[goMac]

The source code to the .Skin format has been released on SourceForge. This means developers can begin making use of this new theme format within their applications. .Skin has many features beyond current theme formats.

� .Skin is a open source specification, available royalty free.
� Resource based design: Unlike guiKit which uses a file based design, .Skin uses a full resource design. Instead of storing the Extras.rsrc as a file, it is stored by resource, allowing for better compression and better ability to interact with a theme. In addition, 3rd party developers may add their own resource types.
� The format is built for application overriding based theme changers, but will also work with file based theme changers.
� .Skin is a format built both for editing and distribution to the end user. This makes is both easy for theme creators to release themes, and end users to mod themes.
� .Skin adapts to the users machine, automatically becoming compatible for the users version of Mac OS X.
� Resources an be edited across multiple variations within a .Skin at a time as part of the format design. Tools based on .Skin can easy change resources that are the same across multiple variations all at once by design, speeding up theme creation time.
� Better compression algorithms can create themes 1/3 of the size of their guiKit counterparts.
� .Skin can render pxms without additional coding needed, making the creation of theme editor tools simple. The .Skin format code contains all the necessary theme editing code.
� Enhanced theme preview support: Theme previews now support rich text types.
� DRM Support: .Skin has support for DRM within themes at various levels. Certain portions of a .Skin may have one level of DRM, while a different portion of a theme may have another. This allows theme creators to make certain portions of a theme free, while others may require a DRM key to unlock. .Skin is built to allow anyone to issue their own keys and encoding via a key server. Currently developers must write their own key server and DRM authentication code. DRM is completely optional, and there are currently no DRM authentication servers.
� Support for various OS X theme enhancements such as menu enhancer and Finder theming.
� Full support for application theming.
� Support for icon sets and sound sets: Both icns and tiff icons are supported. Mac OS 9 sound sets are also supported.
� Database driven design: .Skin automatically organizes and optimizes lookups of various resources.
� Easy translation from XScheme, DLTA, and .theme (XScheme 2.0 is not supported). Basic support for importing decompressed guiKits is also in place.
� Easy bridging to native Radio classes.

The .Skin format is available to developers for use immediately. Use of the .Skin format requires the ThemeKit 2.0 framework. ThemeKit 2.0 is hosted at SourceForge at the following address:

http://sourceforge.net/projects/themekit

ThemeKit is available under the GPL (GNU Public License).

No programs are currently shipping that use the .Skin format. It is being made available so that developers wishing to build theme software based upon it have early access, in addition to any Radio developers so they may openly work with ThemeKit. Programs currently in development using .Skin are scheduled to start arriving within the next few months. Carpe Stellarem is currently building a theme editor for .Skin files. 3rd parties are welcome to pursue coding of their own theme creation software.

Current goals of .Skin format development are importation of guiKit and ThemePark project files, commenting code and adding documentation, eliminating older code, adding cursor support, increasing layo resource support, continued testing on 10.4 (including handling any adaptation needed for using 10.3 themes on 10.4), and continuing development on DRM.

[demograph68]

Is this suppose to be an alternative to Shapeshifter?

[goMac]

Originally posted by demograph68:
Is this suppose to be an alternative to Shapeshifter?

It's a theme format. It would be more an alternative to guiKit.

[kwyjiboy]

[MacDog]

Originally posted by demograph68:
Is this suppose to be an alternative to Shapeshifter?

It's what you might call... a waste of time.

[)\/(aelstrom]

Hey goMac!

I am wondering; What application released in the next six months will support this format? I , not wish to denote your skill and creativity, I just Do Not see a use for a format with no apparent support in upcoming months, as it wil sit on a hard drive, gathering digital dust, forgotton, until the user, even if the program is out, deletes the file to make room for another intriguing essay on the state of sponges in the Saltan Sea. So, if you may release a Developmental verson for cross- checking, a Public Beta, or equivalent margianally functional program to remove the accusations of Vapourware and a format supported by no-one.

I personally hope you will quash the Vapourware accusations, and makle this format usable, in a timely manner.

-)\/(

[siMac]

Sounds interesting...

But then again, so did Duality when that was 'announced', yet we're all still using ShapeShifter aren't we?

I admire your determination Colin, but you don't seem to have learned anything from the last round.

