[bbxstudio]

Originally posted by rezonate:
The box I talk of is the charge that shapeshifter introduces, and how it times out, that can be a problem for some. So what I said was to basically say that the ground is now open for others to use other themechangers, fair is fair. I never said it was a bad thing that shapeshifter costs; what I do see now is a line being drawn between the shapeshifter guys, and the other themers. Bit silly.

The charge shouldn't be a problem - computers aren't free, most software isn't free... the main skinning app for the last version of the system (K2 for OS9) cost even more and nobody complained about that. I understand that a shift to a shareware over freeware switcher system is causing some concern for some people, but forgive me if I'm wrong, but didn't I pay $25 for Duality?

Originally posted by rezonate:
[[ And would people whine about paying for that too? After all - something as complex as a WYSIWYG gui creator should be pretty simple to create in a couple of weekends, no? ]]

Show me where I whined? please do. All I see is you getting very defensive about all this.

Sorry - that wasn't directed at yourself or anybody in particular (it was supposed to be a thinking out loud thing that's why I used square brackets - should have said it wasn;t directed at yourself and damned if I didn't think I should at that at the time but forgot. Again, apologies - it was just a knee-jerk reaction to all the whining about the cost of SS I've been reading over the past couple days.

Nah, I know what is exactly involved, since I work in the film industry as a special effects animator/artist, and have worked on things such as futuristic interfaces for films like Attack of the Clones, Phantom menace, the hulk, etc. More work goes into that than any computer theme.

Hey cool job! - but I do the same thing for videogames, commercial media player skins and applications (which can get just as complex with regards to 3D and animations - I still use tools like Maya and AfterEffects but with the added level of complexity in that people actually have to use what I'm creating). Honestly though, designing something that's going to be onscreen for one shot and something people have to use day in and day out are two totally seperate things. It's much easier to design without limits than it is to design within them.

But listen - you design the imaginary interfaces for these great movies - they must be using you because you have a knack, correct? I mean it's not something just anybody can just pick up and do and do well, is it?

It's the same thing with real interfaces - you say it's easy but look at who's talking, a guy who designs sci-fi UIs for movies You and I have the mindset, we know what we're doing and it took us a while to learn and develop techniques... for the average user, designing an original OSX theme from the ground up is going to be a daunting task, regardless of the tools. That's all I'm saying.

[bbxstudio]

Originally posted by Fellow2000:
What a sad world that would be. We would get a trailer and then have to wait another 2 or 3 years before we get to see the movie.

Hehe - it's almost that bad now

[rezonate]

Originally posted by bbxstudio:
The charge shouldn't be a problem - computers aren't free, most software isn't free... the main skinning app for the last version of the system (K2 for OS9) cost even more and nobody complained about that. I understand that a shift to a shareware over freeware switcher system is causing some concern for some people, but forgive me if I'm wrong, but didn't I pay $25 for Duality?

I'm sorry how I came across about the charge thing, I find the cost to be reasonable, and that it does bring about a more concrete form for themeing on the Mac, and god we need it. I'm one of those that gladly pay for all my shareware, and love to support such endeavors. My contention was that some themers might find a problem releasing a theme which was only accessible via a system which timed out after 10 days ( I think), instead of just throwing up some pay the fee dialog every so often. I've tried shapeshifter, I like it, it holds lots of promise, but I guess I just thought, based on some opinions here, that it might not be the thing for some. Good or bad? I don't really know, I hope think we'll see the merits of a system soon enough.

Sorry - that wasn't directed at yourself or anybody in particular (it was supposed to be a thinking out loud thing that's why I used square brackets - should have said it wasn;t directed at yourself and damned if I didn't think I should at that at the time but forgot. Again, apologies - it was just a knee-jerk reaction to all the whining about the cost of SS I've been reading over the past couple days.

