Our friends at OSNews.com have put together a thorough first look at the Linux client OS, Linspire.

Here are some freeware programs that are very popular but don't tend to get much news made on them:

CursorXP. www.cursorxp.com. This program takes your Windows mouse cursors to the next level. It's free, no spyware, and very cool.

LogonStudio. www.logonstudio.com. This program lets you change your Windows XP logon screen. It hasn't been updated in a long while but it does the job very well and it's free.

IconDeveloper. www.icondeveloper.com. I use this program all the time to make icons. What it does is let you take images (PNG, JPG, BMP whatever) and quickly turn them into Windows icons. Even works from the Windows shell.

In my last article, I talked about how there is a sub-set of people on-line who have a real problem with the concept of capitalism. That is, people intentionally making products and services that are designed to make money for the creator of those products or services.

But while capitalism may be tolerated by those people, some are pushed over the edge over the concept of charging money for intellectual property (such as software).  While one can understand having to pay for food or cars or other tangible things, the idea of having to pay for something that has no physical form and hence no production cost is anathema to some.

The result is that a small but vocal minority of people will go out and harass those who create commercial software. 

The example I gave was a the announcement of a  program called Multiplicity. It enables users to take multiple computers, each with its own monitor(s) and combine them together into a single unit that is controlled by a single keyboard and mouse.  At first, we saw people come on and insist it was no different than some freeware program that's available. And indeed, on paper there are freeware programs that are similar to Multiplicity. But in a similar vein, there are similar programs, on paper, to WindowBlinds such as CustomEyes.  Such freeware, open source programs tend to be more technology demo than something you would use.

The response I got from people in that thread was very interesting.  I wasn't aware that there were people who were really and truly insistent that commercial software and freeware/open source are generally equivalent in quality even though any reasonably experience software user knows that isn't the case.

Commercial software is almost always better than freeware.  Not because commercial developers are better programmers but because the commercial developer has a stronger incentive to keep enhancing, fixing, tweaking, polishing the program than the freeware developer.  The typical freeware developer is making something largely for themselves that they later decide to share with others. By contrast, the commercial software developer is making something they hope others will pay for. Big difference.

There are countless examples of freeware that is better than commercial offerings (Look how good Firefox is). But that's not the norm.

Personally, I use freeware when I can because I'm cheap. But if it's something that matters, I'm going to go with whatever the best and that normally means having to pay for it.

But getting back to the hatred of capitalism, once the argument over freeware vs. commercial in terms of software quality was simmering I also received private messages from ant-capitalists that essentially said "Look, you've already got Stardock and WinCustomize to post your spam on, why do you have to post your spam on Neowin's software news?"  Which was an intriguing unintentional admission. 

The Neowin.net software news section is designed for announcements of software news (I should know, I'm a news moderator there).  It doesn't discriminate on the type of software. It can be free. It can be commercial. It doesn't matter. But it was very telling that multiple people objected to the announcement of commercial software.  If Multiplicity was a freeware program, no doubt they'd been fine. Their hope, from experience, is to try to harass/shame commercial developers to go away. 

Of course, this is nothing new. I've been dealing with this phenomenon for years. During the dot-com extremes and the height of the open source hype such people were much more numerous and more vocal as we got regular demands for us to make our software open source.

But at the end of the day, software that is complicated and hard to develop, particularly if the quality of the software has to do with the execution of it, needs to be developed by people who are paid to do it. And that money has to come from somewhere. WindowBlinds dominates the GUI skinning world because it has been continuously developed for 8 years now. If it were freeware, it would have died off long ago, I can assure you of that. 

That is why capitalism is a force for good -- it provides an incentive for people to do things they would rather not do in order to make the product or service better. And that improvement benefits the user and provides resources to do other things that benefit users (such as pay for a skin site).

Running an Internet based business is vastly different than running a traditional bricks and mortar based company. This is particularly true if you are running and Internet based business that deals with end users since, at that point, you are running the Internet equivalent of a retail store.

The first reason it is different has to do with a term we call "conversion rate".  The conversion rate of a traditional store varies but is typically around 5%.  That is, if 20 people visit your store, you can expect for one of them to purchase something. 

The second reason has to do with pure masses of people visiting the store.  A typical store at the mall can expect around 500 people to come into the store.  A WalMart can expect many more.  But nothing can touch a popular website.   Amazon.com gets in the neighborhood of 5 million unique visitors per day.  That's 10,000 times more. 

This changes the customer/company dynamic completely.  In the early days of retail the phrase "the customer is always right" came into being.  This wasn't based on any sort of noble sentiment but rather necessity. In those days, the family store might only get 50 to 100 people visiting - many of whom were repeat customers. You could not afford to alienate even one of them because one unhappy customer could then talk to 20 other people in their neighborhood about their bad experience.

In an Internet based store the "customer being right" never comes up. A good Internet business tries to maximize the number of happy customers and minimize the number of unhappy ones.  On the surface, this might seem similar to the traditional model. But it's not. Internet based companies merely determine how many unhappy customers they can afford to have statistically and find ways to keep that number at or below that number.  It's a totally different system. 

