There is a certain thing about skinning. It’s just relaxing. Changing skins, browsing for skins, adding icons, trying out different color schemes in order to find the best match. The skinning community is quite large, ranging from people who change only their WinAmp skin, to people who use different DE’s on Unix-like systems. In fact, you are also skinning when you don’t use a DE; since the command line is in fact a type of ‘skin’ as well.
Introduction
So, the skinning community is large. But there are sub-groups. The sub-group that is probably one of the largest and most active, is the “Aqua” community. The Aqua community tries to resemble Mac OS X’s look as closely as possible, mostly on Windows machines. I am part of that sub-group.
But, why do ‘we’ set Mac OS X’ UI as a goal? Well, to put it simply, I think Apple created the best-looking user interface we know (together with the QNX’ Photon UI). And I am not going to buy a Mac, since I am perfectly happy with my x86 machine. But, Windows, KDE, Gnome, whatever, they simply look hideous compared to what Apple presents its customers. They provide us with, to name a few:
Panther:
Milk:
Smoothstripes:
Now, compare that to Luna or Galaxy. Of course, it is all a matter of taste; but seeing the huge size of the aqua-community (AquaXP.com (11630 members), Aqua-Soft.org (678948 members), osx-e.com, (2696 members)), there must be a certain thing that draws people towards aqua-ish user interfaces. What that ‘thing’ is exactly, I do not know. I caught the bug myself, and all I can say is: once you’re in it, you’re in it. It is kind of hard to stop (okay, once people do get a real Mac, the need for aquafying Windows or Linux kind of disappears).
In this article I will try to explain what it takes to aquafy your Windows XP. Why Windows XP, and not KDE or something else? Don’t ask. I will name certain applications, present alternatives, and explain why I chose one over the other. I will start at the base, the so-called “mod-packs”. Then I will move on to choosing a certain style for Windows, and then on to individual applications. Enjoy!
Mod-packs
A mod-pack is, basically, a bunch of system files. The system files inside the mod-pack replace the ones in your Windows install. This way, the creator of a mod-pack is able to individually add icons, bitmaps, and so on. It can also change the layout of dialog-boxes, change text in windows, re-arrange toolbars, and so on. This way, he can rebuild your interface from the ground up.
The first (as far as I know) mod-pack was created by Iceman. With his mod-pack, you have to individually replace your system files with his. Quite a lot of work, but it is worth it.
The two mod-packs most in use today, are Flyakite’s and Stefanka’s. I recommend you to use Flyakite’s package. This mod-pack features an installer where you can select individual components and, most notably, an uninstall option. It changes all your icons, bitmaps, and more. For screenshots, go here.
Why shouldn’t you use Stefanka’s package? Well, it does not feature an uninstall option, and it is not as thorough as Flyakite’s mod-pack. Therefore, I recommend using Flyakite’s.
Okay, let’s move on to selecting a visual style.
Visual Style
If you chose not to install Flyakite’s package, there is one thing you will have to do before you can use all the visual styles available on the net. You will have to hack ‘uxtheme.dll’, the .dll that prohibits the use of non-Microsoft approved themes. Of course, you could also use StyleXP, but it will cost you. Another option is WindowBlinds, but WindowBlinds uses resources on-top of the resources used by Windows’ own theme engine. Therefore, if you do not want to pay and don’t want to throw away resources (you will need them for other applications later on), then download this .zip.. It automatically patches your uxtheme.dll. After applying this patch, you will have access to all the visual styles on the net.
Now, which visual style is the best? Short answer: I don’t know. Long answer: that is impossible to say, because taste is something very subjective, as we all know. I don’t really have a preference. Well, that is not true. I do have a preference, but it changes. A good place to start when looking for Mac-inspired visual styles is this page on
Next up, the dock.
The Dock
The dock might just be the most defining feature of Mac OS X. I already used dock replacements for Windows even before I dove into aquafying my Windows. The dock is, for me, simply a far easier way of managing my shortcuts and running applications. And, it looks a whole lot better too.
There are three docks available for Windows. ObjectDock, Moby Dock and Y’z Dock.
Y’z Dock has been discontinued, and therefore I advice against using it. Its spin-off Aquadock is considered a rip, and since we do not want to support rippers, do not use it.
The only two real options, therefore, are ObjectDock and Moby Dock. My personal preference is ObjectDock. Why? Well, it uses fewer resources than Moby Dock, and therefore performs better. Its drawback as opposed to Moby Dock is that it has reduced functionality. So, it is kind of up to your own preference (and system specifications) which dock you prefer.
Top Bar
Another defining feature of Mac OS X is the top bar. This bar represents the menu bar of the application that is on top. On an aquafied Windows, it will also hold the start menu. Whether you want this functionality or not, is entirely up to you. Some people might not prefer having their bar on top of the screen. I do prefer this, though, and if you do also, there is really only one viable option: ObjectBar. You will have to pay though, but there really isn’t anything else. Other programs are in development though, but they are not as advanced as ObjectBar (yet!). So, for now, we will have to settle with this.
After buying and installing ObjectBar, you will need a theme to recreate the top bar. The best resource is Crni’s site. This site is a wonderful resource for other applications as well, by the way. Anyway, download one of his skins, and apply it. In the configuration screen of OB, enable the following option: “Hide menus of applications when a replacable section is present.” This will hide all your menu bars, except the ones in Mozilla and Thunderbird.
Well, you have the menu bar now, let’s move on to applications in general.
Applications
Mac OS X comes preinstalled with some very fine applications. I will list a selection of them and then my personal replacement of choice. I will not detail any further on alternatives for these applications.
iTunes
iTunes is a an application that is also available to Windows. Get it here. However, it doesn’t resemble the original application. Use this plugin.
iPhoto
Get this application, and install this skin.
Finder
Finder is a problem child. There are a lot of Finder clones out there, but they, well, don’t function quite well. They are too slow, too buggy or too basic. Development on these clones continues. You will have try out several yourself in order to decide which one to use. I do not use a Finder clone. I have several installed, though.
Safari
Download MyIE2 and use the accompanied Safari skin. Google for a Safari screenshot, and use that as a guide as how to arrange the various buttons.
Mail
Download Thunderbird and then follow this guide.
iChat
Get Trillian Pro and apply this skin.
Shadows
For shadows under your windows, get this application.
