I used to really like skinning my desktops to make them look like another operating system. I stopped doing that years ago; and not necessarily because I wanted to do something more useful with my time. I stopped doing it because I somehow saw how utterly pointless it was. Why? I’ll explain– using Aston Martins and Jaguars. Yes, it’s time for another car analogy, boys and girls. Note: This is this week’s Sunday Eve Column.
First, let us try to isolate why one would put considerable amounts of time in making the stuff that appears on one’s screen resemble something that’s not running off of one’s hard drives. I think one of the reasons is to gain some bragging rights; “look, I’m l33t, I made Windows look exactly like CDE. Worship me.” Ok, that’s probably overdone, but you get my point. I think the biggest reason, however, is because you simply like the looks better. This might seem like kicking in open doors, but it is important for that car analogy I mentioned.
But let’s start the analogy. You see, lately, there’s been a considerable amount of buzz surrounding Jaguar’s new sportscar, the new Jaguar XK. Reviews and tests have been almost unanimously positive; yet one ‘complaint’ often rears its head: doesn’t this car look just a little too much like the already legendary Aston Martin DB9?
How did that happen? How is it possible that two of the most legendary car brands in human history produce two cars that look so similar? Well– I think it’s because Jaguar wanted to.
You see, Jaguar hasn’t exactly seen record-breaking sales as of late. Even though the new XK isn’t supposed to be Jaguar’s saviour (the successor to the S-type, planned for 2007, will take that role), it is supposed to show that Jaguar can still design and build stunning automobiles (remember, the legendary Jaguar E-type is regarded by many as the most beautiful car ever built). And, during the planning stages of this car, Aston Martin unleashed the DB9. It was an instant hit. Everyone was simply stunned by the DB9’s lines, its hips, its rear, its engine, interior (with crystal ashtray and crystal ‘start engine’ button), its existence in general.
We Dutch have a saying. It’s better to steal something good, than to create something bad. This is what Jaguar must’ve thought as well. So, they hired the same lead designer responsible for the DB9. Hence, a car was born that in itself is just stunning, but will always be compared to the DB9.
And that’s a problem for Jaguar. You can hire the same lead designer. You can make a stunning interior. You can even price the car 20000 Euros cheaper than the cheapest Aston. But all that means jack. It will never be an Aston. It will never have the same exclusivity. The inherent ‘Bond-ness’ that comes with every Aston. And most importantly– it will never make people like and appreciate you as much as when you own an Aston. Where an Aston breathes British ‘gentlemanship’, exclusivity, and general sense of taste, the XK will always be tainted by the fact that you can get a Jag for 40000 Euros (even in Estate form, for crying out loud)– whereas the ‘cheapest’ Aston is 120000 Euros.
In other words– everyone can own a Jag. Few can own an Aston.
And the same goes for operating systems. You can skin the pajeezers out of it, you can apply a thousand icon sets, you can create dozens of colour schemes, you can apply hundreds of modpacks. But it will never be the operating system you’re trying to copy. You will never lose the weak points, and you will never gain the strong points, by giving your operating system a new dress.
And that is why I saw how futile all that work was. Just get the real thing.
–Thom Holwerda
Poverty beliefs aka “It’s just as good”, “I will never be able to afford it”, “I’m just a college student”, “my parents are poor”, etc…
Some people never grow out of these mental limits. They never think of something simple like putting aside money each month to get something. It’s always now or never. When I bought my first iBook, I decided to put some money aside each week, just a little sum, going to my goal.
Assuming, of course, the college students have some money to spare. Or the parents can indeed afford the rent/mortgage payments. Assumptions like this are, well, offensive.
The assumption that we can all put aside “just a bit each week” as you can doesn’t take into account those from below middle class families with partial scholarships and no other assistance whatsoever. So yes, I agree that MOST college students have self-control issues and could put aside a few dollars a week for a while.
Keep in mind, however, that some of us have outstanding tuition balances, student accounts employees breathing down our necks, and are on a first name basis with the financial aide department.
That being said, my four year plus old Athlon 2000+, Radeon 9000 Pro, and 512mb RAM handles everything I throw at it just fine. Here’s hoping nothing happens to it in the next, oh, two years
@ThawkTH
Assuming, of course, the college students have some money to spare. Or the parents can indeed afford the rent/mortgage payments. Assumptions like this are, well, offensive
Only people stuck Poverty Beliefs will find this “offensive”. Why? Because it’s reality. And sometimes reality hurts.
Keep in mind, however, that some of us have outstanding tuition balances, student accounts employees breathing down our necks, and are on a first name basis with the financial aide department.
Yes. But why do others with average salary can buy themselves a fuel guzzler like an SUV? Again a matter of beliefs.
What in God’s name is a poverty belief? And am I not supposed to find your assumption that people can actually afford things like new laptops (particularly blue collar families with students in college) offensive? Oh, you can afford it. Anyone can! Stop believing you can’t and you will!
“Yes. But why do others with average salary can buy themselves a fuel guzzler like an SUV? Again a matter of beliefs.”
If you actually were to find the average salary in, well, the US…It’s probably a lot lower than you think.
Real Median Household Income: $42,228 (2000 US Census).