Where traditional stores did not want any unhappy customers. Internet businesses, because they're dealing with so many people, don't aim for that level of perfection. Instead, customer relations becomes a matter of statistical analysis.  There is no face time between customer and merchant.  It's all virtual. And that virtual relationship lends itself to statistical analysis.

Moreover, the fractured nature of the Internet changes the dynamic further. An unhappy customer of an Internet greeting card making site is not going to have the same impact on business as the unhappy customer of the local hardware store because of the lack of a cohesive customer community (i.e. telling your friends and neighbors about the Internet greeting card making provider being bad isn't going to matter much since none of them were likely to go there in the first place).

And as if these differences weren't enough, you have the unique concept of internet store and community intermixing. Now you're dealing with the proprietors of the products and services you may be purchasing.  In a traditional store, your interaction with a clerk or cashier is the equivalent of a search engine or electronic commerce server. The typical customer in a traditional store doesn't have a long, drawn out conversation about the items available for sale.

The net result is that many end users, particularly older ones, haven't yet come to terms that Internet based businesses are run very differently from stores and shops in their local area. The expectations are different. The policies are different. The experiences are different.  It's a brave new world indeed.

The thing about Valentine's day is that you can appreciate the love of your life.

My wife is really wonderful. She's my best friend and the mother of our two children. She has an almost infinite level of patience and has a quantity kindness that I've never encountered in another human being.  If she has only faults, it would only be in her questionable taste in spouses.

I am very glad that I met her and that she is part of my life. We've been together 13 years now and each day I wake up and I am thankful for the time we've had together.

Happy Valentine's Day everyone!

The link below will take you through our entire gallery of Valentine's related skins, themes, icons, wallpapers, screenshots, etc.

So our story so far - in the beginning your desktop only supported little static pictures called icons.  Your computer could also load programs but they are contained inside a "window" that is separate from your desktop.

The idea DesktopX postulated in 1999 was to have something new on your desktop. Something more than an icon but not a traditional program.  And today, widgets are slowly becoming very popular and DesktopX is no longer the only provider of extradesktop level content.  You've got Konfabulator and you've got Kapsules and you've got Samurize and a few others that veer a bit further away from the widget concept but still fill the basic premise.

But these widget enablers all suffer a common problem - they have trouble creating things that the developers of the original program didn't think of.

That's because widgets are innovative for TWO reasons: The first is the aforementioned fact that they're a new type of desktop content (i.e. mini-applications that are smaller than a typical program that lives on your desktop.  The second is that widgets are supposed to be able a lot easier to create than regular programs.

And so they make a fairly reasonable trade-off -- they make it easy for you to create this stuff but you have to use their APIs to do it, usually through a scripting language like JavaScript or VBScript.  And hence, if they don't make the API you need, you're up the creek.

The net result is pretty obvious though many people may not understand why - widgets have become (unfortunately) associated with pretty looking but not necessarily useful desktop jewelry. Clocks, calendars, and data retrieved from the net (RSS readers, weather info, stock tickers, etc.).

I'm not saying there's anything wrong with clocks and and web-based headline readers and the like. But eventually, when the hype about widgets starts to die down and people start to look hard at this stuff, if that's all they do, widgets will end up in the dust-bin right along with "Push" technology and "Thin" PCs.

So what can be done about this? The answer in DesktopX 3 comes in the form of scriptable plugins.

Scriptable Plugins

Plugins are no joke to make. They require real coding (C++ or whatever). They're not for casual users to crank out.  But the DesktopX 3 plugin format is open so that anyone who knows how to program can create them.

These plugins can then add new methods to DesktopX 3 that we haven't thought of that are then accessible from scripts.  When an object uses a plugin, it becomes part of the object so when you send it over to another user, the needed plugins are created. So there's no need for users to have to run around downloading third party plugins to make sure their widgets work.

So if there is some feature or API you feel DesktopX is missing, if you know how to code, you can write a plugin and add new APIs to DesktopX itself and it's totally seamless in the scripting.

For example, while DesktopX 2 contains a mail checking plugin, you can't access it from script.  So it's pretty limited.

So for our example, we created a DesktopX 3 plugin. Its features are accessible from script.  So I create an object and add the plugin to the object abilities. So in your JavaScript or VBScript you now have access to a new object class called "Mail" (defined by the plugin).

So in my script (JavaScript here) I'd have it first have gotten the user's username, password, and server and then make this call:

Mail.CheckMail( "1", sLogin, sPass, sServer, 0);

The API, of course, would have to be documented by the author (for instance, the "1", and 0 aren't germane to our example but would be part of the plugin's docs).

The Mail class also includes its own mail event (and DesktopX's built in event explorer will automatically display events that the plugins add).