System Preferences
Install SystemPreferences. Get it here.
There are a lot more applications and skins out there that you could use in order to aquafy Windows even more. To list them all, would be impossible. A very good place to start, in any case, is osx-e.
I hope this guide helped you, and introduced you into the ‘aqua community’. And, to end this guide, here is a screenshot of my current desktop:
Credits
I wish to thank everyone working on applications and skins in order to give us, mere x86 users, the Mac OS X desktop experience. I cannot name all of you individually, but you know who you are, if you read this.
About the author:
Thom Holwerda is a regular visitor on OSNews.com and has contributed more than once. His first computer experience dates back to 1991 (a 286 entered the household). Over the years he has played around with several computers, but it wasn’t until 2001 that he really started to experiment OS-wise with computers. His favorite operating systems are Windows Server 2003, Mandrake Linux and BeOS. He also has an affinity for the QNX Neutrino RTOS. He is also contributing to the SkyOS project, being responsible for the Dutch translation, and also functioning as an overall moderator on SkyOS’ independent forum, The eXpert Zone.
If you would like to see your thoughts or experiences with technology published, please consider writing an article for OSNews.
Wow this is an intense article. There’s a huge underground windows skinning community using things like Litestep and Blackbox for windows. I used to be into all of this, but then I used X11 and Linux and felt at home without all of the .dll patching and registry editing. If I remember correctly there was even an Enlightenment dr16 port out there floating around for Windows NT 4.0. Man those days when I was 16 and had nothing to do
Great article.
no matter how much your skin looks like os X, it’ll never behave like osX.
There’s plenty of linux osx themes too, and still none would ever claim linux is as usable as a mac.
I’d like to make my pc look like os x if it had a nice simple installer, no hacks and could be easily uninstalled. i dont have time to mess around too much with my system, but i could use a break from the look of windows…
Aquafying Windows: The poor man’s Mac
If you can’t afford a Mac, you can at least pretend to own one
I’d like to make my pc look like os x if it had a nice simple installer, no hacks and could be easily uninstalled. i dont have time to mess around too much with my system, but i could use a break from the look of windows…
Haven’t seen one hack in my article… Everything is easily “uninstallable”.
Is there anyone here who has tried the Baghira theme for KDE3.2 (http://www.kde-look.org/content/show.php?content=8692)? Judging from the screenshots it looks nice, but the resemblance with Mac OS X is probably skin deep (ha. ha.).
Well at least there is something very close to osx’s bar.
it’s called engage. and based on the EFL (enlightenment foundation libraries).
kindest regards,
Moritz Angermann
First, I’m not all for the complete Mac conversion. My desktop is Mac-inspired. If I where to go all the way, you wouldn’t be able to tell the difference. Take a look at these screenshots:
http://elumin8osx.tk/
Now you again.
I am so tempted to “aquafy” my desktop here at work.
Just for the sheer giggle factor of the next time the Systems staff has to come by.
it used to be artists would come up with all these crazy ideas, and turn them in to awesome looking skins, not just for applications, but windows itself, now it seems theres just 200 osx variations, nothing new or unique anymore
Thom,
As a Mac OS X user, I say if you want to use XP, more power to you. For all those ready to insult you for liking Aqua and wanting to make XP look like it,
I suggest you ask them why there are so many OS X users who don’t like the default look and use themes to change it more to their liking. Get a grip people, it’s all about choice.
and we can once again get into the arguement that apple ripped off Xerox’s GUI, and this can go on forever, but why not just comment on the article and not someone ripping off someone else
Well, I’m an OS enthousiast, but I just don’t have the money for a new computer, x86 or PPC. I have a desktop machine and a laptop, and that’s enough for me.
Of course, you could also use StyleXP, but it will cost you. Another option is WindowBlinds, but WindowBlinds uses resources on-top of the resources used by Windows’ own theme engine. Therefore, if you do not want to pay and don’t want to throw away resources…
Yeah, if you don’t turn off the Theme service first…. Turn it off and you’ll be using a LOT less memory. WB4 uses under 1MB of memory on my system, whereas MSStyles uses 25MB 😐
screenshots @ elumin8osx : “DB Error: connect failed”
(Opera, Firefox, ie)
Aquafying Windows is IMO lame. If you don’t want to get a Mac, don’t make Windows look like OSX.
If you want a mac, skip you next PC upgrade and buy a Mac.
I use various OSes and I *never* make one look like another. If you want to make your OS look different, use some unique skin like RhodiumX.
And:
How can a computer experienced person recommend to use Internet Explorer (MyIE)? It’s well kown (at least under OSNews readers) that IE is a buggy pile of sh*t.
This guy also paid 54$ for software just to get a “perfect” clone of OSX…
IE a buggy pile of shit? Well, it might be insecure, but I prefer IE over any other browser, except Konqueror.
Why? Because it loads fast. Faster than any other browser available for Windows.
Now, back on topic please.
Is there any reason to dress a Windows box up like this except for personal preference of the UI and/or eye candy? I mean, are there any productivity benefits to setting up a dock and stuff? What specifically can you do with a dock clone that’s not possible with the regular taskbar?
Well, if you like your desktop better, you’re productivity goes up.
Like I said, I prefer working with a dock instead of a taskbar.
So, to answer your question: yes, productivity goes up if you skin your pc to you liking.
I had to spend some time in KDE’s control centre on my PC to get it to look a bit stylish but it’s still nowhere near my Panther desktop with all the default settings ( I set the dock to magnify and the genie effect on but that’s all).
I’m usually a bit weary about modding an OS too much though as you don’t know what knock on effects it could have.
I feel truly sorry for you. You actually like IE? And it loads fast for you? Well, firefox loads just as fast here, and I still maintain my “6 years – no computer virus infections” record. But, to each his own. I guess…
So, to answer your question: yes, productivity goes up if you skin your pc to you liking.
So you’re saying that if I like my current setup the way it is, I wouldn’t be any more productive with an ‘Aqua-fied’ skin, or a real Mac for that matter? If this is the case, then why all the claims of “you’ll never make a Windows box behave like a Mac!” If I can’t get my work done any faster unless I like the asthetics, what difference does it make? IMHO, the dock looks cooler, but the taskbar seems more practical, esp. with the quicklaunch toolbar turned on.