That’s right my friend. Don’t go claiming any kind of high ground when it comes to poverty
Do you understand that the average family, in fact, cannot even pray to afford an SUV? Get your facts straight before you shove your elitist drivel down other people’s throats to make yourself more comfortable.
Really? Dayam. I make less than that, and I consider myself well-off.
Not brand-new MacBook Pro well-off, but comfortably well-off.
Keep in mind it’s the mean income. Some other stats:
Family Household Income: $52,275
Nonfamily Household Income: $25,631
Year 2000-2001 US Census Data
Edited 2006-02-26 21:04
Ah, well, I do make more than that then. At least, assuming a 1:1 conversion to Canadian dollars
“Really? Dayam. I make less than that, and I consider myself well-off.”
It might help to consider the differences in the cost of living, some people would rather put a roof over their heads and have at least one meal a day instead of having a shiny laptop.
That said I’d like all of the above, but then I’m not spending everything or more than I make just trying to survive, some people do. Wage isn’t the whole equation, even with what I currently make if I were to set aside what I have spare at my current income it would take me 11 years and 9 months just to afford a mac mini, of course I expect my income to increase after graduation when I can get a higher paying job but I still don’t expect to have the mac mini I want within the next year.
@ThawkTH
What in God’s name is a poverty belief? And am I not supposed to find your assumption that people can actually afford things like new laptops (particularly blue collar families with students in college) offensive? Oh, you can afford it. Anyone can! Stop believing you can’t and you will!
A poverty belief is a problematic belief concerning money. Concentrate on being poor settling for less and people will always have less in life.
If the situation, a person is in, can’t get what they want in life then they need to deal with that first.
Why do you assume that blue collar people are all supposed to be poor? A lot of them have their own house and have one or more kid in college. If one can do it then why can’t the other do it also?
Do you understand that the average family, in fact, cannot even pray to afford an SUV? Get your facts straight before you shove your elitist drivel down other people’s throats to make yourself more comfortable.
So you’re saying my old man and a bucket load of other fathers are just a bunch of elitists?
Ok people, calm down, take some fresh air. Please get back on topic or I’ll have to break my rule of not moderating on my own stories. You’re going way too off-topic.
Got it, boys and girls?
But why do others with average salary can buy themselves a fuel guzzler like an SUV? Again a matter of beliefs.
Four letters:
D-E-B-T.
That’s the lone reason why you see so many new cars around; people go into debt to fund their lifestyle. North Americans are absolutely inept at saving money and buying things with real, tangible dollars – everything is financed or leased or mortgaged or “don’t pay for 90 days”.
Now, I do agree with your point – but you have to acknowledge that some people simply can’t save. For some people, it is impossible. Single mothers, people working from paycheque to paycheque, indebted students – while they would be well-advised to scrimp and scrive some semblance of savings, in many cases there is simply no room in their budget for that. And they may never have the earning power to consider things like retirement investments, new vehicles or computers. They are called the “working poor”.
I find your statement offensive, it is not just beliefs that keep people from not being able to afford $40,000 cars, it’s debt, commitments, cost of living, number of children, the economy, you name it. Alot of people do not drive SUVs either, please keep your preconceptions to yourself
I am a college student and I do not have money to put aside each week. I’ve been saving my extra money since new year and I have a grand total of $10, I have been tempted, oh how I’ve been tempted to waist this money on pop, but I have my eye on a mac mini… There are some things that are out of reach you dolt.
Another dutch proverb applies too:
“Al draagt de aap een gouden ring, het is en blijft een lelijk ding”
Which translates (kind of) to : “Even if a monkey wears a golden ring, it is and remains an ugly thing”
That one goes out to everyone skinning Windows to look like OSX 😉
“just because ou stick feathers in your but doesnt make you a chiken”
–Tyler durden
Everybody is missing a major point here. People want to customize and control how their interfaces look, even intermix different OS styles. Imagine just for a minute people are not just imitating Apple/Gnome/E17 (litestep does this a lot) but are controlling how their desktop looks and feels. This is why we have themes and why there are theme artists.
If there exists a country wherin “everyone” can afford a 40000 euro car, please, I’d like to move there…
America, Most of Europe, Japan, Taiwan, etc..
Just have to stop making excuses and do it.
Edited 2006-02-26 20:18
No Monaco. I think they have a sign with a picture of that car at the border : “You must be at least this rich to enter” 🙂
I modded you back up for de-trolling you comment 😉
Edited 2006-02-26 20:21
No Monaco. I think they have a sign with a picture of that car at the border : “You must be at least this rich to enter” 🙂
hahaha +1 funny
I modded you back up for de-trolling you comment 😉
You’re an OSNews moderator?
I modded you back up for de-trolling you comment 😉
You’re an OSNews moderator?
No, I just modded you up after someone else modded you down. Who wants to be a moderator here – they get all kinds of lunatics screaming for their head on a pike.
@Tyr.
lol so true.