By the way, I have developed an opensource file format for 3D fully interactive porn called .Skinflick, available to developers immediately. No programs are currently shipping that use the .Skinflick format, but in the coming months I expect a release of the full BlowJob� application.

[valdur]

alternatives are always good...well, not always good, but are welcome...

hoping to see something good and different...

SS is great and all..but it's monopoly is windoze-like...

apple is the prime example of a welcome alternative....

you have my support...

[FB Eye]

Shouldn't this be announced in some developer forum or something? I don't consider myself an idiot (although some people would beg to differ), but all this technical mumbo jumbo is Chinese to me...

I know it's GUI related, but at this point it's no interest to 90% of this community

[aristotles]

*Sigh* What a bunch of fan boys. As a paid user of Shapeshifter, I welcome alternatives and competition.

This is a "good thing" as it will drive the developers of shapeshifter to continue to improve their product to provide a better value proposition to those who would buy licenses.

You guys should not expect a finished product from the get go. Was shapeshifter built in a day?

@FB Eye: Do we discuss up coming versions of Shapeshifter here? Yes. Is this sub-forum called Shapeshifter or GUI Customization? Obviously, the latter.

[Maflynn]

Originally posted by aristotles:
This is a "good thing" as it will drive the developers of shapeshifter to continue to improve their product to provide a better value proposition to those who would buy licenses.

You guys should not expect a finished product from the get go. Was shapeshifter built in a day?

While competition is good, GoMac has unforunitly over-hyped and under-delivered many of his promises. At best he's trying to salvage the work that was put into duality. He promised that in January of 04 (or was in 03 I forget) and said it was only a couple months away from release - it never saw the light of day.

I don't think Unsanity has a Microsoft like monopoly, they produced an excellent theme changer, the older version of duality was on the market and the customers voted with their pocketbooks. That's capitalism not a monopoly. They also have not (to my knowledge) tried to force out other competitors like MS or use unfair business practices like MS. Its too bad (in the name of capitalism and competition) that they stand alone now however.

Having a file format w/o an application is near useless. Since its open source and if it in deed superior to the guikit format (I don't know if it is) perhaps unsanity can incorporate it into a future release of SS.


Mike

[gdiddy]

Originally posted by Maflynn:
GoMac has unforunitly over-hyped and under-delivered many of his promisese

... or what is now called "Pulling a BBX"


While I applaud the effort, I too have my reservations about anything this guy talks about.

[Maflynn]

Originally posted by gdiddy:
... or what is now called "Pulling a BBX"


While I applaud the effort, I too have my reservations about anything this guy talks about.

Doh,

I need to get up to date on my lingo

[goMac]

Originally posted by gdiddy:
... or what is now called "Pulling a BBX"


While I applaud the effort, I too have my reservations about anything this guy talks about.

The source code for the entire format is at SourceForge. Developers are welcome to download it and implement .Skin in applications. I don't think we can be discredited in preemptively announcing anything when the theme format is all we've really announced, and the source code is out now.

[kwyjiboy]

I don't see any apps that support this. Where can I download them? Or are you hoping Unsanity will metaphorically fellate your ego and use this instead of their format?

[FB Eye]

Originally posted by aristotles:
@FB Eye: Do we discuss up coming versions of Shapeshifter here? Yes. Is this sub-forum called Shapeshifter or GUI Customization? Obviously, the latter.
[/B]

We discuss ShapeShifter because it's an actual product we can use. It can modify our GUI right now and is useful to most of this community...

But announcing some technical mumbo jumbo that is of interest only to developers is not of interest to the majority of this community. When Colin has something close to being released that is something we can actually use, then I'll be interested...

I use to be interested in what was coming up for Duality, because I was using Duality and was looking forward to the new features. But a frameworkdooda DRM database driven code is not what this community is about...

Peace!!!

[goMac]

Originally posted by kwyjiboy:
I don't see any apps that support this. Where can I download them? Or are you hoping Unsanity will metaphorically fellate your ego and use this instead of their format?

I actually sneaked an app out that is based on .skin earlier in the file based theme changing thread. You'll probably start to see more in the next few days.

We've talked with various 3rd parties about supporting .skin and the feeling I've gotten is they want to see finished code before they support anything. No one is going to support a theme format unless the code for it is released. I haven't talked with Jason about implementing .skin, but he's perfectly welcome to. .Skin has quite a few advantages over .guiKit.