Well, You might want to try Firefox. The current version is as fast if not faster then IE, more secure, has more features, and has some pretty amazing themes and extensions.
I like skinning certain parts of my XP desktop, but I don’t try to emulate everything about OSX on my XP laptop, because some things about OS X really suck. Case in point, the Dock. I sincerely believe people like the Dock because A) “hey, it’s Apple, therefore I have to love it or I’m not cool” and/or B) It’s flashy. I don’t have to explain why the Dock just blows, it’s been talked about at length by a lot of non-mindwash-zealots such as Bruce Toganizzini. I always find it unbelievable when staunch Mac users proudly display a dock with 35 icons in a row taking space at the bottom of the screen. I keep my Mac’s dock at 8 icons at the most and that’s already stretching the limits or interface usability imho.
The Windows taskbar is definitely a better tool for processes that are running, but it’s no launcher.
Dragthing on OS X is the only launching *and* switching solution approaching perfection, imho. Of course, it doesn’t have fancy scaling effects, but it leaves the Dock in the dust in terms of actual efficiency. There’s something similar to Dragthing on Windows, called Cooltabs, which does a great job but is nowhere near Dragthing.
In conclusion: the Dock needs categories to stop being an ineffective eyesore for people with more than 6 apps and 4 running programs.
Well, I prefer the dock way.
People differ
It’s fine if people want to do this, but this isn’t Aqua. That isn’t me talking as an Apple snob or anything. Frankly, I like RedHat’s Bluecurve. The thing is that what is nice about Aqua isn’t the graphics that you can paste over Windows. It is the Quartz rendering engine and the NeXT object model. Without those (which cannot be duplicated on Windows XP), it’s pointless. Little graphical widgets and the dock aren’t what make Aqua, Aqua and you can’t port it’s feel simply because Windows can’t do those things.
> productivity goes up if you skin your pc to you liking.
And that includes switching to OS X completely. People too often just imply that OS X is a coronation of all interfaces, and confuse their bias for OS X with usability.
Of course, a system can be more usable the more you like it,but then this is just a personal opinion about a system and not a fact.
Yes, I used OS X myself for a while, and I dont think that my several months long excursion into the “best interface known to man” was anything special or more “usable” than Windows or GNOME, to name some other Desktop Systems.
It did have this “I am using something” special factor though, but in my opinion, this comes just from the great expectations one can get when reading all the mac opinions on varios discussion boards, and of course, from the knowing it was more rare, elite and expensive than your usual PC.
So I would say, the reason people create OS X skins is not because of its “self proclaimed ” usability advantage (which in fact does not exist) over other desktop systems, but for the fact that apple is a hip company, and OS X a system not anybody can afford, i.e. the reason people make OS X skins is IMHO the same as the reason why people actually buy macs, and that is feeling hip and special and standing out of the win32 crowd.
I otherwise really cant see a practical reason why somebody would work ahard make a OS X skin for windows, because the OS X looks really isnt all that special. It isnt special, its just unique and different enough to be cool. Its just this coolness factor, at which, admittedly, Apple excells like no other company.
I’ve recently tried this myself.
XP is just about useable as it is, but adding all these hacks and nagware apps just makes it a pain. It may look quite pretty in a single screenshot, but don’t expect to get anything serious done.
@Thom Holwerda, perhaps you should spend less time dinking around with making xp look like os x, and fix your linux web server. db errors etc.
Guy, it ain’t my site I linked to.
I’ll send a mail out to Cyberwoofer and BabyPapiChulo to fix their site.
Am I the only one who does not like Aqua look? Why this sudden rush to make everything MacOS-like?! Yes, I would agree that default Windows XP intereface hurts eyes, but there are many other operating systems to take inspiration from.
>So I would say, the reason people create OS X skins is not because of its “self proclaimed ” usability advantage (which in fact does not exist) over other desktop systems, but for the fact that apple is a hip company, and OS X a system not anybody can afford, i.e. the reason people make OS X skins is IMHO the same as the reason why people actually buy macs, and that is feeling hip and special and standing out of the win32 crowd.
The usability does not exist for you but it does for me so you cannot assert that as a general statement. To me, Windows is damn near unusable. One app crashes and the system comes to a crawl. Poorly programmed app, maybe, but it still causes me a great deal of grief that I do not see with OS X. The UI in XP is clunky, IMO. We all have preferences and you cannot make such generalized statements.
…but there are many other operating systems to take inspiration from.
Agreed. Hence I mentioned Photon.
Photon is amazing. QNX Software Systems have created a UI that in all its simplicity looks so darn good, it makes your eyes wet. It doesn’t have any flashy effects, no shadows, docks, and other stuff. But it I love it.
Then, why don’t I “Photonize” Windows? Why, I have access to the Photon UI on the system it belongs: the Neutrino RTOS.
WindowBlinds uses less resources than uxtheme.dll, not more. WindowBlinds does not use uxtheme.dll.
WindowBlinds skin more than uxtheme.dll (cmd.exe, start menu, etc).
WindowBlinds is hardware accelerated, which means that it is faster.
More info here http://www.stardock.com/products/windowblinds/wb4/
Is osnews getting more and more unfreindly every day, or is it just me? Why must everyone give this guy a hard time about how he chooses to spend his time? Skinning is a perfectly fine hobby (… and profession?) and who are you to say he should be learning to program instead? Great article Thom, I enjoyed it, keep up the good work.
because you are not being constructive with your activities and as everyone knows the most relaxing thing to do is Slacking off.
>Aquafying Windows is IMO lame. If you don’t want to get a Mac, don’t make Windows look like OSX.
What’s lame is thinking you can tell other people what they should do with thier own systems. If someone wants to plaster XP with Aqua themes and skins that’s up to them. Mind your own business.
Thom:
Cool article!
I’ve downloaded and run the program that is supposed to patch the XP theme .dll, and it tells me to reboot, but I do not understand how to use the .msstyle files I’ve downloaded from StyleSuites. Double-clicking on them brings up Display Properties but does not list any of the non-MS themes as possible choices.
great article Thom. I have been Aquafying my desktop for something like two years now. I actually found out about OSNews from one of the members at AquaXP.Com for which I have been a moderator for well over a year. Once I made the move from Windows to Linux, I quit aquafying for some time though I am still very much involved with AquaXP, but recently I began aquafying my Linux desktop again partly thanx to gDesklets and a theme i created. The aqua look for me is not about having the OSX functionality but rather about having a different interface with which to work in.