In this example (using VBScript this time) you then have:

Mail_OnMailEvent(requestID, mails)   If mails Then     strailing = ""   If mails = 1 Then strailing = "mail awaiting!" Else strailing = "multiple email waiting!"   desktopx.Object("mail_info").text = "You've got " & mails & " new " & strailing   Else     desktopx.Object("mail_info").text = "You've got no new email"   End If End Sub

This is obviously a simple example. But what you see here is that DesktopX gains a new object class called "Mail" along with its corresponding methods to control it.  In addition, its own event is defined and can be  used as well.  And all this created without the developer of the original program (DesktopX) being involved. 

This is important in particular to DesktopX 3 Pro gadget makers who might want to make something pretty sophisticated to sell or distribute.

DesktopX 3 is scheduled to be released this March. Its home page is www.desktopx.net. The standard edition of DesktopX 3 will be included as part of Object Desktop, Stardock's suite of desktop enhancement utilities (www.objectdesktop.com).

<Frogboy> Wecome to the #stardock channel for our first conference in a very long time.

<Frogboy> The way we're going to do this..

<Frogboy> Is that for the first 30 minutes or so we are going to ask that people address questions is to go to#questions to ask their questions.

<Frogboy> The moderaotr, Nakor, will then relay those questions here.

<Frogboy> At the end of the Q & A portion, we'll open things up for everyone to ask questions in real-time.

<Frogboy> The primary tpics will be:

<Frogboy> DesktopX 3, Multiplicity, and Galactic Civilizations.  But other questions on any topic you want are welcome as well.

<Frogboy> So to get this show on the road, I'll ask Nakor to pose the first question from #questions.

<Nakor> Julien would like to know: Are there improvements planned for IconX. Such as

<Nakor> better label text editing.

<Frogboy> Sure.

<Frogboy> There are two basic features in IconX we hope to have out in the coming months:

<Frogboy> (1) For users to be able to have or create really nice icon text.

<Frogboy> So people coudl have text labels like you find on othe roperating systems or have things that are totally new.

<Frogboy> The other feature is more practical:

<Frogboy> (2) The abilityt o make it easier to click on the labels to change their names. More of a tweak really.

<Frogboy> But those are the two main features we expect to work on this Spring once DesktopX 3 is completed.

<Frogboy> ##

<Nakor> What's new with DesktopX 3 and the centralized scripting you've mentioned on the web?

<Frogboy> The main goal of DesktopX 3 is to make it more usable by end users but also give more power to developers.

<Frogboy> In the former case, what we are doing is creatign a simple DesktopX run-time version (DesktopX client) that simply lets people run DesktopX content (widgets, themes, objects, etc.).

<Frogboy> So that version will only be $14.95.

<Frogboy> The Standard version will be similar to what is available today, it'll go to $24.95 (but also still be part of Object Desktop).

<Frogboy> It will have the content running and "building" portions be seperate. There will be a slick, easy to use UI that lets people quickly get to the part htey want to make use of.

<Frogboy> In terms of centralized scripting, let me talk about that briefly:

<Frogboy> In DesktopX 2, creating a complex object was a pain in the butt really.

<Frogboy> There wree two reasons (in mye xperience anyway) why this was a pain:

<Frogboy> (1) Scripts weren't synchronous with the UI> That is, you couldn't count on exactly when a script would start in the loading of a widget.

<Frogboy> (2) A complex widget might have a dozen or mroe objects with bits of script in them.

<Frogboy> So debugging such things was a real pain.

<Frogboy> In DesktopX 3, we let people do the whole thing in Javascript (JScript technically) or VB Script. All messages, object creation, object configuratin, etc. can all be done now from a single script.

<Alberto> Let me show you an example:

<Alberto> in DX2, to handle a mouse message of a button I had to do: Object_OnLButtonDown(x,y)

<Alberto> in DX3, the main script receives all notifications from all objects like Object_OnLButtonDownEx(name,x,y)

<Frogboy> Precisely.

<Alberto> from there you can handle the event source programmatically from a single location

<Frogboy> IN DeksotpX 2, every peice of the widget would have to handle its own mouse messages (as ane xample)

* jier is going to love that

<Frogboy> In DeskotpX 3, ONE object can do it all. It can handle the mouse messages.

<Frogboy> There is also now DesktopX 3 Pro. We had DesktopX 2 Pro but it was $499 and had a very restrictive license.

<Frogboy> Our concern was that DesktopX Pro would compete with our corporate "gadget making" business.

<Frogboy> But what we decided was that we believe that DesktopX 3 has enough potential as a devleopment platform that..

<Frogboy> we could really change the face of development by making it only $69.95.

<Frogboy> And to help gadget makers, we coudl then open up a new website where develoeprs could sell their end results.

<Frogboy> (www.desktopgadgets.com).

<Frogboy> ##

<Nakor> You mentioned scripts and widgets. Will DX3 have more integration between plugins and their

<Nakor> associated widgets and scripts?

<Frogboy> Yes.

<Frogboy> In DesktopX 2, scripts and plugins were basically seperate.

<Frogboy> In DesktopX 3, the goal is to allow users to create plugins (or use ones we create) that can then be modified/controlled from a script.

