The skins are always in need of a good looking background and the oposite. <br />The backgrounds are backgrounds, we call them wallpapers and the skins are skins. <br />I don´t get the point of this question. <br />No problem though, the Messageboards are free for any conversation ;) <br />
Technically, putting a wall on your desktop is ´skinning´ in that a program´s default ´feature/characteristic´ is being altered. <br /> <br />Most skinning sites host wallpapers for just that reason, particularly as serious skinning of a Kernel´s GUI, namely shell replacement/modification requires or benefits from the alteration of the desktop background, often making the project reliant on the style/appearance of the wall. <br /> <br />´Skinning´ as an entity refers to the visual modification of a program or part thereof....;) <br />
I understand what the term is used for, but for example, take Kazaa, it´s not freeform skinnale correct? Winamp on the other hand is extremely freeform...that´s the difference that I´m trying ot point out. I´m not referring to wallpapers, or shell replacement, strictly applications.
actually winamp 2.x is not freeform skinnable at all... the buttons are where they are, our job is just to make them pretty! <br /> <br />what i started to think about when you asked this question is programs that let you change a few things, like in sibelius you can change the background of the program, the foreground, and the dialog textures. i believe this to lie in that "grey" area between skinning and not skinning because the program does not say that you can (even though you really can) add your own textures. so it´s not encouraging full customization of making a texture. just pick one of theirs... <br /> <br />i hope that made sense =Þ
i see Jafo´s point as well, but what really is the true definition of skinning, and is there a difference between modifying a program/gui and making a skin? i think so.
I´m slightly worried by this as the one and only skinnable program that I have produced for the masses at large would fall foul of georgieK50´s definitions as there is´nt a great deal you can change exept the background and the font, but then that´s all there is , there are no switches sliders or buttons that could be changed. <br /> <br /> I ask georgiek50 this: a.) what would he define this type of program as ? <br /> <br /> b.) and to where would he bin said applications? <br /> <br />so many programs fall into this category , rainlendar,ghrone, beatnik to mention just a few.
If a graphic...that is, some form of bitmap or other image format can be applied to a computer program to alter its appearance....THAT IS SKINNING. <br />There is your answer.....regarding a ´proper definition´. <br /> <br />Just take it from someone whose been doing it a while....;)
I fully agree with Jafo - if the appearance of an application can be altered using graphics, its in my view skinnable!
I understand everyone´s point, and I mean no disrespect to the programs that aren´t freeform, there are a lot of great apps out there with those specs. <br /> <br />To be honest, my question is coming out of a bit from anger at similar programs like my own. Every time I think up and put in a new feature it gets ripped off. Since they ALL look the same, boring database w/ TOO many input fields on the main screen I thought that the one thing I can keep unique is a simple freeform interface and call it skinnable. Lo and behold, now the other one´s are becoming "skinnable" out of the blue, with just a background change. <br /> <br />So naturally I get pissed off when all my hard work put into making something visually appealing is placed in the same category as the competitors´ which haven´t put in a fraction of the effort into coding something freeform (and by competitors, I mean the other movie organizers, not the above mentioned apps eg. beatnik) <br /> <br />There you have it, my 2 cents...
I think I know what you mean. You probably mean apps where you can alter the background bitmap of the toolbar, which they then call "skinnable". I´d say those apps are leeches hoping to hop along on the bandwagon. <br /> <br />The devs of those apps probably think that: crap app + bitmap ~ skinnable -> popularity
Yes, that´s exactly what I mean...and I don´t think they are crap apps at all. On the contrary I think they are VERY GOOD APPS, I just don´t think they are "skinnable".
Ah...but applying such an image to a menu bar/whatever IS still skinning...just a relatively feeble example of the art. <br />Some argue that WA3 is/was more of a skinned app than WA2x because it was freeform and allegedly harder to do....though in reply it can be argued that to do anything half-way decent within the sorry limitations of WA2x is nigh impossible as it requires so many compromises. <br />BUT.... <br />Then there are the skin-maker proggies for Winamp [2x] which take it all to an entirely different level....´photoskins´....much like the bitmap applied to the menu bar...or the bitmap applied to the desktop [wall].....these are of two distinct standards....the ´I designed a graphic to work as a background and here is my menu/wall/skinmaker winamp´, or ´I found a pic of Britney´s boobs on the net and clicked ´apply´´. <br />One is STILL ´skinning´...the other is just plain sad. <br /> <br />People like faisal, Mobius Co, and nuvem [to name three] create skins for walls. <br />A photo of spot taken by webcam is NOT skinning....it´s a photo of a mutt. <br /> <br />Simple, really...;)
here´s how i see it <br /> <br />pictures= designs/wallpapers <br /> <br />skins=modifications to the generic look of a program (wianmp 2,qcd) <br /> <br />interface=modified look/feel to a program with uniquely coded parts written by the designer. (sonique 2, winamp3, litestep) <br /> <br /> <br />that´s how i see things <br /> <br /> <br />
I have a feeling this isn´t the right area for this question, but this area is the closest subject line I´ve been able to locate.... <br /> <br />But could anyone tell me why most of the windowblind skins I´ve downloaded from this site have annoying, bright purple outlines where the skins masks should be? [ masks: as in the corners of the skin ] <br /> <br />If this isn´t the appropriate place, perhaps someone could point the correct post for this subject out for me?
The purple bits are suppoed to be transparent. That´s about all I can say about it though. Last time I ra WindowBlinds is a long time ago. <br /> <br />Anyhow, the correct way to ask questions as such is to start a new thead, not hijack an old one.