The usability does not exist for you but it does for me so you cannot assert that as a general statement. To me, Windows is damn near unusable. One app crashes and the system comes to a crawl. Poorly programmed app, maybe, but it still causes me a great deal of grief that I do not see with OS X. The UI in XP is clunky, IMO. We all have preferences and you cannot make such generalized statements.
Of course I can. I am no power gui-user and no gui design theoretic so all generalised statements can be allowed as long as i present them as my personal opinion, and not as a undeniable and single truth. I am no windows apologist, and although the windows gui is not perfect, it isnt even near unusable, and i cant imagine what heavy gui work you have to do with a gui that it makes the windows gui really unusable.
It can be that you just see OS X fit your needs better, and i’m ok with that, but it certainly isnt a golden grail of some “usability”, and that to a such degree that people would desperately try to clone its look to windows with such skins. I admit, Apple is hip as a company, and its undoubtly cooler to have an OS X looking desktop, even if you cant afford one, than to copy, lets say, one of gnome’s thousand different themes to windows, although the results, from a windows users point of view, except for some colorful title bars or scroll bars, or button, lets say, except for the theme, should be the same. Just a differet theme, thats all.
Using some other desktop like OS X may seem a little different at first, but when you get comfortable with it, you can see that it really isnt anything but a skin/theme change, in comparisons to other systems, except for the most important fact, that other desktops dont have the coolness of a company like Apple behind it.
I think, and before you accuse me of generalisations again, its everything just IMHO, that all the reasoning behind a aqua skin for windows is as simple as the reasoning behind using OS X at all (except when you have to use some mac only apps, or have some other reason to work on that platform), and that is the coolness factor, and that is, as i said, an area where apple excells more than any other company.
Mac pride is seriously so lame. Take your mac ish and get out of here. It was a very interesting and fun article to read. To all you haters of thom go get a life.
I have to say that the article lacks a little bit of info; a few months ago I skinned my laptop (XP Pro) -> OS X and people were amazed when they saw my box. I had changed everything, Icons, ObjectDock, WindowsBlind with panther skin, object Dock, logonxp, everything.
But the best thing is not only the fancy look, I kind of got used to work the OS X way (depending upon the Dock and not the “windows taskbar” for example)
I think that it’s not just a matter of visual style (at least for me, ymmv).
Give it a try. And windows blind doesn’t use more resources than Windows theme engine.
Martin.
…but I prefer the default Windows 2000 look to Aqua. It may not be pretty (OK it’s butt ugly), but unlike Aqua it’s never distracting.
Don’t get me wrong, I think the Mac OS X UI is far better than Windows, but I could do without the flashy looks.
Great article Thom, very complete. I knew quite a bit about the subject, and I came off learning some things, so I guess you would call that a success.
Nice desktop too.
“Using some other desktop like OS X may seem a little different at first, but when you get comfortable with it, you can see that it really isnt anything but a skin/theme change, in comparisons to other systems, except for the most important fact, that other desktops dont have the coolness of a company like Apple behind it.”
There’s a hell of a lot more to the Mac’s UI design than just a skin/theme change. If you knew anything about user interface design you wouldn’t make such a stupid statement. I know that you say it’s just your opinion, but that doesn’t make it any less ignorant and wrong.
The first thing to realize is that Apple spent money building the Aqua GUI. They pay programmers, designers, and artists to bring you what you see today. Copying their work, even if within legal bounds, means that they don’t get paid. The screenshot that came with this article goes further. An Apple logo is visible in the menu bar, and various icons look identical to their OS X origins. IOW, there are both trademark and copyright issues with this article.
So why not buy a Mac? The most common complaint is the price. Well, yes, it’s more expensive than that other computer-OS pair, but Aqua doesn’t develop itself. What message are you sending to the innovative one? When you pay for a Windows box and dress it up like this, you’re enjoying the fruits of somebody else’s labor without paying for it.
I’m not trying to argue whether this is legal or not, or should be legal or not. It’s not the point. The point is putting your money where your mouth is. Why use their stuff if you don’t like their price?
Why is every macolite foaming at the mouth about how this theme/skin sucks.
everyone knew it would be perfect, its obvious, why do you insist on pointing that out. just because someone besides Apple created it, doesnt mean it cant be atleast GOOD.
but hey ,if apple created this skin for windows, man it would be like the second coming of jesus.
There’s a hell of a lot more to the Mac’s UI design than just a skin/theme change.
Not as I experienced it, and i think not even for a normal computer user thats comfortable with a windows UI. Of course, I havent nothing against OS X, i I was trying to say was that OS X isnt that “wonder UI” that many people say it is. If youre comfortable with Windows, you can pretty fast get commfortable with OS X, but you dont have to expect a “User interface revelation” when you use it. OS X has one reason people respect it platform wide, and that is the hip elite coolness factor the company apple successfully stands for.
> If you knew anything about user interface design you wouldn’t make such a stupid statement.
I DONT know any advanced stuff about interface design, and I didnt even claimed something like that. But that doesnt forbid me as a advanced windows user to make statements about my experience using OS X several months. There is nothing wrong with OS X, in contrary, it is a nice system, but as i said, not the “hands down, the holy grail, the most advanced end USER interface to a computing machine.” If it is made for end users, then I as a end user can make my opinion about it, and dont have to been a interface designer to use and fully grasp the “magic”.
> I know that you say it’s just your opinion, but that doesn’t make it any less ignorant and wrong.
Its neither wrong nor ignorant. OS X is nice to use system, but from a advanced windows users point of view, who had the pleasure using it several months on a daily basis, its a system you can get quickly comfortable with, and dont feel much difference from “at home”. And the only reason people seem so incredibly in love with os x, the system, kinda seems to be the same reason people fall in love with such aqua-themes for other systems, be it kde or Windows: because its noble and known apple design and apples almost “trademarked” hip looks. The fact that something is from apple, like the design, seems almost as valuable as the UI or the design itself. It is rightly so, because apple does stand out with its unique looks in all its products, but it should not be negated.
Someone needs to aquafy OSnews.. We could be reading news about OS’s in aquaesque ways and everything. That would be cool.
So why not buy a Mac? The most common complaint is the price.
