UxStyle Core Beta bits now available

committed to database on June 19, 2009 at 11:50 pm Eastern Standard Time 48 comments digg this

UxStyle LogoIn March, I announced that my unsigned theme patch-less vision was being realized. Today, I’m happy to let everyone know beta bits of UxStyle Core are now available for public testing!

UxStyle Core does not currently have a theme manager or even a UI. UxStyle Core is exactly what it sounds like – the absolutely bare minimum (core) needed to enable third-party theme usage. Nothing more, nothing less. Later in the beta, we’ll push out a “bundle”, containing both the core software and a theme manager developed by our close partners.

Install UxStyle Core. Download some themes. Give them a whirl, everything should “just work”. Let us know how it went, bad or good, in the forums.

Thank God, no more patching.

  1. Vishal Gupta June 20, 2009 at 3:19 am

    That’s an awesome tool. I’m sure now using 3rd party themes would be a lot easier for people.

  2. Sid June 20, 2009 at 4:47 am

    Awesome let me test this on Win vista and win 7 thanks for the share..

  3. Lego399 June 20, 2009 at 4:50 am

    Awesome.

  4. Ramesh K June 20, 2009 at 5:50 am

    Superb !!

  5. MagicAndre1981 June 20, 2009 at 9:17 am

    thanks Rafael :)

  6. HappyAndyK June 20, 2009 at 11:13 am

    Thats wonderful, Rafael !

    Checking it out.

  7. WizardCM June 20, 2009 at 10:22 pm

    An Awesome, Quick and Simple tool. Great work :)

  8. krishnanblr June 20, 2009 at 10:32 pm

    thats a good job rafael, now i dont need to crack my head for theme patch….

  9. pizzaboy192 June 21, 2009 at 12:18 am

    SV33T!!!
    Worked great on a copy of Xp that uses only 40mb of ram, next to test it on FLP and beta releases too =P

  10. Dave June 21, 2009 at 4:01 am

    Awesome tool but ugly logo.

  11. Lego399 June 21, 2009 at 6:45 am

    I like the logo.

  12. asf June 22, 2009 at 9:11 am

    What I don’t get is, why switch from a simple file patch to a kernel driver and added overhead (vs. zero overhead)

  13. pizzaboy192 June 22, 2009 at 12:27 pm

    @ASF: Because a patched file has to be repatched every time you update windows, whereas a kernel driver “patches” while starting
    I found another great use for this: Windows 7’s XPM, skin your XP to look _kinda_ like your current install, you don’t get glass, but it will still be an improvement over the ugly XP theme.

  14. Pallab June 22, 2009 at 2:12 pm

    Installed it on Windows Seven RC without a problem and reposted this stuff on my blog.

    And thanks a lot for including the short version of license, with stuff that actually makes sense. If only the big companies started doing this :sigh

  15. Tom June 22, 2009 at 5:20 pm

    Rafael,
    Your name is all over the web because of this. Its a great tool and I really enjoy it. Thanks for sharing with the world. Also I was able to go back to Hawaii for a couple weeks. Good times, went back to Schofield and saw how much it has changed.

  16. murphy June 23, 2009 at 5:34 am

    Thanks for it. I will give it a shot.

  17. RB June 24, 2009 at 12:39 am

    Why does this app try to make internet contact ?

  18. Bruno Luna June 24, 2009 at 10:38 am

    hey men, i don’t know what i do wrong, but it’s don’t work in my vista ultimate x86… A problem stop the run32dll process :(
    what am i doing wrong?

    I don’t speak in inglish sorry about errors!

  19. Jeff Schader June 25, 2009 at 8:34 pm

    @pizzaboy192: You should probably know what you’re talking about before you correct someone. If you patch in memory you don’t have to redo anything if you patch in memory. Only when you replace the uxtheme.dll physically do you have issues. We’ve patched in memory and installed 2 Service Packs and made sure all updates were downloaded and never once had to fix the patch we use which was created by Andreas of AVEDESK. So get your facts straight first.

  20. Rafael June 25, 2009 at 8:39 pm

    @Jeff: I’m a bit confused. Isn’t that what pizzaboy192 said?

  21. pizzaboy192 June 25, 2009 at 8:44 pm

    @jeff: And I quote myself
    “pizzaboy192 June 22, 2009 at 12:27 pm

    @ASF: Because a patched file has to be repatched every time you update windows, whereas a kernel driver “patches” while starting”
    what you said is basically a lengthier version of the same comment I made, but yet making it sound like I’m an idiot… I congratulate yourself for that amazing effort on your part for reading and comprehending someone else’s comment.

  22. Jeff Schader June 25, 2009 at 8:47 pm

    Sounds a lot like he’s saying the patch would break and have to be repatched due to failure.

    “@ASF: Because a patched file has to be repatched every time you update windows, whereas a kernel driver “patches” while starting”

    I’ve updated Windows numerous time and have never had an issue. What’s the difference of patching automatically in memory when Windows starts up or patching the kernel when Windows starts up?

  23. Jeff Schader June 25, 2009 at 8:49 pm

    No. What you’re saying is wrong pizzaboy. You do not have to repatch every time you update Windows when you do it in memory. I have never come across a single update that broke the patch we’re using. Not one. And i’ve installed plenty of Windows updates where i didn’t have to reboot and nothing broke.

  24. pizzaboy192 June 25, 2009 at 8:51 pm

    @Jeff:
    There isn’t a difference, being that they are the same thing. The program you use is also a kernel driver, like Rafael’s, and the difference between a Kernel driver and a patched system file (like what Rafael used to do) is that a system file (Uxtheme.dll) will be overwritten every time you update.
    You don’t patch the kernel with Rafael’s patches, you just patch a single system file.
    The advantage to using a Kernel driver (A.K.A. Program) is that you don’t need to download the latest patch, or repatch and hope Windows Update doesn’t kill your patched file.