Man, thanks for telling me I could afford a Jag, I thought it was my empty bank account and debt that was keeping me from buying one, this is wicked
If there exists a country wherin “everyone” can afford a 40000 euro car, please, I’d like to move there…
Everyone was meant in a relative sense. 40000 Euros is a more than reasonable price for i.e. a company lease car. As a lease car, and even as a personally owned car, 40000 is very accesible when compared to the 120000 Euros for the Aston V8 Vantage, or 202000 Euros for the DB9. Also remember that these are Dutch prices; and we have the highest car prices in the world due to an insane amount of taxes… i.e. the Bently Continental GT is little over $100000 in the US, but costs well over 300000 EUR here.
On a sidenote, the DB9 is the one you’d want. You don’t want the V8 Vantage because it just screams “I actually wanted the DB9 but I’m too poor to” (much like the Porsche Boxter compared to the 911), and you don’t want the 300000+ Euro Aston Martin Vanquish because it is basically the same as the DB9 (they carry almost the same engine and have the same performance), but only without the stunning DB9’s interior.
Sigh, I need to get rich. Seriously.
Edited 2006-02-26 20:29
Thom, as far as I am aware, the ‘current’ Vanquish is still based on the older pre-DB9 Aston. Apparently there is a new updated DB9 based Vanquish on it’s way.
Also, the V8 Vantage is – to my mind – not a ‘I couldn’t afford a DB9’ car at all. It was bought into production by Ford-owned Aston to:
A) Be a 911 competitor
B) Help Aston continue to make money through selling in higher numbers through being a little more affordable and targeting a slightly different demographic.
The V8 Vantage is a more ‘pure’ sports car model to the DB9’s grand touring focus. Aston haven’t had a V8 model for quite some number of years being exclusively V12 based (except for the awful V6 DB7’s that somehow made it into existence!).
I read somewhere that Aston made a profit last year, for the first time in a few decades. Long may they stay around I say.
…both the Aston and the Jag are a mere Ford Mondeo underneath, just with different switchgear and price tags
I agree about skinning, it can get tiresome. However, it is nice in GNU/Linux being able to adjust the theme when required. The hoops you have to jump through in other OS’ make it more work than it’s really worth.
…both the Aston and the Jag are a mere Ford Mondeo underneath, just with different switchgear and price tags
Oversimplification, but yeah, *ouch*.
As a true Aston (and British cars in general) fan, that just hurts
.
>> …both the Aston and the Jag are a mere Ford Mondeo underneath, just with different switchgear and price tags
> Oversimplification, but yeah, *ouch*.
> As a true Aston (and British cars in general) fan, that just hurts
.
…and also not true. I work supporting CAD systems at Jagaur & know (as in used to sit at the desk next to & get occasional calls from) people doing the same role at Aston Martin. Though there may be odd switches and vents from Ford which may have been reused there aren’t many in recent Astons or the XK. They certainly aren’t based on the same platform as the Mondeo!
…both the Aston and the Jag are a mere Ford Mondeo underneath, just with different switchgear and price tags
Although I know which I’d rather be driving…
I bet I can guess …
The Ford!
😉
sigh
I don’t think you have the correct reason for the cars’ similarity. Both Jaguar and Aston are (or were; I’ve not checked recently) owned by Ford. They are essentially the same company, building the same cars, but Aston is the luxury version, of an already luxurious car. Nought to do with the OSness of the story but the analogy doesn’t hold water for me. Although it is a commonly accepted cliche that a Jag is a poor man’s Aston. I just wish I were poor enough to only own a Jag.
Edited 2006-02-26 20:31
Ford owns Volvo as well, but Volvo’s cars are definitely not based on any Ford platform. The only Jaguar car I’m aware of that’s based on a Ford platform is the X-type, which is an upscale Taurus. The other ones are still Jaguar’s designs.
Volvo’s latest cars (V50/S40) are indeed built on a Ford developed platform that also underpins the Mazda3 and the new Ford Focus.
The Jaguar X-type was actually built on the same platform as the European Mondeo rather than the US Taurus. I’m not sure whether the Taurus also shared the Mondeo platform or not. I know their [duratec] engines were similar but of different capacity (2.5 in the Mondeo and 3.0 in the Taurus) so they may well have.
The North American built S Type shares a platform with the Lincoln LS.
The analogy, for me, only holds water when you are discussing skinning Windows to look like OS X, or Linux to look like OS X or BeOS.
When people come up with original, clean, or stunning themes that do not resemble anything else available – then Thom’s analogy fails.
He’d have to extend it to include something like the TVR Tuscan for unique cases.
http://www.fastcoolcars.com/images/wallpaper7/tvr_tuscan.jpg
*grin* Indeed, if only.
While both Aston and Jaguar are Ford owned (as are Volvo, Land Rover and Mazda), they do have different focuses (pun not intended). Also, as far as I am aware, Aston’s are still hand built where the Jaguars arent’t – hence the price difference. Whereas Jaguar is using the Aluminium body as their point of difference.
While the new XK and the DB9 do share some common components, one is definetely not a more up or down market version of the other.
arf
Edited 2006-02-26 20:30
This is way offtopic but it struck me as a web designer: The Aston Martin website is done using XHTML Transitional and CSS/divs…no tables, no ugly flash. It’s pure, valid xhtml. That’s totally sweet! The code is even formatted well…
On topic: I still skin windows using the cracked uxtheme (this allows for non-signed themes). I change them out every month or so, and only use really good, functional themes. I do this for a little bit of change, I don’t like the drab same old same old feel things get after a while.