Sometimes it has nothing to do with price. I’ll give it to you straight – I really don’t care for the OSX UI. But if I did, I still wouldn’t buy a Mac. Why? Because I couldn’t use a Mac exclusively and stay employed where I currently am, unless I had Virtual PC fired up all the time, which would completely defeat the purpose. For those that like the OSX interface but are tied to PCs for whatever reason like I am, ‘Aqua-fying’ their interface is the next best thing.
The first thing to realize is that Apple spent money building the Aqua GUI.
Copying their work, even if within legal bounds, means that they don’t get paid.
Well, the people that developed that windows aqua skin didnt “copy” aqua. They made something that resembles the looks of the UI, in the bounds of what windows permits. Apple did spent money on aqua, but as here nobody actually “copied” aqua, theres nothing for apple to lose on this. Aqua maybe does have some own color shemes, and scroll and title bars and whatever, but that should not be (and luckily, it isnt) enough to make this looks worth protecting, and restrict reproducing.
If it is within legal bounds, then the legislator didnt plan to protect it, and it should be ok to use it. Protecting art from counterfeiting can be ok, but protecting a way one arranges his colorscheme is a little bit overreacting.
An Apple logo is visible in the menu bar, and various icons look identical to their OS X origins. IOW, there are both trademark and copyright issues with this article.
Of course, when using the work of the artists directly on another system without their consent, that is a clear problem with the copyright.
So why not buy a Mac? The most common complaint is the price. Well, yes, it’s more expensive than that other computer-OS pair, but Aqua doesn’t develop itself.
The should be no reason to buy a whole new system just to get another theme, not even the ui framework, just some looks a skin maker can resemble on his own. You seem to be reducing Aqua on the looks it has on a screenshot. From this point of view, aqua can stand as a decision of a single man who just gave orders what icons and what color schemes to use. Aqua, if all you can see is there on this screenshot, and so easy to resemble, is not worth protecting more than any other gnome/kde/windows theme. It of course, does look more polished, and fresh than ans of the windws themes, but for this reason only is not more worth protecting.
Why use their stuff if you don’t like their price?
Ok, except for the use of the icons, and other parts real artists worked and got paid exclusively for, and that is clearly a breach of copyright, there isnt anything in this windows skin that is “apple’s stuff”, neither the title bars, nor the dock, nor the privilege to use this pieces together in a particular color sheme, so i dont really see a problem here.
Any Mac users (OSX or “classic”) with Windows themes?
In response to the comments about IE being a good browser for Windows.
Myth #1: IE loads quickly because IE is written in efficient code.
Busted: IE loads quickly because most of the libraries used by IE are loaded into memory by Windows on startup. This is because IE components are used to render a lot of stuff on the Windows desktop, more than you think. In addition, Microsoft wants those libraries to be there so IE can be easily integrated into whatever apps need it.
Firefox, on my admittedly modern 2.6Ghz system, loads just a tad more slowly than IE. But Firefox would load a lot faster if firefoxd were installed–that is, a daemon that keeps the firefox libraries in memory at all time, and loads them on startup. This is the only way one could fairly benchmark Firefox’s code versus IEs.
Myth #2: Forget startup times, IE loads pages faster than Firefox/Mozilla.
Busted: It’s been proven a million times by various sites that Gecko is a much faster rendering engine than IE, especially in stressful pages (lots of nested tables, nested divs, etc.)
Myth #3: IE supports more sites than any other browser.
Busted: More sites support IE than any other browser. That’s different. In terms of real standards (I’m talkin W3C), Gecko and KHTML are much more compliant than IE. In terms of de facto standards, IE is more compliant–but hey, IE _invented_ those standards, so they well should be!
The more people to switch browser (to Firefox, Opera, or whatever else), the less people to be plagued by ActiveX control-initiated spyware & malware, non-W3C compliant sites, and explorer-web browser integration.
It’s cute. I’ll never get to try it, cause, I’ll never by WinTel.
win 2k default interface looks great to me.
it’s not even ugly, it’s boring.
but it flies! OS X on my brand new 1000mhz ibook lags.
lag. lag. lag.
i’m going to put crux linux on it and fluxbox.
a fan of win xp, win 2k, slackware, crux linux, freebsd and os-x.
To call the KDE GUI hideous, is rather funny to say the least, honestly I think the Mac GUI is a rip off of everything on the market…..
What Thom did looks pretty good, much better than the default look of Windows. I remember when I got my first Mac about a year ago. I had been using Windows, Linux and *BSD but I read great things about OSX and wanted to try it. The first time I got to look at the OSX desktop in person I was shocked. I could not believe how much better it looked than Windows. The icons in the dock and finder look so much better than the icons in Windows.
There’s a hell of a lot more to the Mac’s UI design than just a skin/theme change. If you knew anything about user interface design you wouldn’t make such a stupid statement. I know that you say it’s just your opinion, but that doesn’t make it any less ignorant and wrong.
I’d say the same to you. Its YOUR opinion so don’t try and tell us that anything you say is anything but ignorant and wrong. Its just an opinion right ?
Oh and don’t claim that you *know* UI design. UI designers got better things to do than flame on forums like this.
I thought the article was interesting, and I’m a Mac user. I have to use my brother’s PC sometimes, and I keep trying to get him interested in skinning his XP so I’ll like it better, but he doesn’t want more stuff running in the background (he’s usually working the pro audio apps and other CPU-heavy tasks).
Why must either side be acting all antagonistic here? The Mac people are whining about XP users wanting to make their interface look like a Mac (what’s wrong with that?!?!), and the XP users are whining about how uppity Mac users are about their UI. (My opinion? The usability of OS X *is* far superior to XP, and it has nothing to do with looks. But that’s just my opinion.)
Here’s a thought: let the XP users skin their desktops to look like OS X all they want. Maybe a few will end up buying a Mac to get the real thing. Nobody loses here — in fact, it’s a win-win situation. Free marketing for Apple if you look at it that way.
So can we all calm down now?
Jared
Yes, there are several ports of windows themes to OSX. Classix 10k, Ashen, Watercolor, ChosenOS, FatalE, and MacOSXP. But you don’t see any windows users complain about them.
I’ve been asking myself the following questions:
1) Does this increase productivity?
2) How many times in a year does the user see the about dialog of a program and why is the about dialog with copyrighted, proprietary artwork shown in this screenshot?
