2020. 2. 21. 03:33ㆍ카테고리 없음
THIS STYLE IS VISTA ONLY! Ok you waited long enough for this release. Imusst admint that it's not finished overall, but the basic theme is. I would rather not recommend you to use the Glass style, it's more or less pretty bugy. The taskbar looks different from what it's shown on the preview pic, i wasnt able to take a new one as i'm on a real mac these days The pack includes: - The style ( with regular and thin taskbar) - Wallpapers - The Y'z Shadow app i used on the shot - browseui.dll for the back/forward buttons. I hope you still enjoy it, i'll continue working on it as soon as i'm back on Vista, but for now thats all i can give to you.
Several improvements which could be made -Taskbar, when windows are maximised the taskbar becomes a shade of gray till the point that its unusable.Make a ieframe.dll to match your browseui.dll -Improve on your start menu, it looks like Vista 4074 lol -Rename your style folder to 'leopard' and not 'leopard 0.5', windows apparently hate the way you name the style folder -Others like improving the taskbar For users having problem with y'z shadow, just set it running in Windows XP SP2 compatibility mode Overally a good OSX skin for vista. I've tried your visual style. It's looking good but there are still some odd things. First, your style doesn't show with 'Windows Aero, Windows Vista Basic' but with 'Aero style' that come between the 'High Contrast #1 and #2'. The start menu is a bit buggy where the apple appears black instead of blue and the menu itself is not straight. The lines that define the items on left and on right are 'cut'.
In 'thin' mode, the apple is too big and is too high on the bar so we don't see it clearly. Also, Y'z Shadow doesn't work in Vista so, how did you manage to get it to work? I didn't see anything else for now. Keep on the good work!
It has come to my attention that it SEEMS a lot of the Longhorn utilities used to modify Longhorn have been lost around the web. This includes customized DLLs, the sidebar for 5111, unofficial service packs or 'Longhorn 2008' as well as modifications to services that run on startup and different colors of plex, to the 5048 direct sound patch, I've saved a lot of stuff since I joined BetaArchive since 2009, even though it was well after the Longhorn time. I would be willing to pack up a small archive of these utilities, although it is understandable it cannot be put on the FTP. I will not be including Activation Patches. Maybe with these little things, they can be put together to create something big. It would be cool if there are other things we can find around the web so that it's possible to keep preserving these utilities and customizations since it's hard to find.
Longhorn 4074 Patch 2008( Update 1) 10
It has come to my attention that it SEEMS a lot of the Longhorn utilities used to modify Longhorn have been lost around the web. This includes customized DLLs, the sidebar for 5111, unofficial service packs or 'Longhorn 2008' as well as modifications to services that run on startup and different colors of plex, to the 5048 direct sound patch, I've saved a lot of stuff since I joined BetaArchive since 2009, even though it was well after the Longhorn time. I would be willing to pack up a small archive of these utilities, although it is understandable it cannot be put on the FTP. I will not be including Activation Patches.
Maybe with these little things, they can be put together to create something big. It would be cool if there are other things we can find around the web so that it's possible to keep preserving these utilities and customizations since it's hard to find. I noticed you posted a link to the longhorn utilities. Just why do have to upload these files on a provider that makes you download them with a manager? Mediafire, for example gives much faster download speeds, and you do not have to install adware to get one single file! It just annoys me that you make yourself trouble by uploading these files to some dubious host, where a more well known host with much better attributes would have been better. I do not know if you consider this a rant, but if you do, note this as being my first one so far.
'Everything is useless when you're an idiot.' I noticed you posted a link to the longhorn utilities. Just why do have to upload these files on a provider that makes you download them with a manager? Mediafire, for example gives much faster download speeds, and you do not have to install adware to get one single file!
It just annoys me that you make yourself trouble by uploading these files to some dubious host, where a more well known host with much better attributes would have been better. I do not know if you consider this a rant, but if you do, note this as being my first one so far. What does your post have to do with anything on this topic? Quicker and simpler than what? Mediafire is just horrible.
It's ad-infested, a terribly designed site, and pitifully slow. Are you sure that Mediafire is bad? It seems pretty good to me, and Ads? I have never really noticed them. Mediafire is quite unstable at times.
Next thing you know, you need to enter a captchca, which redirects to another. And, worst part is, Mediafire likes to delete downloads randomly for 'some' sometimes no reason. Google drive, Dropbox, Mega are some of my preferred data storage sites. '5 years ago though, Mediafire was actually a pretty good cloud site.' I noticed you posted a link to the longhorn utilities. Just why do have to upload these files on a provider that makes you download them with a manager?
Mediafire, for example gives much faster download speeds, and you do not have to install adware to get one single file! It just annoys me that you make yourself trouble by uploading these files to some dubious host, where a more well known host with much better attributes would have been better. I do not know if you consider this a rant, but if you do, note this as being my first one so far. Well it is a rant, and you shouldn't instruct people on their preferences of cloud storage.
James. BA Moderator Alternate History writer.