I really don't think it would be proper to say anything more regarding .skin applications at this time... I've already had to self edit this post enough.

[olorin15]

Jesus, this has been chewed over and over and over already so many times ... another great useless piece of software from our resident genius goMac.

[smeger]

Originally posted by goMac:
.Skin has quite a few advantages over .guiKit.

Since you have zero knowledge of what guiKit can or cannot do, I'm not sure how you managed to arrive at this conclusion.

[Tick]

Originally posted by smeger:
Since you have zero knowledge of what guiKit can or cannot do, I'm not sure how you managed to arrive at this conclusion.

Well, in his defense, he didn't say that it was totally better or totally worse. One advantage possibly is that he has a list made up here. Disadvantage right now is no release, lack of lots of support, etc.

[Fusion]

Originally posted by goMac:
I actually sneaked an app out that is based on .skin earlier in the file based theme changing thread. You'll probably start to see more in the next few days.

We've talked with various 3rd parties about supporting .skin and the feeling I've gotten is they want to see finished code before they support anything. No one is going to support a theme format unless the code for it is released. I haven't talked with Jason about implementing .skin, but he's perfectly welcome to. .Skin has quite a few advantages over .guiKit.

I really don't think it would be proper to say anything more regarding .skin applications at this time... I've already had to self edit this post enough.

Why isn't this guy banned yet?

Seriously, get a life. No one cares about your software plans. If you have something to show, then do it, otherwise keep the forums vacant of your nonsense.

[goMac]

Originally posted by smeger:
Since you have zero knowledge of what guiKit can or cannot do, I'm not sure how you managed to arrive at this conclusion.

Your resource storage system works completely differently. All the resources within a .guikit are stored as a Extras.rsrc within the guiKit. You can tell easily by generating a guiKit with ThemePark with only one modified resource and looking at the data output. The resulting guiKit has one file with a file path. Because guiKit stores by file this means there are significant problems with compression. .Skin automatically eliminates redundant resources with a hash system. It also has a built in pointer system. This means you can change resources being pointed to by a pointer, and the resource will change automatically in all variations that point to that resource. A nice side effect of this feature is that you can edit across multiple variations at once as part of the format. Yes, guiKit uses libz compression, but it still can't compress down as well.

In addition, in since .Skin stores by resource each resource can have its own metadata. Instead of having a whole Extras.rsrc be dependent on the OS version (as far as I can tell, guiKit only allows the whole theme to be dependent on the OS version) you can have multiple PXM's all for different variations of OS X within the same variation.

The encryption for guiKit also creates problems. The most obvious of which is that no one can open the file. There really isn't a point to this currently. ShapeShifter must cache all parts of the theme in order to do the necessary file overrides to redirect input. By writing the contents of the theme out to the hard drive as part of the theme change, the end user is able to pull everything out they need anyway. This is why drm is also not implementable on the theme changer side yet. Second, the encryption causes a few file size issues. In an example, guiKit has taken a theme name that should be 4 bytes long and instead uses a 20 byte one. Now, you might not be using encryption. But I know libz won't touch that theme name, and NSSerializer won't take it either, so you'd have to be using some extremely goofy serialization, which at that point it might as well be encrypted.

On that note a .skin is a pure Cocoa serialization. It has a bit more overhead in the file than guiKit, but .skin is noticeably more efficient when the variations start to stack on. Because .skin is a serialization, that means when you open a .skin you get pure Cocoa objects, making it very easy to build applications around .skin. Those Cocoa objects have many for free features in them, such as image rendering, resource file generation, etc. This makes is very easy to custom build theme apps around .skin.

Finally guiKit is a closed system, with no public API, making it impossible for developers to share data with ShapeShifter. I think the repercussions of this will be more clear in the near future.

[Syzygy]

Originally posted by goMac:
I think the repercussions of this will be more clear in the near future.

Talk all you like, why don't you just show us for once? We're all waiting.

[G0Ducks]

Originally posted by Syzygy:
Talk all you like, why don't you just show us for once? We're all waiting.

goMac, please, give us something. I have been here for a while and have hoped to see your products to come to light as much as any. It is hard to give much creed to this app / thingy that you are talking about now.
You must remember that most of us here, save smeger, are just consumers of the themeing world. We don't much want to know how the watch works, but if the watch works well. What I mean to say is that we really only want to consume something tangible, not read about what it could be.