<Frogboy> Here's why that's important:

<Frogboy> What if there's a fundamental feature of DesktopX we didn't think of?

<Frogboy> This is one of the more common things that comes upw ith these widget programs - how do we add new "methods" for scripting that the developer didn't think of?

<Frogboy> Well, what we hope to do is enable devleoeprs to create plugins that essentially add new methods to the scripting. So they can add their own base level features to DesktopX themselves.  This is particularly important in a corporate environment but one can imagine places it's useful for typical users too.

<Frogboy> ##

<Nakor> You touched on this earlier, but:

<Nakor> <jier> q: to get a better understanding of dx3, can we see a breakdown of each version/model, and how they will differ from the current dx?

<Frogboy> Sure.

<Frogboy> You have DesktopX Client. It'll be $14.95.  You won't be able to "make" stuff with it, but it'll run widgets, deskotps, and objects. It's like running DesktopX 2 in user mode but there will be no UI at all. It will come with a simple program called "widget manager"

<Frogboy> Widget Manager will just be a little system tray app that has short-cuts to your widgets and lets you manage the ones that are running. You don't have to run it though.

<Frogboy> You can run DesktopX widgets just by having the client installed on your computer. So Widget Manager will just exist to make it easier to get at them (in other words, it's not an envirnoment).  In the other widget enabling programs, you have to first load the "environment" and then run the widgets. this is a level of overhead DesktopX 3 won't have.

<Frogboy> Then you have DesktopX 3 Standard. It's $24.95 but will also come with Object Desktop.

<Frogboy> It will let you create objects, widgets, and desktops (.desktop) files (themes). 

<Frogboy> It's similar to what we have today but with a cleaner interface.

<Frogboy> And lastly you will have DesktopX Pro for $69.95.  The only thing it adds over the DesktopX Standard is that it can create stand-alone programs that ANYONE can use.

<Frogboy> As an example of that let me show you a "gadget" I made for Gamasutra:

<Frogboy> https://www.stardock.com/brad/gs.html

<Frogboy> Being able to build something and use it stand alone in minutes is a "big" deal. It puts DesktopX Pro in a whole new category of software development environments.

<Frogboy> ##

<Nakor> Everytime I see an article on the Internet about widgets, it's talking about

<Nakor> Konfabulator. Why shouldn't I make my widgets there for OS X AND windows?

<Frogboy> Well there's a couple of thigns.  First, Konfabulator is an outstanding product.

<Frogboy> And on the surface, cross-platform widgets sounds like a great thing. Until, at least, you start really looking into it.

<Frogboy> Cross-platform widgets mean you are dealing with the lowest common denomoninator.

<Frogboy> Let me give you you an example:

<Frogboy> With DesktopX, you can access the Windows specific APIs.  That means the whole MSI console of things.  If you want to find oout something about yoru PC, you can use the built in Windows APIs with DesktopX.

<Frogboy> With something like Konfabulator, they have to have specifically implemented it.  I.e. a .getbatterylife type feature has to be specifically coded by the Konfabulator devleoeprs.  With DesktopX, we don't have to code that (we have plugins for that but you don't even really have to use them). So that's a big advantage right there.

<Frogboy> Secondly, Konfabulator has no equivalent to DesktopX Pro.  So the widget you make with Konfaublator still requirs Konfabulator in order to use.  That means the user has to download a 7 to 10 megabyte download first, install that, then download the widget and use that.

<Frogboy> With a DesktopX Pro gadget, like the exampe I gave here: https://www.stardock.com/brad/gamasutra.zip any user cna use this. They don't need anyting installed.

<Frogboy> Where Stardock has failed..

<Frogboy> Is that we didn't recognize early enough about the improtance of having nice looking, GOOD examples.

<Frogboy> The Konfabulator developers did an outstanding job of providing initial, well documented, examples of how to make various kinds of widgets to open the minds of widget developers.

<Frogboy> By contrast, with DesktopX 2, we essentially tossed it out thre and said "Go for it, make neat stuff"

<Frogboy> And so we ended up with 500 clocks and other little things.

<Frogboy> So with DesktopX 3, we hop eto correct this. adn with the opening of DesktopGadgets.com, we hope to poen the door for devleoprs to make some really outstanding thigns. Widgets need not be little desktop toys. You can make really useful things with them. The point is, you don't have to be a mega software devleoper to create them.

<Frogboy> ##

<Nakor> ed looks to increase his knowledge by asking: what is the base size of a DXPro app?

<Frogboy> 500K in that example.

<Frogboy> So her'es the irony --

<Frogboy> You culd create a really slick looking widget with DeksotpX Pro whose EXE size is smaller than a typical "Hello World" app created in .NET.

<Frogboy> ##

<Nakor> ThomThom bangs the technical drum and asks: will we be able to iterate through all objects in the DX enviroment?

<Nakor> i.e.: getting all child objects of an object into an array for instance? then be able to interact with them objects?

<Frogboy> Yes.