I cannot answer question 1, i’d have to try MacOSX extensively out and Windows XP this bunch of hacks (or the other way around). Or rather, a research done by multiple people. However i do know there are various features which (possibly) increase productivity: a CPU/RAM/Load/Netwerk/HDD-I/O meter are all statistics which give information regarding the health of the computer in one eye view. If you’re for example rendering something, this gives interesting information. Such statistics have been included in LCD displays on servers, or even on professional desktops like gr_osview on IRIX. OTOH, i delete clocks when i’m allowed to do so because they distract me. YMMV. A taskbar which groups is one which i don’t like, but one which sorts based on the alphabet (eg. GNOME) is one in which i at least can find easier my applications back when it comes ‘messy’. Not necessarily because i think: “the application starts with an X so it’s on the right side” but rather because “it’s always somewhere on the right side in the taskbar”. YMMV. Point is, that such additions are much, much more interesting than eye candy IMO even though i find truelly inventing developments like the Enlightenment WM/DE moderately interesting.
Part 1 of question 2 is fairly simple to answer: it’s done over the top. No sane user really cares about an about dialog nor what it says except for only 1 or 2 times. Why this unimportant, unauthorized detail is included in this screenshot really goes beyond me.
Maybe someone who’s gonna use this will actually like it very much. So much, that he/she is gonna buy a Mac. Or like Avalon, E17 / FD.O, Expocity, or whatever is there or gonna come. In any case, one who uses this misses various features of MacOSX. Expose, for example. If you really wanna find out if you like the MacOSX DE, OS, etc i suggust to try & use it instead, preferably for a while. As the saying goes: “never judge a book by its cover.”
good work, i was really amazed how far you can get skinning windows xp. i guess i have to do that at work sometime in the future
flo
making you windows desktop look like an apple desktop is not so special. as if it is only possible with windows xp. using 3rd party software anyway.
but has anyone tried to make his windows desktop look and feel like CDE or OS/2 WPS or BEOS or <fill it in yourself>?
skinning is not done for usability, but for the sheer excitement of twitching knobs, tweaking your colors and fondle with settings.
I have Win2k SP4 using the High Contrast White theme. Clarity + simplicity = 10/10.
Mmm, those “Buy a mac” comments are really annoying you know… It’s not like I have 1000+ Euros lyin’ round here for another computer, PPC or x86. And since I have a life, I prefer to spend my money on something else. As I already said, I have a desktop machine and a laptop. Besides that we have two other computers in this house. Buying yet another one would be kinda over the top.
This does not mean I don’t want a Mac. Quite the contrary, actually. But, as with everything in life, you gotta set priorities. And I’m not going to sell nor my desktop, nor my laptop. Especially my Desktop, I have put a great deal of time and effort into that machine, spent over 3500 guilders (~1700 Euros) and I’m not willing to sell that for a mere 200 Euros (the general price paid for my system specs on auction sites).
Call me cheap, poor, whatever, I don’t care. I have recently acquired a lot of stuff that has nothing do to with computers, but that stuff is way more valuable to me. I am thinking of setting aside money for a Mac though, but I’ll only donate money to that fund that I can really miss.
Besides, I have this really annoying hobby called music. I could buy a dozen or more Macs if I would sell all my CDs and LPs (really).
This reminds me of people who buy a ford escort and then spend alot of money putting on giant spoliers and noise making tailpipes and ground effects kits etc.. They think thier car looks cooler, really it just looks like a cheap knockoff. Why not save that money and buy a nice looking car?
Simply copy the dir that has the .msstyles into c:/windows/resources (e.g. c:/windows/resources/osx/osx.msstyles) and then choose the theme on the dysplay settings.
>> Simply copy the dir that has the .msstyles into c:/windows/resources (e.g. c:/windows/resources/osx/osx.msstyles) and then choose the theme on the dysplay settings.
I did that, but it doesn’t show up in the display settings.
As a Mac OS X user, I say if you want to use XP, more power to you. For all those ready to insult you for liking Aqua and wanting to make XP look like it,
I suggest you ask them why there are so many OS X users who don’t like the default look and use themes to change it more to their liking. Get a grip people, it’s all about choice.
That is true, I’m using ShapeShifter and the Rhapsodized skin. The Aqua-look is too flashy for me. But looks is nothing compared to feel.
Wow this is an intense article. There’s a huge underground windows skinning community using things like Litestep and Blackbox for windows. I used to be into all of this, but then I used X11 and Linux and felt at home without all of the .dll patching and registry editing. If I remember correctly there was even an Enlightenment dr16 port out there floating around for Windows NT 4.0. Man those days when I was 16 and had nothing to do
Hehe, very true! I used to make my own skins for Litestep, WinAmp and all those other applications in the late 90’s. Now I just don’t have any time and the computer is more of a fun piece of tool to get the job done. So I bought a PowerBook. I was/am a UNIX user that used to use the terminal for everything, even browsing my files. Just old habit. Now I just use the Finder. I’m almost embarrased of myself for not using the power of the terminal as much as I did in my years with FreeBSD. Maybe it’s because the usability on OS X has a little bit extra juice. I don’t know. All I know is that my Mac is good for my business. I can use native Adobe products along with powerfull UNIX programming tools, as well as recieving Oooh’s and Aaah’s at customer meetings.
(new Mac user last year. using OS X as desktop and FreeBSD on x86 as servers)
Gusto
In my case the reason to skin my Windows BeOS-like was simple: I like BeOS, however I can’t find software I need for my work for this OS. So I’ve tried to make Windows more pleasant to look at.
Nice artikel – themes are fun to play around with.
Does anybody have a PC (Wintel) screensaver that works similar to that nice Mac one where the screen slowly and very smoothly pans around a mucha larger picture ?
It turns out that my theme file was not being patched. For those of you who find the MultiPatcher file ineffective, you should try running it in safe mode.
“I did that, but it doesn’t show up in the display settings.”
Remember, you need to select the theme on the display properties -> Appearance tab and not the themes tab (god knows why)
If that doesn’t work then it probably didn’t patch the file, try using this:
http://www.dev3l0per.devisland.net/sites/en/projects/uxthemexp/uxth…
and then try testing using this theme (which is not osx related), it has an installer which makes things easier:
http://www.themexp.org/preview.php?mid=53&type=vs&view=&page=&cat=&…
in any case, remember that you need a separate dir for each .msstyles file.