You have my hopes this last time. Please use them well.

Sincerely,

R

[MorphOSX]

I immensely respect Smeger's opinions (and not just because he's a friend of mine), and his development work is nothing short of genious.

That said, I must agree, goMac, you've hyped products that will be "more open" and "more efficient" than ShapeShifter for a while now, and yet nothing like that has ever come to light. Now we have an "open-source" theme format for developers and themers to use that perports to be as easy to use as guiKit if not moreso. Okay, that's great, now tell me how someone is supposed to use the source code for a theme format to create a theme? ThemePark, a ready-made application, allows for themers to simply cut and paste their resources into their new theme and save it as a guiKit and voila you have a theme. So tell me how you do this with .Skins?

You also complain that guiKit isn't an open theme format (and so you make assumptions about it without evidence of the actual frameworks to back it up) and try to create a product to beat it based on that. Smeger's pointed out befoer that he had to create the format the way he did to support a lot of the features that themers take for granted in ShapeShifter that one cannot do with straight resource hacking or with other options. So, how do you make yours do this? (I haven't gone through your sourcecode so I couldn't begin to speculate, you can elaborate if you wish).

I see a format for themes that is released with fanfare of how it's great, but I see also that you're hoping that this theme format will get accepted by some other developer who will go through the truouble of supporting it in some kind of client to use it (or maybe even with shapeshifter to support it) by making it look really popular.

If you really want to compete with Shape Shifter and make a product that people will use, you hae to first have a complete product package that people will use. You can't make an alpha-grade theme editor, a hacked-up theme format, and a promise of a theme changer that will do all sorts of nifty things and then expect people to line up in droves at your doorstep. We're all jaded by developers that promise us the next big thing and then give us the next big headache. And, hey, if it ain't broke, don't fix it.

[goMac]

Originally posted by MorphOSX:
You also complain that guiKit isn't an open theme format (and so you make assumptions about it without evidence of the actual frameworks to back it up) and try to create a product to beat it based on that. Smeger's pointed out befoer that he had to create the format the way he did to support a lot of the features that themers take for granted in ShapeShifter that one cannot do with straight resource hacking or with other options. So, how do you make yours do this? (I haven't gone through your sourcecode so I couldn't begin to speculate, you can elaborate if you wish).

I see a format for themes that is released with fanfare of how it's great, but I see also that you're hoping that this theme format will get accepted by some other developer who will go through the truouble of supporting it in some kind of client to use it (or maybe even with shapeshifter to support it) by making it look really popular.

If you really want to compete with Shape Shifter and make a product that people will use, you hae to first have a complete product package that people will use. You can't make an alpha-grade theme editor, a hacked-up theme format, and a promise of a theme changer that will do all sorts of nifty things and then expect people to line up in droves at your doorstep. We're all jaded by developers that promise us the next big thing and then give us the next big headache. And, hey, if it ain't broke, don't fix it.

There are a few problems with guiKit. First off, it still stores all resources in a Extras.rsrc. The Extras.rsrc is archived within a guiKit, but its still there. There is an advantage to this I can think of, it could make generating a Extras.rsrc a bit faster for a theme change, but thats about it. .Skin moves all resources out of a resource file, into pure Cocoa objects. This frees them up a lot, meaning you can attach all sorts of things to resources such as metadata and rendering functionality. The reason guiKit cannot store more data along with resources is because it needs an improved resource storage system. In addition, .Skin also supports multiple types of data entries. You can store any information you want in a .Skin, and I mean absolutely anything.

(Edit: Hey! Had to go to work... time to finish the post)

.Skin actually works quite a bit like a QuickTime movie. A QuickTime movie can contain anything in it, DiVX, MPEG4, MP3 audio, etc, but its all wrapped in a QuickTime .mov. .Skin works the same way. Of course theres a lot of stuff supplied so deveopers don't all put in their own versions of, say, a PXM resource. There is a standardized data type for PXM's, LAYO's, etc. But if there is any "extra" information that doesn't fit a resource that can be added.