<Frogboy> You would have something like myObject = DesktopX.CreateObject("Hello");

<Frogboy> Or do it as an array. That means states, child objects, the whole works can be interacted with from a single scriopt.

<Frogboy> i.e. myObjects<Frogboy> ##

<Nakor> <jier> q: brad mentioned dx can access windows api, but  from my experience this is only through plugins. will winapi be available through scripting in dx3?

<Frogboy> (excuse my horrific syntax errors please)

<Frogboy> ##

<Frogboy> Yes.  for instance, the whole MSI range of things are available in DesktopX 3.

<Nakor> WMI

<Frogboy> Doh, inded, WMI interface. Thanks.

<Frogboy> Plus we plan to have a scripteable Win32 wrapper available.

<Frogboy> ##

* Frogboy thumps self for saying MSI -- twice!

<Nakor> That sort of answers this questoin, but... DesignCaddy flashes the channel and asks: Will desktop x 3 have

<Nakor> better integration with the scripting engine for porting Flash apps? Right now, you seem to need to embed

<Nakor> in an IE control. kugo88 has a related question in terms of embedding IRC in the desktop like Linux.

<Frogboy> Well, indeed right now Flash is integrated via ActiveX.  In terms of direct integration, I'm not quite certain yet what benefit that wuld be.

<Frogboy> I can, for instance, embed a flash game as a DesktopX object. I've done that in some DesktopX 2 widgets for instance.

<Frogboy> ##

<Nakor> Let's move onto some new areas.

<Nakor> What is stardock's new Multiplicity application and why should I pay for it rather than using Synergy!

<Frogboy> There's a qeustion I was looking for.

<Frogboy> Multiplicity is a program that is designed specifically to allow users to merge their various computers they have available to them locally into one computing platform.

<Frogboy> Now, on paper, the freeware, o pensource program Synergy lets you control multiple computers with a single keyboard and mouse.

<Frogboy> Then again, on paper, Microsoft Outlook and a freeeware open source Linux text email client are pretty similar too.

<Frogboy> Next week, we will be putting out the beta demo version of Multiplicity.  It's in use that the differences in these kinds of things will be more apparent.

* WBlinds adds that its cool

<Frogboy> I'm not sure how many peopoel here have used Synergy.  We've used it extensively and while it is a great thing (especially for free), it tends to lose connection, tneds to have problems reconnecting to other machines, has little security, is hard to set up, doesn't have filec opying, and all kinds of other features.

* Nakor adds that he's using it during this chat

<Frogboy> The thing about about Multiplicity, and this really has to be seen to really be understood, is how seamless it is.

* Frogboy is using it right now too.

<Frogboy> If you've ever used multi-monitor, you can imagine what multiplicity is like. It's that seamless.

<Frogboy> I use it all the time and can't imagine using anythign else. And at this point, I've used every alternative I can think of to see how it compares. Everyone else seems to look at multi-PC control as being a sort of software KVM switch. 

<Frogboy> By contrast, we look at Multiplicity as being the next step up from having a SMP box.  For someoen who wants to multiply their computing power and have them work together.

<Frogboy> As a single unit.

<Frogboy> And that difference in approach is what translates to all the usability features.  We think that a LOT ofp eople have multiple comptuers now.

<Frogboy> And we also think that a lot of those people would find this program immensely useful. The key is making sure it's easy to set up, has lots of usability features, etc.

<Frogboy> I guess the best real world analogy would be this:

<Frogboy> Many of you probably have ObjectDock Plus.

<Frogboy> However, on apper, ObjectDock PLus is very similar to this program:

<Frogboy> http://www.winstep.net/default.asp?cat=workshelf

<Frogboy> We even support WinStep's software on WinCustomize.

<Frogboy> But if you were to do a bullet item feature comparison between ObjectDock Plus and Workshelf they would sound like they're teh same thing.

<Frogboy> But anyoen who has used them both would find that their approaches to be completely different.

<Frogboy> ##

<Nakor> <Zoomba> Q: How long after release can we expect the OS X version of Multiplicity to surface?

<Frogboy> We're not sure yet.  It's a very high priority for us though.  The ability for a user to run a PC and Mac together is somethign we think is key. Then after that we would look at doing a Linux based client.

<Frogboy> ##

<Nakor> Zoomba reads webpages closely and asks: Multiplicty is part of the ThinkDesk suite according to the information page.

<Nakor> Can you tell us more about what other products will be a part of ThinkDesk?

<Frogboy> Sure.  Right now, Stardock basically has three product lines.

<Frogboy> You've got the games - TotalGaming.net

<Frogboy> You've got Object Desktop

<Frogboy> and you've got the WinCustomize products (ObjectDock, CursorXP, etc.)

<Frogboy> ThinkDesk is a whole new suite of programs designed to let people manage their "stuff".

<Frogboy> Multiplicity is the first program in that list.  But this time we're going the programs seperately and then will bundlethem up later.

