Comments on: UxStyle Core Beta bits now available

By: Modificare finestre Windows 7 | Cirillina - Programmi gratis, Blog, Tecnologia, Web 2.0

Tue, 09 Feb 2010 10:27:20 +0000

[...] di particolare perché esiste già un tema che offre la trasparenza. Per prima cosa installate Uxstyle Core e in seguito scaricate il tema Full Grass e impostatelo, ed ecco che le vostre finestre come per [...]

By: Creare delle finestre trasparenti in Windows 7, ecco come fare. | Segreti e consigli dal WEB 2.0

Sat, 06 Feb 2010 19:12:09 +0000

[...] prima cosa bisogna installare Uxstyle Core. Poi, dobbiamo scaricare il nostro tema e lo facciamo da questo [...]

By: Come far diventare trasparenti le finestre su Windows 7 | Computer Trucchi

Come far diventare trasparenti le finestre su Windows 7 | Computer Trucchi — Sat, 06 Feb 2010 13:34:32 +0000

[...] procedimento da seguire è davvero molto semplice. Prima di tutto bisogna istallare Uxstyle Core, dopo aver seguito la procedura guidata, non vi resta altro che scaricare il tema cliccando qui. [...]

By: Finestre trasparenti Su Windows 7: Ecco Come Fare - Tgeek - Il telegiornale dei geekers

Sat, 06 Feb 2010 01:02:19 +0000

[...] di tutto bisogna installare Uxstyle Core. Dopo aver fatto questo passo, cosa assolutamente facile, dobbiamo scaricare il nostro tema e [...]

By: Jeremy

Jeremy — Tue, 26 Jan 2010 03:33:50 +0000

so i dowenloaded a theme through torrent then i installed the uxstyle core but now i have no idea what to do next? to be sepcific it was the dark and spooky theme i am running win7 x64

By: JD

JD — Wed, 04 Nov 2009 09:26:12 +0000

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

By: prodibody

prodibody — Fri, 30 Oct 2009 15:11:55 +0000

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

By: Pritush

Pritush — Mon, 21 Sep 2009 05:38:29 +0000

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

By: nivek_hcerg

nivek_hcerg — Sun, 13 Sep 2009 12:40:52 +0000

Doesn’t work on my windows 7 :(

By: psych0t1c

psych0t1c — Thu, 06 Aug 2009 07:14:15 +0000

Nevermind.

By: psych0t1c

psych0t1c — Thu, 06 Aug 2009 06:27:39 +0000

Yo does this work on server 08 R2?

By: UxStyle Makes Skinning Windows Easy And Painless

UxStyle Makes Skinning Windows Easy And Painless — Thu, 23 Jul 2009 12:52:02 +0000

[...] UxStyle (217 KB) UxStyle Release Information Version reviewed : Ux Style Core – June 19th Release Platforms Supported : Windows XP, Vista [...]

By: bernard

bernard — Fri, 17 Jul 2009 22:43:40 +0000

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

By: CDan

CDan — Sun, 28 Jun 2009 21:48:53 +0000

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?

By: Dan

Dan — Sat, 27 Jun 2009 22:27:16 +0000

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. :)

By: CDan

CDan — Fri, 26 Jun 2009 20:42:27 +0000

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….

By: Jeff Schader

Jeff Schader — Fri, 26 Jun 2009 02:17:28 +0000

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.

By: Jeff Schader

Jeff Schader — Fri, 26 Jun 2009 02:13:41 +0000

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…” :-)

By: pizzaboy192

pizzaboy192 — Fri, 26 Jun 2009 02:07:26 +0000

@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)

By: Rafael

Rafael — Fri, 26 Jun 2009 02:01:53 +0000

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

By: Jeff Schader

Jeff Schader — Fri, 26 Jun 2009 01:59:05 +0000

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.

By: pizzaboy192

pizzaboy192 — Fri, 26 Jun 2009 01:51:07 +0000

@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.

By: Jeff Schader

Jeff Schader — Fri, 26 Jun 2009 01:49:55 +0000

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.

By: Jeff Schader

Jeff Schader — Fri, 26 Jun 2009 01:47:32 +0000

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?

By: pizzaboy192

pizzaboy192 — Fri, 26 Jun 2009 01:44:06 +0000

@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.