I don't see anything in guiKit that really screams to me that there is special support for some function. It's file based, and the fancy encryption or serialization or whatever it is doesn't serve a purpose besides making the file unreadable. Even the theme name seems to be encrypted or have really funky serialization (because it SHOULD be serialized as ASCII, and its definelty not a standard Cocoa serialization from what I can tell). I can read the structure of a guiKit file, but the data storage it does is just plain weird, and everyone who I've talked to whos looked at it can't make heads or tails from it. It doesn't seem to have much of a place. There is no reason Jason couldn't release his code for the format. I'm sure he has standard classes for reading the format from a program. Others have also suggested we could pay some sort of licensing fee to read it, but seeing as how any guiKit code we get would be released into ThemeKit as open source, I don't see that happening. No one can really figure out why guiKit is so gosh darn unreadable. Theres just no good reason for it. If Jason could release guiKitty, what is the harm in releasing the code behind the format?

We currently have 4 secret projects going: Radio, Highway, and a few other ones without code names. Catalyst was another but that was already announced. I've stayed away from saying anything, but I'd assume perhaps one or more of those projects has to do with themes? I mean... we wouldn't just design a theme format for no reason. I'm sure we'd at least have projects to test the theme format with. But considering we're getting enough criticism for just announcing a format, and we'd like our own take on themes to stay unique for just a little while, we've not said anything regarding this on purpose. We've been very very picky on getting testers for these projects, and most of them are only people I know on a face to face basis. But... who knows... maybe there are a few testers who've been lurking in the forums here.

[Fusion]

You bring shame to Mac development. What ********.

[olorin15]

Originally posted by goMac:

We currently have 4 secret projects going

goMac, you are so entertaining That should be your singature.
Personally, I don't want to drop too many hints, but I'm working on a top secret project (code name "dumbass") that may or may not have something to do with manipulating the fabric of space-time itself, which, who knows, may result in rendering all existing theme formats obsolete, as it will probably allow a program's appearance to be altered in real time by the power of human thought alone ... possibilities are endless ... I'll give you an ETA soon, wink wink

[Maflynn]

Originally posted by goMac:
We currently have 4 secret projects going: Radio, Highway, and a few other ones without code names. Catalyst was another but that was already announced. I've stayed away from saying anything

I wasn't going to post again but your replies seem to scream respond.

First as Smeger said, not seeing the frameworks, you only guessing at how it guikits work. You of all people have no right to complain about them also. He has at least a working program, you nothing.

Second, your posting the release of your file format here which makes little sense. As someone else pointed out, there's not too many developers here, mostly designers and enthusiasts.

Third speaking of theme designers you have like zero credability with them. Your overhyping of the new duality (or whatever it was called) and never releasing it, burned you especially when your reputation here was in the mud beforehand. Why should a designer port his theme to vaporware.

Fourth, your "4 secret projects" was probably the funniest line in this whole thread. Why mention them if they aresecret
If (big if) you are finally produce something other then vaporware, why not wait to release .skin until the apps see the light of day.

You post here to a mostly hostile crowd, now mind you the hostility is your own doing but why post

You seem to crave attention even if its bad attention. Let your work do the talking. Even though you slammed Smeger's file format take a page from his book. SS was kept under wraps before it was released. The updates have not really been preannonuced. Never mind dropping hints of your secret posts or releasing the file format to the open source, and glibly hinting that something is coming down the pike.

Do it, release it and hope that you haven't burned all of your bridges with the designers so they may port their work.

Mike

[goMac]

Originally posted by Maflynn:
secret posts

And what secret posts would these be?

[Maflynn]

Originally posted by goMac:
And what secret posts would these be?

Err I mean secret projets, which I quoted you. My fingers were faster then my brain

this may be a double post, I got a mysql error just as I was entering this.

[goMac]

Originally posted by Maflynn:
Err I mean secret projets, which I quoted you. My fingers were faster then my brain

this may be a double post, I got a mysql error just as I was entering this.

The projects are only secret as far as they haven't been announced to the public. We've been doing demos and distributing documentation on the projects for quite a while now. They're pretty well publicly know under codename, except no one actually knows what they do... A lot of people have been assuming that Radio is a theme changer (which it isn't). So even though you didn't know we had projects going under codename, quite a few people do.