<Frogboy> Our database system will enable us to provide steep discounts to those who have purchased components (i.e. if you've bought a couple of the programs it'll konw which ones and generate a custom upgrade price for you).

<Frogboy> The other programs are partially under wraps in terms of their full features.  But we have SecureProcess, ThinkSync, and KeepSafe.  We'll talk more about those programs as they near their beta releases.

<Frogboy> ##

<Nakor> so much for Magus' question about upgrade pricing!

<Nakor> I've been waiting patiently for a new ControlCenter from Stardock. Please? Pretty please?

<Frogboy> heh.  Well th twould be the first thign I'd be worried about.

<Frogboy> The wait is nearly over.

<Frogboy> Yesterday we released the beta of Virtual Desktops 2.

<Frogboy> Having the next generation virtual desktops was obviously very key to the release of a ControlCenter 2.

<Frogboy> Once we have the virtual desktops complete, We can finish up the "host" for thost virtual desktps in the form of COntrolCenter 2.

<Frogboy> It will be based on the ObjectBar 2 code but it will visually look simila rto ControlCenter except it'll be skinnable, support embedding DesktopX widgets in there, and have a lot more features.

<Frogboy> This should be ready this Spring.

<Frogboy> ##

<Nakor> A last desktop enhancement question before moving onto games...

<Nakor> phlu asks: "My question is, can future ObjectDock Plus versions allow showing BOTH

<Nakor> tray and taskbar icons on NORMAL docks, because in the latest versions you can

<Nakor> only choose to show only one of them. I'm using it to replace my taskbar."

<Frogboy> I'm not sure on that.  I suspect that may be technically difficult to do but I will ask about that.

<Frogboy> ##

<Nakor> <Zoomba> When TotalGaming.net was launched, there was a bit about monthly games through the end of '04.

<Nakor> I know a month was missed and was wondering what was going to be done with that.

<Nakor> Also, what can we expect coming down the line in '05?

<Frogboy> Don't forget, go to #questions to ask questions if you have somethig you would like to know about.

<Frogboy> We have two more games ready for release but we've not had the (ahem) "marketing bandwidth" to get them out the door.

<Frogboy> In hindsight, we shoudl have said a game every other month.

<Frogboy> Because what happened is taht we started releasing a game per month and the media and such would scarecly mention it.

<Frogboy> That said, something big is about to happen for TotalGaming.net

<Frogboy> This Spring, we're going to launch TotalGaming.net Phase 2.

<Frogboy> Instead of a yearly subscription, it'll be a token based system (existing users will be converted to this).

<Frogboy> This has a distinct advantage for customers -- they can pick and choose which games.  The idea came from the issue with Galactic Civilizations II.  You could have someone who bought TotalGaming.net and then has their subscription expire a month before GalCiv 2 ships. Imagine if the ONLY reason they bought TotalGaming.net was to get GalCiv 2 and then it expired?

<Frogboy> But the token system has another big advantage:

<Frogboy> It enables us to get a LOT mroe good content for it.

<Frogboy> It cleans up the "royalty" issue for game developers.

<Frogboy> We hired Brian Clair to lead the new TotalGaming.net effort and he's been talking to game developers from aroudn the world and many want their games on TotalGaming.net.

<Frogboy> So once TotalGaming.net phase 2 launches, we expect ot start releasing a LOT of games on there. It'll be essentially the iTunes for gamers.

<Frogboy> ##

<Nakor> I've preordered GalCiv2 and am looking forward to the beta. Soon? Soonish?

<Frogboy> March is the beta of GalCiv 2.

<Frogboy> ##

<Nakor> q: what player feedback, if any, has been incorporated into GC2?

<Frogboy> There's tons of features in GC 2 based on feedback.

<Frogboy> For one thing, you can play as any alien race now in GalCiv 2.

<Frogboy> before, you coudl only play as humans.

<Frogboy> It would be too lengthy to go into all the new stuff there. Just go to https://www.galciv2.com and check that out.

<Frogboy> ##

<Nakor> more non-games questions

<Nakor> q: I have an AMD64 and the 64bit XP beta from microsoft. when is wb going to be

<Nakor> skinning this version of windows?

<Frogboy> This is something we're working on presently actually.  I suspect WindowBlinds 4.51 will be launched shortly after Multiplicity is put away.

<Frogboy> Here's an interesting bit of trivia: The WindowBlinds team is the same team working on Multiplicity.

<Frogboy> I think we have 64bit XP working internally now. It's just that MS's way of..ahem..implementing system extensions was a bit non optimal.

<Frogboy> ##

<Nakor> We do have x64 support internally for AMD64 and the new intel chips.

<Nakor> q: windowblinds 4.5 added per-pixel support for start menus. will that be expanded?

<Frogboy> That really depends on a lot of things.

<Frogboy> I think it's safe to say it'll be "expanded" when Longhorn comes out since Avalon shoudl enable us to have alpha blended everything across the OS.

<Frogboy> But in terms of Windows XP, we're still struggling with that.

<Frogboy> The Start menu having per pixel alpha blending is difficult but not that difficult to do.

