Po' Smedley's Life And Brain Drippings
Published on August 13, 2006 By PoSmedley In OS Customization
I don't want to offend anyone. Okay?

But what is the freakin deal with the sudden increase in skins that require Styler Tool bar to get the whole effect? If a person has to design or make the toolbar for styler, why not make all that stuff and apply it to WB's? I have seen some great skins, but end up deleting them when I find out I need styler to complete the skin.

Am I missing something? Is it possible to take the bits and pieces from the styler stuff and apply it to the wb skin in SkinStudio?

I thought the idea of using WB was to have ONE program skin it all. I don't want to have to buy something else, and I don't want to add to the load on my PC.

Can someone explain this to me? Granted, I have run into this more on DA, but lately these skins have been showing up here in more frequency.
on Aug 13, 2006
Hey Po, I think it is because Styler toolbar can do more than WB can but I agree it would be nice to have the toolbar icons in the WB for those of us who do not use Styler toolbar.
on Aug 13, 2006
Styler toolbar can do more than WB

Okay. I have looked at the site for it, but don't understand all it does.
Does it do what WB does? I notice a lot of the skins that have the Styler Toolbar seem to be 'ports'. Are they Styler ports or StyleXP ports? (or are they the same?)
on Aug 13, 2006
I agree that a wba should be complete. If someone wants t o include something extra, fine, but the wba should skin the customary parts for people who do not have the additional program.
on Aug 16, 2006
I am equally frustrated as well. They shouldn't be called WB skins since WB can do what Styler can at least from what I can see. And if it can't do it all, it certain does enough.
I don't even bother with skins that say they need Styler, though its shame to miss out on what might be great skins. Of course a bigger sin would be not saying it needs Styler, but I haven't seen that myself yet.