  25. Jeff Schader June 25, 2009 at 8:59 pm

    First, do you have a name other than pizzaboy?

    I’ve never seen our patch get killed. It’s been over a year since we’ve been doing this. Now when i hear of someone saying you have to repatch i’m reminded of the days of StyleXP where every single time there was a SP, StyleXP died a sudden death. Just not that way with our stuff.

  26. Rafael June 25, 2009 at 9:01 pm

    Not sure what was meant so I’ll help clarify by outlining the pros/cons…

    Offset-driven patches (on disk) [e.g. VistaGlazz, all the popular patchers]
    Pros: No running services, drivers
    Cons: Difficult to do, error prone, invalidates Windows baseline, could cause instabilities if updates are not in sync, not-cross-platform.

    Offset-driven patches (in memory) [e.g. PC Tools]
    Pros: No replacement of files needed, easy to install
    Cons: Could cause instabilities if updates are not in sync., not-cross-platform, increased developmental effort

    Dynamic disassemblers (in memory) [e.g. UxStyle]
    Pros: No replacement of files needed, easy to install, works across platforms granted no major structural changes
    Cons: Increased developmental effort

  27. pizzaboy192 June 25, 2009 at 9:07 pm

    @jeff: I do have another name, but I don’t use it for security purposes…
    As for the patches, any program, weather it be your’s, Rafaels, StyleXP (yes, it is a kernel driver), TuneUp utilities, or “Uber 1337 Patch” (as an example) are all programs that instead of physically patching a file, they modify Windows’ memory to allow it to load unsigned themes. (That is my guess, I don’t code, and am too lazy to ask for a real answer, so correct me if I’m wrong)
    The person who asked why Rafael’s program is so much better than his patches gets the simple answer: Because the patched file (Uxtheme.dll) is replaced in every startup. A program, wether Rafael’s or not, that “patches” for you, does not apply to those rules, since it doesn’t physically modify the system files. Rafael’s files are\were there for those who didn’t mind re-copying the files, but it is just easier for Rafael to write a program that does all the dirty work for him, and that way he isn’t bugged with emails every Patch Tuesday saying “OMG TEH PATHC BROK! FIX IT NAO” (lame attempt at humor there).
    Your program is (in theory) the same as Rafael’s, but is nowhere near what Rafael’s patches did.

    So… just to clarify, Rafael’s program is not a patched system file, but a kernel driver, used to “trick” windows into letting you load custom themes. His program does the same thing (in theory) as any of those programs you pay for to allow you to run your favorite theme on XP, Vista, 7, FLP and many others (I’m just guessing again, haven’t had a chance to see if they work on whistlers or longhorns yet)

  28. Jeff Schader June 25, 2009 at 9:13 pm

    Well that’s just it. I have never seen “instabilities”. Ever. Considering I’ve done every single update all the way to SP 3 and have never seen our patch break, I’m not sure how you can state this as a “clarifying” fact. Now if you said: “in some cases…” :-)

  29. Jeff Schader June 25, 2009 at 9:17 pm

    In the end, seriously who cares how its patching as long as its safe and it works? Like i’ve said the patch process we use for XP has performed flawlessly. That’s all i care about. I don’t sell software, i sell the themes we create. The software is made so that i have my own distribution platform to release them on.. theme, icons, etc. If Rafael’s works great, then awesome. But i don’t want people saying his way is the only really good way since its not. It may be good but its certainly not the only way that works. That’s all i’m saying. In the end, to me, its all about the themes not what makes them run.

  30. CDan June 26, 2009 at 3:42 pm

    Thanks A Ton Rafael!!! Works great on Win 7…
    I could finally test msstyles I created on the builds u havn’t released patches for….

  31. Dan June 27, 2009 at 5:27 pm

    I personally like the disk-file patches since they don’t require extra constantly-running services or drivers. I try to trim as much as I can (although I tend to avoid trimming drivers since that’s asking for trouble if I trim the wrong thing) and I have my XP system down to 3 svchosts and a few other service processes.

    Not sure if I agree with your cons about disk patches Rafael. As long as proper hashing is done before and after a patch, and the original file is backed up, I wouldn’t see a problem since any patching errors would be caught before the system file is replaced. Only con I can see is that if MS releases a Windows Update that overwrites the file then a new patch has to be created. Uxtheme on XP isn’t updated all that often though, I think it was just every SP for the most part. But yeah the big con is that a patch has to created for every individual DLL build… quite tedious, as I’m sure you know. :)

  32. CDan June 28, 2009 at 4:48 pm

    Hey By the way my visual styles worked great(prev comment above) after I stoppd the uxsms service & started it..
    But After the first reboot the visual style stopped working & windows reverted to classic style…
    Whatever it was, I reinstalled uxstyle again but I wasn’t able to get my visual style to work…win 7 build 7201…can you help out?

  33. bernard July 17, 2009 at 5:43 pm

    Is this the Win7 Starter bg image workaround you spoke about before?

  34. psych0t1c August 6, 2009 at 1:27 am

    Yo does this work on server 08 R2?

  35. psych0t1c August 6, 2009 at 2:14 am

    Nevermind.

  36. nivek_hcerg September 13, 2009 at 7:40 am

    Doesn’t work on my windows 7 :(

  37. Pritush September 21, 2009 at 12:38 am

    Now using 3rd party theme is not painfull, thanks for this.

  38. prodibody October 30, 2009 at 10:11 am

    Great job! It just works! Congrats. No more annoying patches. HURRAY!!!!!

  39. JD November 4, 2009 at 4:26 am

    Installed it on 7 6.1.7600 cannot find any trace of it. dunno how to even find where to open the thing