As far as the guiKit format is concerned, we can tell a lot about it from:

a) Generating guiKit files in ThemePark and reading the file in a hex editor. You can look at all the various keys in a guiKit that way. The problem comes when you can't read the values associated with these keys. Still, this gives you an idea of what kind of data is in a guiKit and how it is stored. This alone shows a lot of differences between .skin and .guiKit.
b) You can look at the libraries guiKitty links to to see what kind of libraries its using for guiKit. This is actually the only place I've seen any sort of thing implying the guiKit doesn't use any complex compression. It doesn't seem to link to any standard encryption libraries, although it does use libz. Libz iirc does not support encryption. However, that doesn't change that data values within a guiKit are unreadable.

Some people we've talked to who've tried to figure out guiKit are saying that the way they would go about it is actually de-compiling guiKitty and looking at the source, but we're not going to be going that route as the legality of that is probably shaky.

I wrote a whole blog entry on my initial impressions of the guiKit format:
http://gomac.blogspot.com/2005/02/gu...structure.html

[MorphOSX]

So let me get this straight, Colin. You generate themepark files and look at what it spits out, and you look at the files/resources that it links to and use a hex editor and all this and that and the other...

So tell me how does this actually show you what, if any, special code goes into the guiKit format? What, if any, of the tricks and file tweaks actually APPEAR in your magical machine showing you things smeger does under the hood that are not specifically resource-related, but rather are in the code of the file format but aren't acting directly on the resources themselves? Smeger has mentioned here more than once that he's used hacks and other tweaks to make guiKit go beyond the capabilities of just hacking the .rsrc file.

Err..you mean to tell me that your magical applications actually show you ALL of that? and you assume decompiling guiKitty will also show you that, but you're scared to do it?

This smacks of Ford looking at the Corvette and assuming by looking at the major parts under the hood that they understand that "oh there can't be anything special there" without seeing the engineering files that don't show up when you look at the car as a whole. Come on, man, anyone can tell you that the sum data doesn't always show you everything under the hood. If it did, Windows would be so much more like the MacOS today.

I think you need to grow up and show us something that actually works rather than saying "Oh well people know our stuff pretty well, we're surprised that you don't" because all this does is make you look like an arse who has an ego problem. Get off it, Colin, just admit that your products aren't getting done and then, instead of releasing the source code for a file format (which I still don't understand how a themer's actually going to use...is he going to have to compile it now? and just how IS someone supposed to edit the theme, anyway?) and then strut around about your 'four secret projects' that 'real people, face to face' have used and 'who knows, maybe some people here have seen it' who never respond that they HAVE seen it to even back you up that they even exist outside of your own wet dream?

I'm really tired of wading through your posts every other week trying to make sense of what you're announcing, and believe me, I'd really like to see other apps out there that could possibly do theming better, because then it would push further development which is good for everybody.

This is where we say, collectively, put up or shut up.

[goMac]

Originally posted by MorphOSX:
So tell me how does this actually show you what, if any, special code goes into the guiKit format? What, if any, of the tricks and file tweaks actually APPEAR in your magical machine showing you things smeger does under the hood that are not specifically resource-related, but rather are in the code of the file format but aren't acting directly on the resources themselves? Smeger has mentioned here more than once that he's used hacks and other tweaks to make guiKit go beyond the capabilities of just hacking the .rsrc file.

If you look at guiKit, you can see that there is no code or object serializations within it. It is comparable to a plist written in a style similar to what you'd use on Mac OS 9. It's readable in hex. Open up a guiKit in TextEdit if you want to see. Most of it will look like garbage, this is all encrypted data. However, its pretty easy to spot the keys. They are four letters and spread throughout the file. If you look at a format which is actually code based, (such as .skin, not that I'm expecting anyone has any .skin files), it looks like all garbage because the whole thing is a serialization, meaning the whole thing is actually code based. Another nail in the coffin behind the idea of guiKit being made of serialized objects (code based) is that each entry in a guiKit has a very clean header of some sort. Serialized objects generally don't. Of course I welcome your technical opinion on this, but so far everyone who's poked at it has come to the same conclusion. The only place code matters is decoding the individual files and keys in the guiKit. These could be serialized objects, but that would be pointless seeing as how everything is defined by plain text keys anyway. guiKit is pretty much a codeless format. It's very obvious from a short look. It also lacks the overhead of a fully serialized format.

Most likely the special things you're talking about are part of ShapeShifter's engine and not the theme format. Color and texture correction would all be part of that, as Jason has previous stated many times when people have tried to get themes working without ShapeShifter.

