Main Area and Open Discussion > General Software Discussion

Windows XP Alternative shells

<< < (2/3) > >>

wraith808:
Dear Wraith808

Do tell us what things can add to Win XP Pro to avoid installing Litestep shell ?
-SKA (July 18, 2009, 11:53 PM)
--- End quote ---

There are several windows customization solutions to help you get a different look for your shell.

Of course there are the Stardock Solutions (Windowblinds, DesktopX, ObjectBar, ObjectDock, et al), but there's also the Winstep solutions (Nextstart, Workshelf, Nexus), Aston has a shell replacement, and a menuing system and widgets to go on top of your current shell.  There's also free alternatives like Styler, IconDock, RocketDock, RKLauncher, Appetizer, and I'm sure many more I don't know about.

I used to replace the explorer shell because other shells gave more bang for the buck, and explorer was just as unstable as any other, so why stick with it.  Now that it's become more robust, there's less incentive for me.  There's always compatibility issues when replacing the shell, and it's not just worth it to me anymore.

steeladept:
There's always compatibility issues when replacing the shell, and it's not just worth it to me anymore.
-wraith808 (July 19, 2009, 09:32 PM)
--- End quote ---

AMEN!  This is why I never bothered.  Too much hassle for too little payoff.  Windows has always been stable for me (well since Win98 anyway, when I started using computers in earnest instead of as over glorified gaming consoles).  I tried once on Windows Mobile because that interface was so bad it was worth the hassle; but even then there were so many issues I just went back to the original.  It is at least a fairly stable shell at least.

rsatrioadi:
here's my opinions:

1. litestep is resource-friendly and very customizable, but to get the max out of it you have to understand the scripting language.
resource friendliness: 8/10
customizability: 10/10
user interface: (1..10)/10 (depends on how you customize it)
friendliness in configuration: 4/10

2. sharpe looks good and friendly, and is customizable too, not as much as litestep though. but unfortunately it's not so resource friendly.
resource friendliness: 4/10
customizability: 6/10
user interface: 9/10
friendliness in configuration: 8/10

3. emerge desktop is very resource friendly and customizable, and you can also use any other .exe (even explorer) as a part of emerge desktop.
resource friendliness: 9/10
customizability: 9/10
user interface: (7..8 )/10
friendliness in configuration: 7/10

sorry for bad english  :-[

Target:
another one for your list - BB Lean

it's a fork of blackbox (another shell) with the focus on being, well, lean.  minimalist interface, easy to setup

I played around with shells quite a bit back in my win98 days (trying to get the most out of my aged hardware  :'(), then ran with BBLean for a while but stopped after a rebuild - as others have noted there weren't enough benefits for me to bother with it

Actually it seems like most shells are as much about eye candy as anything else - litestep is probably the best example of this (the majority of the content on their sites is skins and screenshots).  

if anyones at all interested, these sites may be of use...

shell-shocked.org (the sites been inactive for a long time, but the content is still good)
www.shellfront.org
wikipedia

Innuendo:
I thought I replied to this thread, but I guess I forgot to hit the Post button or something.

As I said in my missing post, there's very little incentive to run an alternative shell on Windows these days. The only reason now to do it is just to see something different on your PC, but you are going to pay for it with compatibility issues. Even simple tasks like installing software can be frustrating as a lot of these alternative shells lack the code to respond to installers telling the OS where to place icons.

With the release of Vista the world of alternative shells hit a major speed bump as UAC doesn't allow the shell to be replaced. These days the world of Windows desktop customization is dominated by bolt-ons and add-ons that aim at extending Explorer functionality rather than replacing it.

If you are wanting functionality changes, it's best to sit down and list out what you want changed/improved and then set about finding a program that add that stuff to Explorer.

If, on the other hand, you are wanting to just try some new radically different UI then maybe it's time to explore the option of either dual-booting Linux or setting it up in a virtual machine. For the technically inclined, building a hackintosh might be just what the doctor ordered.

Navigation

[0] Message Index

[#] Next page

[*] Previous page