<italic> This reminds me of people who buy a ford escort and then spend alot of money putting on giant spoliers and noise making tailpipes and ground effects kits etc.. They think thier car looks cooler, really it just looks like a cheap knockoff. Why not save that money and buy a nice looking car?</italic>
It’s nothing like the same. Because an escort is in almost all it’s properties inferior to say a Ferrari. Hardware wise there’s barely any difference between a Mac & a PC as they share mostly common components & conversely, like it or not, the components they don’t share are reportedly better in the cheap knockoff.
The reason I386 owners immitate Mac is it’s <italic>style</italic> it has nothing to do with wanting one.
“I’d say the same to you. Its YOUR opinion so don’t try and tell us that anything you say is anything but ignorant and wrong. Its just an opinion right ?”
If the difference between Mac OS and Windows is just skin deep, why hasn’t anyone come up with a OS X theme for Windows that replicates more than a small fraction of the functionality of Mac OS X?
“Oh and don’t claim that you *know* UI design. UI designers got better things to do than flame on forums like this.”
Did I say I’m a UI design pro? But I do know enough to see how totally clueless you and drynwhyl are. Read any basic book on UI design and maybe you’ll understand that there’s a lot more to it than just the look of the GUI.
>> This reminds me of people who buy a ford escort and then spend alot of money putting on giant spoliers and noise making tailpipes and ground effects kits etc.. They think thier car looks cooler, really it just looks like a cheap knockoff. Why not save that money and buy a nice looking car?
I thought that was bad until I moved to Georgia. People here like to buy old, boaty cars with heavily weathered paint jobs and ruined interiors (which I have no problem with), but then they go and bolt on unbelievably gaudy chrome-and-neon wheels with racing tires that look like they have 1 cm thick rubber. The word “tacky” is far too mild to describe it…
@Gusto
I too use Shapeshifter and Rhapsodized is my second favorite theme next to pro lcd blue.
@other people
I see no problem with people theming xp to look like osx. I used to do it a little and now I have a mac. It does cause a few people to convert to macs. However I have never found a dock program for windows to be all that good. Windows programs are just not designed for docks and do not scale as well to them. For an example of good dock usage look at adium ( http://www.adiumx.com ).
I use an aqua theme on my work computer to make it feel more at home (and because I don’t like the windows look).
This reminds me of people who buy a ford escort and then spend alot of money putting on giant spoliers and noise making tailpipes and ground effects kits etc.. They think thier car looks cooler, really it just looks like a cheap knockoff. Why not save that money and buy a nice looking car?
Well it’s a hobby for them. I think some of the rice burners are tacky too, but the kids enjoy it. I think the hopped up pc cases are tacky also. Give me a nice Lian Li 18 bay full case. I prefer litestep or cygwin KDE to OSX / windows hybrid, but to each his own.
To Thom: another nice article. I esp liked the other pearpc one. keep up the good work.
I was trying very hard to avoid the common “buy a Mac” response, because that isn’t the point. I don’t have a problem with it.
I’m not trying to tell you (no single person in particular) that you have no right to use Apple’s colors and UI design, except for the parts that violate copyright and trademark laws. I’m not saying you have no right to prioritize your life and spending in a way you decide is right.
What I am saying is that these spending choices have an effect. As much as you like the way OS X looks (and it’s plainly evident from the extent to which you wish to replicate it), you are not compensating the innovators. I’m not even saying they have a right to be compensated for putting pixels together. I’m just pointing out that you’re not paying for it. And because they do this for a living, if enough people don’t they won’t survive. You don’t have to offer excuses if you don’t want to do it, but your choices will discourage innovation.
Imitation is the sincerest form of flattery. But we don’t live on flattery alone. If innovation won’t make money, then there won’t be innovators.
First of al: Konfabulator -Dasboard. But that’s lame, I know.
Secondly: The themes I use are inspired by the Mac-look. All the themes I use are ported to .msstyle with permission from the orignal authors who wrote them for the Mac.
As for the programs: ObjectDock has legally been created by a fully legal company (Stardock), and they have recieved no threat or whatsoever from Apple. Therefore, I see no problems in using it.
Objectbar has nothing to do with Aquafying in the first place. I only use a theme (in case of the screenshot: Smoot Stripes Gloss). Again, permission to port it have been given.
Therefore, what’s your point? If the people who wrote it for the Mac are aware and approve of the ports, what’s the deal? Explain…?
“It’s not like I have 1000+ Euros lyin’ round here for another computer, PPC or x86. And since I have a life, I prefer to spend my money on something else.”
Good points, Thom. In this day and age where there’s a glut of computers on the market, it doesn’t make sense to spend big bucks on a pc unless you’re a uber geek or you’re forced to. Me personally, I’d rather save on the computer and spend those extra hundreds on travelling. More people really need to get away from the machines, and go and see if not the world, at the rest of the state/province/island whatever….
Based on your final screenshot, I can see that the following icons are exact or near exact copies: System Preferences, trash can, Safari, Mail.app (including the delete, reply, forward, and junk buttons), iTunes, Finder, most of the System Preferences buttons, including the OS 9 Classic button. These are probably copyright violations, unless you received explicit permission from Apple.
At the top left corner, right in your toolbar, there’s a logo of Apple Computer Inc. The Finder window uses the word “Macintosh”. These are probably trademark violations, unless you received explicit permission from Apple.
But putting all that aside, the “deal” is that not supporting the innovator with money means that nobody will innovate for money. The open source community has made undeniably great strides and contributions, but UI design is commonly acknowledged as a weakness. This means that, in the meantime, we still need innovators who do it for the money.
I’m not saying you’ve done anything illegal or immoral. I explicitly wrote that, without breaking copyright and trademark laws of course, “you have [the] right to prioritize your life and spending in a way you decide is right.” What I am pointing out is that you’re not paying the innovator, and that choice has an impact. What I’m saying is that if you bought a Mac, you’d have supported the people who actually drew those icons and did the UI research and wrote the original code. You’d have encouraged innovation in this area, which is important enough to you to spend time skinning.