My powerbook hasn’t changed though, and I doubt ever will. I really like the look and feel of Tiger enough to not want to reskin it.
Here in the USA, folks put big muffler pipes, wings, ground effects, spinner hub caps, and all kinds of hideous adornments on their Honda Civics et. al. so that they have something “special”. Is it a waste of time and money? Some would say yes. The owners would say heck no!
The irony (and applicable analogy) in this is that even though they strive to deviate from the OEM design, the fruits of their labor cause them to exude even greater loyalty and pride in their chosen mark. And Linux devotees act much the same in this regard. They might modify KDE until it looks like OS X, or XP but you best not make one negative remark about it!
This is where Linux shines. Its ability to be modified and extended in customized ways defy any other OS to even try to compete. Unfortunately, to those who think it is a waste of time, the options and modification can also be its biggest detriment to adoption. Many a Windows (potential) converts have given up in frustration. They just don’t want to waste time getting things to look and work right. They don’t need or want the thing to look like a space ship control console, they just want OpenOffice to work.
Here in the USA, folks put big muffler pipes, wings, ground effects, spinner hub caps, and all kinds of hideous adornments on their Honda Civics et. al. so that they have something “special”. Is it a waste of time and money? Some would say yes. The owners would say heck no!
Extend that to turbo chargers and nitrous in those Civics and you got Gentoo ricers.
Extend that to turbo chargers and nitrous in those Civics and you got Gentoo ricers.
Yeah – here in Toronto the kids street race them late at night on the urban expressways. Hairy and I guess they do the same in the states.
Making your computer experience look the way you want becomes a discussion about novelty items that you can waste your disposable income on. It’s almost like having someone talk down to you for the way you opt to arrange your desk, as they tell you how they realized how much of a waste of time it was to make their boring desks they had more more to their liking, and went out and bought a new desk, stationary, pen set, and a new leather chair. Now they’re truly happy.
If it wasn’t such obvious classism it might be funny. How many people here use any Gtk+ Win32 programs? Do you use the Wimp theme, or do you go out and use H2O? Gaim is never going to use those Wi32 common controls, so why bother making them look more like them? And iTunes? You might think Apple just ported a large portion of Carbon to Win32 and made it look like an OS X application. And God knows if you were ever fond of the titlebars of BeOS and installed an Enlightenment theme that copied their appearance you’re a poseur lacking in social grace. All of those screenshots where Java applications pretend to be Gtk+ programs? What are they thinking? Any desire for consistency or a certain aesthetic in something inherently personal as interacting with a computer, is a faux pas on the order of putting a Mercedes logo on your Honda (oh cringe).
No, I take it back. It is funny. It’s funny what some people really value in life.
Not only we can’t change the core of an OS but also there are many disadvantages. No matter whatever you do, there is always a performance lost in it. Sometimes you may not feel it.
I think today’s Interface developers have forgot what there main goals are for developing a good interface.
Interface must be simple and easy to use. Make it beautiful but don’t add animations in it because its totally useless. Don’t add too much sound events. Only play a sound where it’s really a need.
Look at todays developers creating 3d interfaces that will suck all the performance and a very little or half of processing power left for our work. Huh, 3d interface for an OS looks like a game’s interface.
Can you imagine how useless these things are? Suppose a user have a 3d interface. Now if he/she right click on something to display a menu. First the code loaded in RAM for playing an animation will execute first and then the menu which we want to display will appear. How foolish is this?
are as various as the people doing the modding. I think that it is mostly kids trying to make their Windows look like OS X. So, Thom, you probably just outgrew it. Now, it seems, you are into cars. Next it will be girls.
Just get the real thing. (from the article)
Thom’s used a line there which I have heard so many times I really really hate it. From time immemorial, whenever someone skins Linux or Windows to look like OSX, the response from Apple faithful has always been “just get a Mac!”.
“Just”. As in merely, only, simply. As though plonking down $1000+ dollars for a completely new system which requires new software (for more $$) is somehow simpler and easier than changing skins, when all a lot of people really want is the damn look.*
Aqua looks nice. I can get the look of Aqua (the widget style anyway) with a skin, using my existing OS and hardware. To someone who wants the look and is thinking of buying a new machine to get it, the response could be “just use a skin!” and that would be a reasonable use of the adverb “just”.
___________________
* The look is of course not Apple’s only good feature, for people who want a usable desktop system with less threat of malware, getting a Mac is the way to go, and the only thing I can in good conscience recommend to computer neophytes who don’t want to learn how it works.
Edited 2006-02-27 01:24
I agree with the authors point, but why do we always go to cars. They never work for anologies. In this case they are both ford motor co owned. So ford has a hand in the price structure and so forth.
Anyways.
Jaugur has 2 ford based cars. The S type is built of the Lincoln LS platform that is also used in the New Mustang and the now defunct Thunderbird.