<Frogboy> It doesn't move.

<Frogboy> It doesn't resize.

<Frogboy> So it can be done.

<Frogboy> But a normal window can be moved, resized, etc.  And even today, in 2005 where WindowBlinds 4.5 is so much faster than what's built in that most people can notice the difference we still have the "l33ts" who run around saying WindowBlinds is a "bloated pig".

<Frogboy> So there is concern about how we could implement such features iwthout any performance hit. That is what we're struggling with now.

<Frogboy> ##

<Nakor> Skarn: Will the new online validation for Object Desktop affect the archive and restore procedure?

<Nakor> Will restored apps require revalidation after archiving?

<Frogboy> ##

<Frogboy> That's a good question.  I am not certain on that.  I would probably say no in general.

* Frogboy doesn't like DRM in general.

<Frogboy> ##

<Nakor> They won't require reactivation

<Nakor> but you won't be able to just copy the directory to another pc and expect it to work

<Nakor> q: articles are reporting that there will be longhorn builds available by

<Nakor> late june. can we expect to see some cool new things from stardock?

<Frogboy> A lot of that depends on Microsoft and what features are in Longhorn.

<Frogboy> The biggest new feature from our point of view is Avalon.  Avalon comes with a compositing engine that shoudl allow us to do things that were previously impossible.

<Frogboy> In a nutshell, Avalon should, in theory, allow us to do anything to a GUI that one could imagine being done in a computer game. So you can imagine the possibiltiies there.

<Frogboy> ##

<Nakor> q: might desktopx 3 make use of avalon in the future?

* Frogboy and by a remarkable coincidence, Stardock makes games and hence has developers ready to pounce on such new features.

<Frogboy> Yes.

<Frogboy> I think that's a given.  I have 3 things I would like to see in a post-Longhorn DesktopX:

<Frogboy> 1) Make use of Avalon for its visual effects.

<Frogboy> 2) Make use of the .x format (Direct3D) to be able to have truly 3D objects, vectors, etc. in there.

<Frogboy> 3) Use XAML as the underlying code that our DeskotpX UI talks to.

<Frogboy> To expand on #3, I want to be able to use .NET to create my widgets. Imagine being able to use C# to create really cool stuff with DesktopX and combine that with Avalon's features?

<Frogboy> Not that .NET widgets aren't possible now, the problem is requiring users to download 20 megs of .NET libraries which we don't consider acceptable.  Longhorn will resolve that.

<Frogboy> ##

<Nakor> q: what is the diffrence between Multiplicity and Remote Desktop or VNC or something liek that?

<Frogboy> The idea of Multiplicity is that you would have multiple PCs.

<Frogboy> Each PC has at least ONE monitor.

<Frogboy> Adn they are all together near you. It's NOT remote control.

<Frogboy> Your first PC has the keyboard and mouse.

<Frogboy> The other computers don't need a keyboard and mouse but are all connected together via a network connection of some kind.

<Frogboy> So you move your mouse over to the other monitor and you're controlling the coputer that that monitor is connected to.

<Frogboy> VNC and Remote Desktop are remote control solutions.  You are logging onto some computer and its display takes over (or shares) your primary monitor display.

<Frogboy> ##

<Nakor> q: Why woudl I use multiplicity instead of a KVM switch?      

<Frogboy> A KVM switch is a hardware adapter in which your mouse, keyboard, and monitor are hooked into as well as mulple computers.

<Frogboy> So when you want to view a different computer, you can switch (either with a hardware switch) or with a hot key of some kind.

<Frogboy> They're mostly used by network adminstrators or other technical support folks as a way of saving space.

<Frogboy> Most of the programs we've encountered that let you control multiple computers with a single keyboard and mouse (Synergy, Rover, etc.) seem to hve been designed with the thought of offering an alternative to that.

<Frogboy> So in a sense, a KVM switch "competes" wiht this kind of program.

<Frogboy> But the difference has to do wtih implementation.

<Frogboy> Multplicity is designed specifically sothat you're using these computers TOGETHER as a single entity.

<Frogboy> For example,a ll the web addresses I've used in this conversation have come from my other computer via Multiplicity's shared clipboard between my computers here in my office.

<Frogboy> I could also copy files and folders doing the same kind of thing. Or images.

<Frogboy> For me personally, I spent years trying to get the most out of SMP boxes.

<Frogboy> But I was never able to work fludily because somethign woudl always slow downthe SMP box or bring up the hourglass.

<Frogboy> With Multiplicity, I can use all these coputers together as a sort of super-SMP system.

<Frogboy> ##

<Nakor> <zubaz25> q: Will Multiplicity support dual monitors on the SECONDARY PC?

<Nakor> I'll answer this one: yes

<Nakor> ##

<Frogboy> Yea, Nakor's office is a testiment to that!

<Nakor> <GrimStone> what happned to mobilization ??? the true civilization simulator from star dock ?? remember reading about it at avault and apolyton.net

<Frogboy> Heh.