Sorry, I re-read what I wrote and realised it wasn't a dig at me and I apologise too for ranting without thinking,

Hey cool job! - but I do the same thing for videogames, commercial media player skins and applications (which can get just as complex with regards to 3D and animations - I still use tools like Maya and AfterEffects but with the added level of complexity in that people actually have to use what I'm creating). Honestly though, designing something that's going to be onscreen for one shot and something people have to use day in and day out are two totally seperate things. It's much easier to design without limits than it is to design within them.

But listen - you design the imaginary interfaces for these great movies - they must be using you because you have a knack, correct? I mean it's not something just anybody can just pick up and do and do well, is it?

It's the same thing with real interfaces - you say it's easy but look at who's talking, a guy who designs sci-fi UIs for movies You and I have the mindset, we know what we're doing and it took us a while to learn and develop techniques... for the average user, designing an original OSX theme from the ground up is going to be a daunting task, regardless of the tools. That's all I'm saying.

I know, god I know, and that's why I check out here so often cause I see some pretty amazing designs and concepts coming out. I also see the frustration that some of you have with method of themeing on the Mac, I really feel that pain on how many hurdles you have to go through, and that battle of minds with Apple and their anti-themeing thing, lol.

Hey thanks a bunch for the comments, it's not often that I really talk in forums, or online about what I do, (except a few cgi, lists) especially since being at ILM ( 8 years now, god I';m an old bugger), it's nice to hear.
you're right though about what this involves, and I think I forget it sometimes, but am reminded of it every so often when I see things outside of films, such as your BBX overlay kit, that looks pretty awesome, and yes, I am one of those waiting for you to release it But looking at that, it shows me what an imagination can do, reminds me of the process of getting there. For me, I kinda started out simply, drawing, animating, and bits of home made film stuff; then got bit by the 3D animation buzz, and that's what really got me going, I just felt that it was the way for me to express stories, and thoughts in such a new way. I think that's what it's like for you too, the result can be an amazing feat, or journey, maybe never quite satisified with the end result, but the process of doing it, and the expression with it, is where the learning, and realisation can come from. really opens your mind.

Yeah, what we both do is pretty different, and the constraints are there, for both of us, but are different. Mine seems to involve time, what the guys tell me on how much detail I have to get into, or out of a model, or scene.

Hey, if you're into games, my brother works as a cut-scenes director for Rockstar games, the guys who do Grand Theft Auto, and such like. They've just finished off the latest game, Manhunt, he did the animated cut scenes and such like with a team of other guys. It looks pretty cool so far, lucky sod.

[phillryu]

Dude, you guys rock, I was just basing this off of pure design, not doing the CGI and stuff hehe. I think I get how the interface in minority report may have been a teeny bit more time consuming to represent than Omega. Though I can't be sure hehe.

Are you working on the next star wars movie?

[Stevos]

Just noting that the first release of Monolith won't have application patching. Its a work in progress.

OK, so Monolith v1 is uh...Duality?

Monolith can also theme apps at ship time and has a far better feature set. We see Shapeshifter as a potential competitor, but it runs far differently (i.e. Monolith has no overhead, it only uses built in OS functionality).

Does 'ship time' mean that you can hit the theme button and all your apps change, instantly?

Next, built in OS functionality... what do you mean by this? APE uses 'built in' functionality, it's the same stuff used in GDB. Regardless, I'm skeptical as hell.

[goMac]

Originally posted by bbxstudio:
but forgive me if I'm wrong, but didn't I pay $25 for Duality?

If you gave me $25 for Duality I'm yet to see it. Its been $10-$15.

[goMac]

Originally posted by Stevos:
OK, so Monolith v1 is uh...Duality?



Does 'ship time' mean that you can hit the theme button and all your apps change, instantly?

Next, built in OS functionality... what do you mean by this? APE uses 'built in' functionality, it's the same stuff used in GDB. Regardless, I'm skeptical as hell.

Monolith ISN'T Duality. It makes no modifications to the file system and doesn't require authentication. This is a pretty major difference.