The X type is based on ford global platform used for what was the Mercury Mystic (sp) and Ford Countor in the US, and the Mondeo in other parts of the world. The ford taurus in the US is a completely different thing then what the rest of the world knows. And thankfully the taurus is dead, and has been replaced by the 500, which is based on the volvo S70 platform. Ford owns volvo car (while GM owns Volvo truck). But on the flip side Volvo it seams will be using fords newer smaller car platforms for models, also the SC90 (the suv) uses a engine largely developed by a joint with Ford and Yamaha (don’t confuse the engine with a similar one used in the SVT Taurus in the 90s).
The main new platform is the CD3, which is a ford platform and so far has been used on the Mazda 6, Ford Fusion, Mercury Milan, Lincoln Zepher, The forth coming Ford Edge Crossover SUV and the Lincoln version too, and probably a few Euromodels. The Platform used on the US focus is not used on the new non-american focus’s (go figure).
I believe all the aston martins are still pure bloods. but then again, ford doesn’t have much parts to offer them for what they are making. Even the GT is pretty different from them. Ford is just their to keep aston alive during dry periods and to make sure things don’t go wrong like James Bond driving a BMW again.
To bad Ford didn’t get Mini when they could have, then they would have nearly the full British Car Co collector set. Of course they almost had them since they thought about buying BMW in the late 90s. Thankfully they didn’t bother going for Bentley or RR, let other deal with keeping them alive.
Kewl – someone else who knows about cars like me.
Hey Brad, did you hear that remour about Ford selling off Jaguar and Land Rover as a package this year?
Let’s be honest, Thom. You’re not talking about CDE on Windows. You’re not talking about Enlightment mimicking BeOS, or GTK’s WIMP theme. You’re making the argument that people should not try to mimic Apple’s themes, and you’re using a particularly poor analogy to do so.
This is something I don’t understand. When did an operating system become something to brag about, to flaunt like a luxury vehicle? Ok, the iPod as a fashion accessory I see since you carry it everywhere. But an operating system? I just don’t get it.
Frankly, I think you have been sucked in by Apple’s marketing campaign. Can’t compete on features and price alone? Simple: create demand by adding a societal element to the game. Make people feel more elite for buying a Dell with some white plastic and a shinier operating system.
Well, I’m not buying it, Thom. I use my computer to run software, not boost my ego. FreeBSD, Linux, Windows, Mac OS X, they all get the job done, some a little better than others depending on whether I’m playing games or doing development work. If I want FreeBSD to look like Mac OS X, that’s my business, not yours. How dare you tell me that my experience is cheapened by the fact that Apple came up with the design first. Way to buy into the hype.
By the way, you’re really not being clear here. Is the Mac a luxury “vehicle” that I should pay a premium for just to get the brand? Or is it the best computing platform available today? It can’t be both, Thom; either computers are so similar today as to need brands to differentiate them, or your car analogy is full of holes. So which is it?
Fully agreed, it’s easy to read between the lines and know this is about Windows looking like OSX and how it’s better to have the real thing. It must hurt that “the real thing” can be ran on every computer more or less which supports sse2 with osx86.
Mac a luxury vehicle?
I have had 3 ibooks all suffering from logic board problems and broken inverterboards (backgroundlight). This all in a periode of 1,5 years. There are stories on the net of people that have had their logic boards replaced 5 or 6 times. My count was at 2 replacements.
After the last repair i was so fed up with it that i told myself never to buy an ibook again and sold it. I now own a more cheaper asus, standard warranty of 2 years and it’s been running here for almost a year now. Just performing his “dull little tasks” as apple likes to call it.
And i’m certainly not the only one, a friend of mine bought a powerbook a while back and has had problems with it from the start. Luckily for him he got a refund from apple, ofcourse after being on the phone for hours.
I’m still an apple fan, still own an ipod, still own a few older macs which seem to run without problems. But comparing them with an expensive car. No..
BTW ever heard of the steve jobs reality distortion field? Seems someone is suffering from that
Edited 2006-02-27 12:17
Fully agreed, it’s easy to read between the lines and know this is about Windows looking like OSX and how it’s better to have the real thing.
I think it speaks volmes about YOU that you see hidden messages between the lines. I clearly and specifically was talking about a) myself, and b) about copying ANY operating system– because yes, I used to turn KDE into Tracker/Deskbar, OSX into OS9 as well as Tracker/Deskbar, etc.
The fact that YOU only think about Explorer => Aqua/Finder has nothing to do with how *I* used to skin.
I’m still an apple fan, still own an ipod, still own a few older macs which seem to run without problems. But comparing them with an expensive car. No.
Neither did I. Please point me to where I compared any Mac to an expensive sportscar in this article or in one of my comments on the article.
BTW ever heard of the steve jobs reality distortion field? Seems someone is suffering from that
Heh tell that to this guy [1] [2].
No, it’s not that. You might see messages between the lines, but that might just say more about you than about me.
[1] http://cogscanthink.blogsome.com/2005/09/12/explanation/
[2] http://cogscanthink.blogsome.com/2006/01/05/kelly-mcneil-nailed-and…
Quote: In other words– everyone can own a Jag. Few can own an Aston.
And the same goes for operating systems.
