all when compared to windowblinds and they apply faster. I ran windowblinds for about a month it ate my proccessor and used up about 50mb of ram. I have winxp pro 2ghz P4 768 mb ram and geforce 4. Now with visual styles using style xp it only takes up about 800kb and maybe 1% of my processor.

My choice is style xp or the uxtheme patch (haven't tried it yet)

#107411

i get improper sizing and font problems with windowblinds. i have to mod all the themes i use and it doesn't look better than stylexp (and i like my window control buttons on the right side). windowblinds is faster i suppose, but i can't tell the difference at all. the performance difference is not noticeable imo.

#107412