GDB is allowed in by other programs that are compiled specifically for it. I have to check a little box in XCode to let GDB debug my program. APE exploits a hole in protected memory during the linking of an application when it starts up by modifying the application to point to code outside its space (as far as I am aware). Its quite a difference.

What Shapeshifter does is not new. We came across the way Shapeshifter works last year. I contacted Smeger, was informed Unsanity was working on a project, and decided it was not worth pursuing a theme changer that ran like Shapeshifter because it required to build our own APE. We decided that we would release one last version of Duality and then kill things to let Shapeshifter in. This summer we got tired of waiting for Shapeshifter and began writing our own engine. It became clear that writing a engine similar to Shapeshifter was not the way to go, and we began writing the engine Monolith will use instead.

You can complain all that you want that Monolith is not out in a usable form right now, and that is ok. I think that when Monolith does arrive people will see it is a better product and adopt it.

[Tulkas]

Originally posted by goMac:
Monolith ISN'T Duality. It makes no modifications to the file system and doesn't require authentication. This is a pretty major difference.

GDB is allowed in by other programs that are compiled specifically for it. I have to check a little box in XCode to let GDB debug my program. APE exploits a hole in protected memory during the linking of an application when it starts up by modifying the application to point to code outside its space (as far as I am aware). Its quite a difference.

What Shapeshifter does is not new. We came across the way Shapeshifter works last year. I contacted Smeger, was informed Unsanity was working on a project, and decided it was not worth pursuing a theme changer that ran like Shapeshifter because it required to build our own APE. We decided that we would release one last version of Duality and then kill things to let Shapeshifter in. This summer we got tired of waiting for Shapeshifter and began writing our own engine. It became clear that writing a engine similar to Shapeshifter was not the way to go, and we began writing the engine Monolith will use instead.

You can complain all that you want that Monolith is not out in a usable form right now, and that is ok. I think that when Monolith does arrive people will see it is a better product and adopt it.

Without going into detail, what exactly is the biggest advantage of the monolith engine? I honestly think it may turn out to be better, but people seem skeptical of a product they don't understand.

[NetworkShadow]

Originally posted by Tulkas:
Without going into detail, what exactly is the biggest advantage of the monolith engine? I honestly think it may turn out to be better, but people seem skeptical of a product they don't understand.

I'm using whatever BBX, Max, and Swiz make themes for, so if it's not Monolith I'm not going to use it. IF BBX, Max, and Swiz adopt Monolith then I will too. It's really that simple.

[goMac]

Originally posted by Tulkas:
Without going into detail, what exactly is the biggest advantage of the monolith engine? I honestly think it may turn out to be better, but people seem skeptical of a product they don't understand.

It has quite a few advantages:

� It stays out of other applications memory space, reducing possible crashes
� It has a far broader scope in what it can theme. APE can only override API's, mainly relating to PXM's. Monolith can theme many things, including images on the users computer, like the about box, custom buttons in apps, etc.
� It has full backwards compatiblity. It can run any theme from 10.0 up.
� It is built on ThemeKit on open formats. It runs .theme, .dlta, .rsrc and XScheme.
� It gives users broader choices by allowing them to mix and match different parts of a theme.

It shouldn't be long now until the first tangible evidence of Monolith for the non-believers.

[Stevos]

Originally posted by goMac:

GDB is allowed in by other programs that are compiled specifically for it. I have to check a little box in XCode to let GDB debug my program. APE exploits a hole in protected memory during the linking of an application when it starts up by modifying the application to point to code outside its space (as far as I am aware). Its quite a difference.

hint: 'gdb attach proc#id'. Lets you do a hell of a lot with any program, it's how a lot of reverse engineering is done. I think there is a way to turn this off for an app, but very few seem to do it. If Slava or Roysna could hop in here and confirm my belief that GDB and APE make many of the same system calls that would be nice.

[goMac]

Originally posted by Stevos:
hint: 'gdb attach proc#id'. Lets you do a hell of a lot with any program, it's how a lot of reverse engineering is done. I think there is a way to turn this off for an app, but very few seem to do it. If Slava or Roysna could hop in here and confirm my belief that GDB and APE make many of the same system calls that would be nice.