=================
You are talking about an operating system being exclusive. The only operating system which i can think of being exclusive and which looks are copied all the time is mac osx and the operating system that everyone owns is windows. The ” just get the real thing” is a verb which is spoken by (new) mac users all the time when some windows dude on a forum is trying to skin his machine to look like osx.
A simple “aqua buy a real mac” google search brought me to:
http://www.osnews.com/story.php?news_id=7596
In this you say yourself the aqua community is biggest, is it so weird that i think you are talking about windows looking like macosx?
Edited 2006-02-27 16:08
In this you say yourself the aqua community is biggest, is it so weird that i think you are talking about windows looking like macosx?
No…. But if I specifically say, both in the article AND just now in a comment that I’m talking about ANY conversion… Then why don’t you simply trust my words? That just baffles me. That you misunderstood me– fine, possible, no problem. But even after clarification you INSIST on your own standpoint. That is just, well, ‘obnoxious’ :/.
The “just get the real thing” is a verb which is spoken by (new) mac users all the time when some windows dude on a forum is trying to skin his machine to look like osx.
‘Get the real thing’ is a normal, non-specific phrase, not tied to anything. I can understand if personal experience makes you think the column refers to Aquafying only– but why do you keep on believing that EVEN if I clarify it all?
Thom, regardless of what you were thinking about when you wrote this article, I think the point still stands that your philosophy regarding skinning is technically bankrupt.
You seem to completely misunderstand the purpose of skinning. Let us consider a hypothetical person Joe, who is a home Linux user. He really likes Linux. He likes the level of control and customization. He likes having source code available. He likes writing kernel modules and optimizing web servers and everything like that. He also likes KDE and Konquerer and everything it provides.
However, he doesn’t like the KDE interface. He finds it ugly and unrefined. He has discovered, however, that the new Windows Aero theme is exactly what he is looking for. The Aero theme isn’t just a look, it’s a feature that he wants to copy. So he creates such a theme for KDE/Qt and uses it.
Now, apparently if you were Joe, you would not create an Aero skin at this point, right? Apparently if Joe wants the Aero look, he should switch to Windows, even though Windows does not offer all the features and benefits that Joe enjoys about Linux. Clearly this is utterly ridiculous; the theme is just another feature, and developers copy features from competitors all the time, back and forth. Will copying Aero give Joe DirectX and access to games? No. But will copying Aero give Joe the Aero look with all the existing advantages of Linux? Of course.
By insisting that skinners should just switch operating systems is to put look and feel above all other features and benefits of an operating system. Some of us like having access to Windows software. Some of us like the flexibility affording by a freely modifiable operating system. Some of us are Mac fanboys
. We all have reasons besides theme to choose our operating systems.
After all, when it comes to operating systems, beauty is not only skin deep.
By insisting that skinners should just switch operating systems is to put look and feel above all other features and benefits of an operating system.
Let me restate yet again, that I was CLEARLY talking about why *I* stopped skinning. You seem to think the goal of my column was to somehow show that skinning is pointless *for everyone*. Which is wrong, as I explained why *I* find skinning pointless. That’s a huge difference.
The problem is that in the rush to reinforce the elitist self-delusion of the Mac user, the kernel of the entire pantheon of skinning motivations is tossed into the corner of shame, and all practical reasons covered over in a thick, multi-paragraph layer of “whatever you’re copying the appearance of is just better.”
If you want to make Windows look like Motif, well that’s just a low-class thing. Nevermind you might be using CDE and a bunch of custom Motif applications on a Windows computer sitting in your office. No one ever claims about the inconsistency of the desktop or anything.
Or maybe you want your Windows XP to look like Windows 2000 and you use the Classic theme. That Windows XP is never going to be a Windows 2000, so just install Windows 2000 instead.
Macs don’t cost that much. Their hardware isn’t that impressive. People don’t like you more for having a Mac. No one cares. If anything, overzealous Mac users repel other computer users because they think their computer is the equivalent of owning a luxury car. Some proverbial kid, if for some reason they actually like the look of Aqua, is going to make their lowly Windows peesee look something like OS X (with included dock and expose functionality no less) and then play all of his video games, download selected titles from the massive library of windows peesee warez with his choice of p2p clients for his choice of p2p networks. He’ll encode his music files with his choice of audio codec, and watch his warezed porn with his choice of video codecs.
And everyone else will skin the programs and desktop environments they want for whatever reasons they want, fully aware that their computer is never going to magically transform into a Star Trek ship computer terminal, even if looks like one.
…could fit on the head of a mouse.
Skinning is mainly about interface preference, not copying or keeping up with the Joneses.
Although skins have been available to all for at least a decade (e.g. Windows 9x themes), it was music players that really saw skin usage skyrocket. After all ,why play cool music and stare at the same silly Media Player bars as your not-so-cool cubicle mates?
People skin entire OSes just because they can. “It was there.” There is a major hobby component to computers, and cars. Hence the case modding and overclocking crazes right now. But it is not, IMHO, about copying but rather taste. And there is no accounting for that.
I stopped most skinning and related activities like screensaver and wallpaper collecting (topping out at about 18,000 images) some years back. The main reason was I liked all my various computers to be set up the same, to work the same and the dingle balls were making it hard to see out the rear view mirrors. Almost any utility one allows to hook into the system will cause a glitch at some point.
