BiPolar Posted September 30, 2004 Posted September 30, 2004 I've been using litestep for awhile, and recently rebuilt my machine. I noticed that it takes a crapload shorter time for the machine to load into the windows shell than why I had it going into litestep. THey say it's supposed to be faster, but what are the opinions of you guys? Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Reidhardt Posted September 30, 2004 Posted September 30, 2004 Used litestep for a bit, decided explorer was a **** of a lot faster and stable than litestep. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
anthony Posted September 30, 2004 Posted September 30, 2004 Litestep does take longer to load, but I would much rather its interface. works better for me Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
pi-dickens_project Posted September 30, 2004 Posted September 30, 2004 what exactly is litestep? Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
anthony Posted September 30, 2004 Posted September 30, 2004 alternate explorer shell, unlike skins.. its an entirly new shell Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Reidhardt Posted September 30, 2004 Posted September 30, 2004 what exactly is litestep? An alternate shell. Windows by default uses the explorer shell, with the task bar, start menu, etc. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
BiPolar Posted September 30, 2004 Posted September 30, 2004 It's a shell replacement program (although it acts more like a shell-skin, since explorer continues to run). It allows you more freedom in desktop layout and functionality. You can go to Litestep to check them out. My old desktop (using the Plastik II theme) looked like this : My Old Desktop...just scroll down to my post. It's a whole new shell, but it still allows explorer to run for its functionality. So in reality, it's entirely new, but it still needs explorer to run, which i guess eats up some more sytem resources? Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Agallion Posted September 30, 2004 Posted September 30, 2004 i used it..meh i had to ctrl alt del to load into wiindows..it was ok lots of the themes didnt work and things go "broken" quickly Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
FollowerCTO Posted September 30, 2004 Posted September 30, 2004 yeah, a lot of tweaking is involved with Litestep... I used it when themes didn't even exist, you had to load modules individually, and the only configuration file was the step.rc.... I'm a veteran. takes a lot of time, but once you get it up and running, it just looks beautiful Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
BiPolar Posted September 30, 2004 Posted September 30, 2004 Yeah, i'm very happy with my end look, but just not too happy with the apparent system slowdown. I'm going to just keep explorer up for a while and see if I notice any differences (but i'll miss all my little modules, and the left click anywhere for file manager!) Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.