Most reverse engineering is done on a BSD/Mach level.

If you do some research online you can find quite a bit of discussion on this, along with some example code that patches into another application's space. I'm sure APE is more robust, due to some limits on the size of the code that can be introduced into an application.

[MorphOSX]

Hey Colin,

On the Carpestelarem website, is the contact info for you good? was hoping i'd've heard back from ya but haven't gotten anything and it's been at least a few hours.

My ISP is notorious for dropping e-mails, so I figured i'd contact you here since you're sure to see it.

Thanks,
Dave

[goMac]

Originally posted by MorphOSX:
Hey Colin,

On the Carpestelarem website, is the contact info for you good? was hoping i'd've heard back from ya but haven't gotten anything and it's been at least a few hours.

My ISP is notorious for dropping e-mails, so I figured i'd contact you here since you're sure to see it.

Thanks,
Dave

If you emailed the contact address for Duality (and not CarpeDaemon, DNS, Radius) then your ISP must have dropped it. I didn't get anything.

I'm gomac (at) mac.com.

[MorphOSX]

could've sworn that that's the address I used. Ah, well, I've resent the e-mail, expect it soon.

Thanks,

Dave

[goMac]

Originally posted by MorphOSX:
could've sworn that that's the address I used. Ah, well, I've resent the e-mail, expect it soon.

Thanks,

Dave

Got it. I'll look you up in the database.

[slava]

Originally posted by Stevos:
hint: 'gdb attach proc#id'. Lets you do a hell of a lot with any program, it's how a lot of reverse engineering is done. I think there is a way to turn this off for an app, but very few seem to do it. If Slava or Roysna could hop in here and confirm my belief that GDB and APE make many of the same system calls that would be nice.

In fact, Colin is wrong. A program doesnt have to be compiled specifically for GDB to attach to it. Quite contrary, the program must take extra steps to prevent attach, like iTunes does, and yet it is easily bypassable from within GDB.

And no, APE doesn't quite uses the same calls as the ones used by GDB. To go technical, GDB uses ptrace() and friends (man ptrace), whereas APE uses vm_allocate and friends. Both are a legal mach or POSIX APIs and existed around for a long while.

As for Colin assumptions about what ShapeShifter cannot potentially do, I beg you, do not make them if you're not quite understanding how everything works, as you have admitted here before. I can tell you for sure what ShapeShifter CANNOT do at the present time: replace the boot screen as it cannot run outside of user login session. If Monolith can, and is not replacing system files, it must be running as root outside the login session, which can be a Bad Idea. But as said before, I will not make any more assumptions cause I haven't seen how Mono works... yet.

Preemptive bashing of the competitor can be good for your future, but at least get your info straight first. =)

[Rosyna]

Originally posted by goMac:
It has quite a few advantages:

� It stays out of other applications memory space, reducing possible crashes
� It has a far broader scope in what it can theme. APE can only override API's, mainly relating to PXM's. Monolith can theme many things, including images on the users computer, like the about box, custom buttons in apps, etc.
� It has full backwards compatiblity. It can run any theme from 10.0 up.
� It is built on ThemeKit on open formats. It runs .theme, .dlta, .rsrc and XScheme.
� It gives users broader choices by allowing them to mix and match different parts of a theme.

It shouldn't be long now until the first tangible evidence of Monolith for the non-believers.

So you wrote a kernel extension?

[rezonate]

Originally posted by phillryu:
Dude, you guys rock, I was just basing this off of pure design, not doing the CGI and stuff hehe. I think I get how the interface in minority report may have been a teeny bit more time consuming to represent than Omega. Though I can't be sure hehe.

Are you working on the next star wars movie?

Cheers phillryu. I can imagine that what bbx does is just as much of a headache at times as working on a film too, lol.