– Skinning is a teen activity.
– Getting up to speed at something useful is for the 20-somethings.
– Being fast and efficient without fluff or bragadocia is for the gray-backed alpha males.
BTW, I drive a 4-door Olds Ciera. Plain, bordering on ugly, but oh the functionality.
Floyd
http://www.just-think-it.com
“Veiled” OS comments at the end? Wow, That “column” was both weird and elitist. The extra funny thing is that both cars discussed are marketed to sell-outs — just at different earnings brackets. Perfect message for a sunday — you are a loser if you don’t have extra expensive “X” but rather only have equally nice but *much* less expensive “Y” — loser!
Bah.
I noticed the other day that Bagheera is now available in the Mandriva repositories as an install. Has anyone tried it, is it stable, and do you like it?
There may be an interest which is slightly at an angle to what Thom writes about. I tried Aston and some of the other skinnning solutions on XP, and never found them either any better than native mode or sufficiently stable. So yes, duplicating an OS look and feel at a very superficial level, one says why not the real thing?
However, sometimes people have done what looks like skinning for a different reason – to produce something which is their platform, but is comfortable for someone else who is familiar with it. This presumably is what was behind fvwm95, and I came on some very interesting screenshots by a lady, lost the url, who had customised fvwm for her non technical husband and made it look astoundingly like XP. Got the config file somewhere and always meant to try it. This is pretty legitimate. fvwm in its native state is pretty forbidding to a former windows user, but it has a lot to be said for it in terms of speed and lightness.
When skinning a computer what you are doing most of all is pleasing yourself. So I think you should be able to do whatever you want. How often do you bring someone over to your computer and show to show them and they give a flip either way? It doesn’t matter what skin a person is using as long as it pleases THEMSELVES. Whenever someone looks at my computers that’s the last thing they notice and I use really nice looking skins\icons.
This whole car thing is a flawed argument because skins are as temporary, quickly changable and are pretty much a dime a dozen unlike car modifications and unlike car modifications most of the time only the owner of the PC is viewing or caring about what is on their screen.
The other argument that goes something like “if you like a certain skin get the OS that it came with” is also tired as well. Skins aren’t the only thing an OS offers. Like you said if you put another OS’ skin on a different OS it doesn’t transform that into the former OS but some people don’t care they just like that particular look and not everyone is willing to go buy another system or install a totally new OS just to get a new look.
I kind of think people who take offense of someone running for example Aqua on windows should start caring less about what other people do with their computers which is their own business and care more about what they themselves are doing. Either way people are going to do what they want with their computers so why get all huffy about it?
I run whatever skins on my Mac or PC that look good to me first and foremost and it doesn’t matter where they originate as long as they look good.
You are operating under the false assumption that everyone who skins their OS wants another OS or is fooling themselves into thinking they are running that other OS.
Edited 2006-02-27 09:50
You are operating under the false assumption that everyone who skins their OS wants another OS or is fooling themselves into thinking they are running that other OS.
That’s why I was CLEARLY talking about skinning operating systems to make them resemble other OS’s– and NOT about skinning in general.
Seems like you are operating under the false assumption that I’m operating under the false assumption that everyone who skins their OS wants another OS or is fooling themselves into thinking they are running that other OS.
Err…
Ahhh but i am talking about that too. Read carefully I mentioned running Aqua on windows. Of course I can’t cover every permutation of running whatever on whatever so I gave an example. And you also misread that sentance you quoted. It means a person can run a ported skin and actually not want the OS it was ported from believe it or not and that is their business.
Seems like you completely missed everything I wrote.
IT’S JUST A SKIN.
Edited 2006-02-27 10:08
The thing is– I’m not ‘offended’ if other people are using skins, as you think. All I did in my column was explain why and how *I* found out how useless skinning actually is, FOR ME. If you want to skin, then go ahead, I don’t care.
That doesn’t stop me from explaining why I find something pointless, though.
And that’s a problem for Y. You can hire the same lead designer. You can make a stunning interior. You can even price the Y N Euros cheaper than the cheapest X. But all that means jack. It will never be an X. It will never have the same exclusivity. The inherent Z that comes with every X. And most importantly– it will never make people like and appreciate you as much as when you own an X.
Please provide the substitutions for variables N,X,Y,Z that makes your comment apply to home computers rather than automobiles. For the sake of preempting the inclusion of CDE, CDE is not an operating system.
You’re writing an editorial, aren’t you? You’re presenting people with an opinion of this behavior, and not simply an anecdote about how you decided to go out and just buy an operating system? Well, which operating system would that be? Did you go out and buy a computer to run OS/2 on? Or did you buy a NeXTstation instead of using WindowMaker/Afterstep in conjunction with neXtaw and a gtk+ theme? What computers even approach an expensive automobile in any of its properties? There’s certainly no home computer that is anything similar. Do you have an E25k somewhere that you’re controlling with a CDE session?