I CANNOT more strongly recommend that users stay away from
Flyakite’s mod-pac. It repaces system protected DLL’s and
rendered my machine unusable until re-installed XP
(actually I used GHOST to re colone the disk – thank goodness for a recent disk image)
Use at your own risk!
There appear to be several main arguments permeating this discussion. I think they are:
1) Compensation for the developers – You like it, shouldn’t you contribute, and help them develop more?
2) I can’t afford a Mac
3) Waste of time – You’re an idiot.
The problem is that were we to simply discuss the article itself, we would all agree that it is fairly simple, yet provides an above-adequate beginning to skinning WindowsXP to mimic the Aqua interface. Our controversies lie with the premises behind the article, not the substance of the writing.
To these premises I should say:
– The computer you have is yours. Should you want to make it look a certain way, by all means, go ahead.
– If there are enough nice things about a certain machine/os that you really, really like, it will probably be beneficial for you to simply buy the system/os. (this is not Apple-specific, but applies to any OS and any System)
– The above note is not always possible. In some cases, it may be deemed even entirely unnecessary. Perhaps you just like clicking on an Apple rather than on the word “Start.” In some cases, mirroring another’s work may be a high form of flattery.
– It is neither my place, nor anyone else’s to say what you do and do not prefer.
– If you can afford to compensate someone for their work, *I THINK* that you should.
– User Interface is 50% personal preference, 50% technical. (my percentages may be off, according to some, but the point is what matters) A good UI will follow basic, well-established design rules, yet despite a strict adherence to such guidelines, will not appeal to everyone. Therein lies the beauty of customization.
– Apple systems do carry price tags which are higher than comparable Wintel machines. This isn’t argument, it is a very sad fact. I myself greatly wish Apple would lower it’s prices. (I’m not stating I think the prices to be unfair, but I can buy a new, blazing fast Dell for $599 and a comparable Apple would run me several hundred dollars more [depending on model], which is disheartening).
– If you want an Apple system, and can afford one, you *should* consider buying it. If you don’t, do what you will.
– Trademark/Copyright violations are a possible issue of dispute. I’m uncertain what licensing is associated with each “duplicated” icon/name/etc. Some may be public domain. Some may be free use as long as you aren’t making a profit from it (kinduv how it isn’t illegal for me to type the words “Microsoft Windows” and place it as my desktop background). If you are unsure of something, ask. Also attribute each issue to your own morality and judgement, if it is not currently a legal matter. I myself will await any action that may or may not come from the Apple Legal department.
– Computer productivity is in direct correlation with the UI and the operator’s familiarity with the UI, as well as the operator’s neccesity from the OS. This really isn’t disputable. If you are highly familiar with a given UI, and the UI is built well, and specifically for the purposes for which you are using the system, you will be more productive than if you were using an unfamiliar system. At first, anyway
– I personally want an Apple, and as soon as I can afford it, plan on purchasing either a G5 tower or a Powerbook. The Tiger OS looks quite appealing. I will also purchase Longhorn. I like to use systems as tools to accomplish jobs. I also like to use the right for the right job. This sometimes varies in the computer world.
I also love the general “aqua” interface. I dislike the dock, and do not like the positioning of the Apple menu. I also dislike the fact that some apps are brushed metal while others are not. I love Sherlock. I love the column-view Finder. Again, though, all personal preference.
My current XP system uses StyleXP with the basic “panther” install. I don’t use iTunes, unless I need to buy a song. I use Winamp, with the iPlay skin (as well as others).
To cap: It is up to you. It’s all about choice. I recommend choosing to compensate developers when possible, and choosing what works best for you. For many, this article will point users in a direction that may enable them to be more productive with their Windows system than previously. I say go for it. But then…that’s my choice
-John
aside: I use IE simply because of load times. As soon as Firefox loads as a daemon service in the background much like IE is so built-in, I will switch. I love tabbed browsing. Moreover, I’m just more comfortable with IE. I know the MANY benefits of Firefox, and indeed have it on my system. I just prefer IE. That’s just my choice. I will vouch for any who say MyIE sux, however. My personal experiences have been nothing but negative with MyIE. Some may find it wonderful- I found it buggy, resource-hungry, and bloated. *I* cannot recommend it to anyone, but then…that’s just my opinion, eh?
pps. – I enjoyed the article!
WindowBlinds doesn’t sit on top of the theming engine. The skinning in XP is just a bundled lite skinning add-on. WindowBlinds works instead of using the lite version.
And WindowBlinds is hardware accelerated.
Using Enlightenment years ago in Mandrake 6 and I was amazed by the variation of skins that this UI had,one themw was called BeOS,and somewhere in in this theme(maybe in the wallpaper)were these magic words http://www.be.com ,needless to say I surfed on over there to check out this OS I never heard of before.This was about the time they released Personal Edition so I proceeded to Download It and try it out.This led me to forget about Linux for a few years,because BeOS was just what I was looking for in an alt-OS,fast,easy to use and streamlined,with plenty of easy to install apps(even tho many were alpha and beta quality)
The point of all this spiel is if it weren’t for skins I probably would have never heard of this great OS,so here’s to the skinning community,even tho the desktop OS market seems to be getting narrower all the time,with Be Inc.going down and QNX not really trying to be a desktop contender anymore,and with the possible exception of SkyOS and Syllable,the rest are light years away from being anything usable.
I’m running Windows on my company laptop, and now that he looks like a mac, I can open my laptop without being ashamed
(me being a Linux’er)
Rob,
you probaby were a bit too fast (like me yesterday evening): if you’re NOT on Windows XP Service Pack 1 (I am on SP2 RC2) then a lot of your XP system files are more up-to-date than the ones covered by the automatic install of Flyakite’s mod-pac!
This will let Windows crash on reboot.
No need to completely reinstall Windows XP: just boot from the installation CD and select “Recovery Console” – then enter BATCH SystemRestore.txt command. Done! When rebooting Windows XP is back…
If you are on another version than Service Pack 1 you will need to extract BATCHMOD.zip and execute the script files as described in the README doc.
After this and a reboot everything is fine…
I also installed the DockBar and I must say I’m quite impressed with all the resource work being done by these guys…
I’m confused. Why are people taking the absolute worst aspects of MacOS X (the glassy icons, transparent everything, the garish colours, the vast white windows, the inconsistant UI, the thrice-damned dock) and porting them to Windows?
I mean, it’s your computer, do what you will with it, but…