Yup, been working on the next SW film for a while now, but I'm glad to get some vacation time just now, so back home for a few weeks in the UK, then back out to work at the end of the month; and it's along slog for another year and a half or so, but I'll be doing little bits for other projects, so that kinda evens it out a bit.. Wish I could have been here for the New Year though.

You should check out Noel Rubin, who was the senior designer on the Phantom Menace, he actually did the 3D interfaces for the film, such as for the pod race, he came on board for it, and was thrown right into the chaos.

Here's his website, it's quite a nicely designed one too, just rollover the name of the site and go to the design section, then go to the screen graphics secxtion for the star wars stuff.

http://www.teknoel.com/

[ambush]

Originally posted by Rosyna:
So you wrote a kernel extension?

No.

And Colin, shuz your mouf

We need to keep the features SECRET

[milhouse]

Too much bitching and whining fellas...

If there are security or stability concerns, ask questions. If it becomes a matter of opinion and folks don't like the manner in which a developer's unique SW implements a functionality, or the version feature set, write your own ...

IMO, competition can be very positive.
Theming has not been "state of the art" for OS X but I think we may be heading in that direction. I've been more than happy to donate to themers, theme changers and I've paid for Duality. Ditto for Unsanity's products.
(IMO, the theme creators deserve to be paid for their talents as well )

I'll happily purchase an upgrade to Monolith and support Mac shareware development.

cheers

[unlinear]

Originally posted by slava:
If Monolith can, and is not replacing system files, it must be running as root outside the login session, which can be a Bad Idea.

Actually, if it DOES do that, I think i'd want to know in case I ever want to install Monolith. And it'd have to be optional to run it as root. That's a scary, scary thing to do.

Good point, slava. thanks for scaring me.

[goMac]

I never said anything about the user login screen. Thats obviously user based and can't be themed in Monolith. (Well, it could, but it would be pointless).

: blinks :

So apparently I was wrong about APE, which explains how it gets around the memory limits.

[quandarry]

.

[solidfox]

It's like a small war in here...

[SomeToast]

Originally posted by rezonate:
You should check out Noel Rubin, who was the senior designer on the Phantom Menace, he actually did the 3D interfaces for the film, such as for the pod race, he came on board for it, and was thrown right into the chaos.

He did that "trouble" screen sequence in the pod race? No question, one of my favorite bits from the movie. Without a character of English text and with a lot of peripheral activity going on, it depicts with clarity the engine problem and fix done to get around it. Beautifully done. Right up there with my other favorite screen, the battle droid startup sequence, which I see he did as well.

If only themeing allowed for such flights of fancy. But that's probably why I'm also a Konfabulator fan... the being able to start from a blank slate.

[phillryu]

Having a real interface change like say a really futuristic star wars computer interface would be really neat, but unfortunately, it just would be impossible. Think about all those custom widgets applications use, ironically to look more consistent, and iTunes, etc.

That would be so cool though

[NetworkShadow]

Originally posted by phillryu:
Having a real interface change like say a really futuristic star wars computer interface would be really neat, but unfortunately, it just would be impossible. Think about all those custom widgets applications use, ironically to look more consistent, and iTunes, etc.

That would be so cool though

Ya I wish Apple didn't go with the strange hardcoded metal interface for iApps...

[Sage]

Originally posted by rezonate:
You should check out Noel Rubin, who was the senior designer on the Phantom Menace, he actually did the 3D interfaces for the film, such as for the pod race, he came on board for it, and was thrown right into the chaos.

Here's his website, it's quite a nicely designed one too, just rollover the name of the site and go to the design section, then go to the screen graphics secxtion for the star wars stuff.

http://www.teknoel.com/

I've been visiting Rubin's site for over a year now, and it's always a lot of fun. That's easily one of the most awesome sites ever... and I particularly like his Deskulator, since it's a beautiful way to present the various sized desktops that can be downloaded.

[phillryu]

Where's the deskulator? I love the smoothness of the site, it feels incredibly polished and high tech.