To be technical maybe changing your computer to anything but the default is pointless when you come down to it but the point is the person who did it is satisfied like I said so even if a person changes it to look like another OS the point is they are satisfied and that’s about as good a point as you can get when it comes to computer customisation at all. If you can’t understand that then obviously you don’t have any business doing it. If a person changes their windows skin to aqua and they are satisfied the point of the skin has been fulfilled and if not then obviously they need to get something else. Plenty people find points or pleasure in doing things that others might find pointless and they don’t need people telling them that it’s personally pointless to them.
Edited 2006-02-27 10:36
When I change themes (and/or make them) Im not trying to get a look similar to any other I have seen. Sometimes I want something new, Ive never seen before, and I can fill my screen with stupid things. Sometimes, I want something very, very functional, and very simple and light.
I like to change, and I like to innovate. When I write an E17 theme you can be sure my focus is not to look like CDE.
um all good theories…. but isn’t a more likely explanation for the similarity of design between the Xk and Db9 the fact that the same man designed them both? He wasn’t just the person “running the design team” he was the designer.
It wasn’t a case of Jaguar “stealing” the lead designer to try and make a car that looked the same, the link between Jaguar and Aston Martin has existed for a long time.
Aston Martin is Ford is Jaguar.
The old DB7 was a reskinned XJS.
People said the old Xk8 was just a reworking of the DB7 design.
Edited 2006-02-27 15:57
There’s a number of dissimilarities; Ford owns both Aston Martin and Jaguar. Therefore they make cars to target different market, so that they don’t canabalize each other’s sales – it makes absolutely no sense for Ford to have two competing brands under one roof.
Furthermore, cars and computers are two different beasts, it’s like comparing apples and oranges. Just say you like Aqua – but you also like menubars and toolbars within windows, Windows-based games, and that AMD Athlon X2 with dual 512*2MB DDR2 RAM, 533Mhz front side bus and that 250GB SATA disc with 8MB cache – and the office requires you have Access – you should buy the “real thing”?
Have you notice Thom that most people who skin Windows to look like OS X change largely the looks and rarely the behaviour?
Another problem with your argument is that Macs aren’t significantly more expensive than their first-tier OEM counterparts (in fact, the MacBook Pro is pretty competitively priced against companies like Sony, Lenova and the likes) – Aston Martins is significantly more expensive than Jaguars (€20,000 is a pretty big gap in my books).
If the price difference was €200, would you think those who pick Jaguar over Aston cheap instead of considering there may be reasons why a person would pick one platform over another other than merely aesthetics.
ronaldst: What exactly is your point? That those who don’t put money aside to buy a laptop that would go outdated in a few years time as opposed to say, putting it in their retirement fund or buying a house, have the poverty mentality? Certainly, if I put money aside on a monthly basis, sooner or later a house in Malibu, a custom Bentley, vacation home on a private French Polynesian island, a private jet plane, etc. could be mine.
Of course, I would be working my whole life saving up for those.
When people say “I can’t afford it”, they don’t mean it literally where they have absolutely no cash whatsoever that owning a iBook or a Mac mini would be a distant, elusive dream. No, most people when they say “I can’t afford it” most of the time mean, “I don’t want to spend so much money on a piece of computer equipment I don’t really need because it looks cool”. Most credit cards nowadays have interest-free installment plans between 6-18 months and if that isn’t good enough, Apple offer consumer loans (though with pretty high interest rates). Most consumers in Western Europe and North America can, in that sense, afford a Mac.
Quite different from, say, owning an Aston Martin (or a Jaguar for that matter).
I guess you’re probably forgetting that the Ford Motor Company owns both Jaguar and Aston Martin. To save R&D costs, the new XK probably runs on a very similar chassis (or maybe even the very same platform) as the DB9.
If I’m not mistaken, it’s actually the Ford Mondeo platform.
That’s why they look so alike.
> I guess you’re probably forgetting that the Ford Motor Company owns both Jaguar and Aston Martin. To save R&D costs, the new XK probably runs on a very similar chassis (or maybe even the very same platform) as the DB9.
XK and DB9 aren’t off the same platform and don’t share a chassis.
Cars like the XK and the DB9 aren’t playing in the same arena for image, cost or performance as the Volvo V40, European Focus and Mazda 3 which do share a platform (but are all very different cars to look at,to sit in and to drive).
For there to be a “cheap Aston in Jag clothing” could do horrible things to Aston’s sales. I don’t believe Ford would allow that to happen.
> If I’m not mistaken, it’s actually the Ford Mondeo platform.
You are mistaken and it’s not.
What baffles me is that you can’t understand that freedom of choice of how your applications look is a good thing. Before skinning we didn’t have much of a choice especially on windows. Now we can have it look like pretty much anything we want depending on what software you use, etc. It’s all about personal choice and preference. Any conversion is covered under that statement as well.
I’m sure no one wants for there to be a “theme fashion police” going around telling them what they can or can’t do, “You have commited theme faux pas!” Some of the most respected themers have done conversions of skins from one platform to another or from different versions of the same platform. When we are talking about conversions in general some people might also like the looks of an older version but the features of the newer version and skinning allows them to do that. There are a lot of reasons that a person might decide that they want the same platform or software but the looks of another. Again like I said it’s about freedom of choice.
I still can’t help but kind of think that people doing ports or as you call it conversions offend you because you where the one who had to sit down and write a whole article admonishing it and then defend it as much as you have.