<Frogboy> Well, I can't go into too much detail about that but let me put it like this..

<Frogboy> Instead of Mobilization it's going to be Society. (www.societygame.com).

<Frogboy> And while it will still have a full blown single player mode, its multiplayer is actually a massively multiplery game.

<Frogboy> Sort of a World of Warcraft but for RTS. Or imagine Age of Empries done as a massively multiplayer game.

<Frogboy> But we'll be talking about that more soon.  One other thing, it's going to be FREE.

<Frogboy> ##

<Nakor> <Psyringe> Regarding TG.net Phase 2: I'm planning to subscribe to TG.net shortly. You said that existing accounts will

<Nakor> be converted to the new token based system. When I subscribe now, can I download all the games, test them, play them etc.

<Nakor> or may that cost me tokens in the conversion process?

<Frogboy> You would get all the games now.

<Frogboy> Plus you would get the tokens on top of that.

<Frogboy> ##

<Nakor> <GrimStone> any multiplayer modes in Gal Civ 2 ??

<Frogboy> Okay, I'm goign to open this up for everyone after this next question.

<Frogboy> Then anyoen can ask questions and I'll do my best to keep up.

<Nakor> there's one more to take as well from me

<Nakor> before we open it up

<Frogboy> GalCiv 2 won't have multiplayer built in.

<Frogboy> But we may do it in an exapsnion pack.

<Frogboy> ##

<Nakor> <Skarn> If I have desktopX Pro, are there limitations on how, how many, and to who I distribute my compiled freestanding objects? What stops a pro user converting everything into stand alones for his/her mates, effectivly circumventing the need for them to have desktopx standard/lite?

<Frogboy> Skarn: That is why DesktopX Pro costs more.  Also, you can't just take other people's work and distribute them. That's software piracy after all.

<Frogboy> But there are no limitations other than you can't build entire desktops as EXEs. That you would need to talk to us if you wanted to build say a Kiosk desktop or something to give to corproations.

<Frogboy> ##

* Nakor sets mode: -m

<Frogboy> Thanks guys for meeting with us. We look forward to doing more in the future!

..I'm in a ranting mood...stand back!

Over the years I've noticed a pretty consistent thing - there are people who really really have a problem with the concept of people making a living selling software.

As a result, some of these people make it their mission to go out and harass people (like me) who make a living selling software. 

One example came up today. I am a news moderator on the popular tech news site Neowin.net. I think it's a fantastic site with an incredible staff of volunteers.  But it has a sizeable user population of "l33t" users who a) Think they know everything on tech because, well they're 19 years old and they know everything doncha know? and Non-free software is the devil and any level of nastiness is justified to thwart the purveyers of evil.

One guy today went so far to create an account called "ToadLad" (my account name there is "Frogboy"). Get it? Toad = Frog. Lad = Boy.  Very clever...

Since I post software news on Neowin I also post Stardock's press releases too. On other sites, our media relations goddess does this. But since I'm a news moderator on Neowin, it makes sense for me to go ahead and do this since, essentially I would be the one who would end up approving the final news item.

But this guy went onto a rant that essentially went like this "You just love to spam the world with your crap? You've already got Stardock.com and WinCustomize.com? Why do you have to spam your stuff here?" Here being a Technology NEWS site. And spam being news for software that is (god forbid) not free.

For those not ambitious enough to create fake users to troll the comments, you also have the people who insist on trying to rationalize that any good commercial product has a freeware equivalent.  Photoshop? Oh, the Gimp is much better. Terminal Server? Loser, VNC.  WindowBlinds? No, just hack your uxtheme.dll.  And now with our upcoming Multiplicity program we've got the same crowd chimes in with "Oh, you can do the same thing with Synergy!"

In most of these cases (almost all these cases) these "l33t" users have never actually used the commercial product (see "evil" above).  But they just know because they know everything.  Who cares if the "Free" program has a lot fewer features or is flakey or requires hours of setup time to work? When you're 19, time is all that matters and $20 or whatever is big money to someone who's source of income is their mom. 

I have nothing against free software. I use a lot of free software.  In fact, I use free software whenever I can. I'll take free over commercial any day if it does what I need it to do.  But there is nothing inherently magical about free software. And the downside is that most free software I run into (not all of course, there are very well known examples) have the 80% problem.  They work -- almost.  They tend to often be more proof of concept.

"Sure the screen flickers when you switch desktops and you can't play a full screen game while using it and you have to configure the machines using a text file with arcane configuration fields and it sometimes disconnects for no reason requiring you to reboot...but...it's free!"

I don't think I have a problem so much with the people who try to promote a freeware program. Hey, more power to them. I take the view that people who might potentially buy our product will try out the free alternative, try ours and make their own conclusion.

What I do have a problem with are the people who intentionally go out of their way to try to stifle my right to promote our software.  The double-standards really irritates me. As if free software somehow deserves special treatment because it's "free".  I don't think users should make such distinctions in terms of what gets reported, only in terms of when someone makes a decision on what to actually use.