If you want to see anything, feel free to look at the source to the theme format. Beyond that I have other things to do than continue to reply to you. I have already stated my reasoning for not "putting up". You're free to take your own look at the guiKit format and make your own deductions.

[Maflynn]

I have to say these Gomac threads are by far the most entertaining here at Macnn.
You may not produce any software but at least you produce some good chuckles

[Dimethyltrypt]

*munches his buttery popcorn*


MORE

[iindigo]

Oh, give the poor guy a break... He probably has to deal with real life (work, family, etc) and doesn't have tons of time to work on his projects, but he gets excited with his projects, and wants to tell someone about it (this happens to me all the time). I think .skin has some real potential.

If you're truly not interested in GoMac's projects, then don't post in his threads! It's kinda like ordering sushi when you know you hate it... It's kinda dumb.

To get back on topic:
A friend of mine and I are working on a new theme changer/system customizer... I wish I could implement .skin, but I really don't know any Obj-C or Cocoa (I only know some REALBasic). I created the interface for my program in Interface Builder, but never really got any farther. Maybe we could have some sort of project merge...

[goMac]

Originally posted by iindigo:
Oh, give the poor guy a break... He probably has to deal with real life (work, family, etc) and doesn't have tons of time to work on his projects, but he gets excited with his projects, and wants to tell someone about it (this happens to me all the time). I think .skin has some real potential.

If you're truly not interested in GoMac's projects, then don't post in his threads! It's kinda like ordering sushi when you know you hate it... It's kinda dumb.

To get back on topic:
A friend of mine and I are working on a new theme changer/system customizer... I wish I could implement .skin, but I really don't know any Obj-C or Cocoa (I only know some REALBasic). I created the interface for my program in Interface Builder, but never really got any farther. Maybe we could have some sort of project merge...

If you're interested in implementing a theme changer program, we have a superset API for .skin you might be interested in. You can get my aim from my profile and im me about it. I can send you the design document for it.

[goMac]

Originally posted by Maflynn:
I have to say these Gomac threads are by far the most entertaining here at Macnn.
You may not produce any software but at least you produce some good chuckles

Fine. I'll make the thread more entertaining for you.

If Jason comes into this thread and proves that guiKit is a format built from serialized objects and not a bunch of data with headers in a data buffer like I'm saying (any file format is of course a serialization, but you're saying guiKit is a serialized object), I will gladly send him a king sized candy bar of his choice in the mail, as long as they carry it at the local Safeway (hell, I already paid for a lot of happy meals for him ). Hey, while I'm at it, I'll send you one too Maflynn. Beats coming in here and complaining about .skin, right?

Maybe its time for you to put up or shut up.

[Maflynn]

Originally posted by goMac:
If Jason comes into this thread and proves that guiKit is a format built from serialized objects...
Maybe its time for you to put up or shut up.

I could care less if guiKit is a serialized object, all I know is this one file format has an application that uses it and that app works well.

Your .skin may in fact be light years ahead of guikit but the biggest distinction is guiKit has ShapeShifter, yours *crickits chirping*

You were the one who promised that the new duality was only a few months away back in January of 04, Its now February of 05.

The funny thing is I really hoped that your theme changer saw the light of day. I think through competition products are enhanced.

Bottom line, I welcome your threads as they truly do lighten up my day.

Mike

[cgc]

Originally posted by goMac:
If you look at guiKit, you can see that there is no code or object serializations within it. It is comparable to a plist written in a style similar to what you'd use on Mac OS 9. It's readable in hex. Open up a guiKit in TextEdit if you want to see. Most of it will look like garbage, this is all encrypted data. However, its pretty easy to spot the keys. They are four letters and spread throughout the file. If you look at a format which is actually code based, (such as .skin, not that I'm expecting anyone has any .skin files), it looks like all garbage because the whole thing is a serialization, meaning the whole thing is actually code based. Another nail in the coffin behind the idea of guiKit being made of serialized objects (code based) is that each entry in a guiKit has a very clean header of some sort. Serialized objects generally don't. Of course I welcome your technical opinion on this, but so far everyone who's poked at it has come to the same conclusion. The only place code matters is decoding the individual files and keys in the guiKit. These could be serialized objects, but that would be pointless seeing as how everything is defined by plain text keys anyway. guiKit is pretty much a codeless format. It's very obvious from a short look. It also lacks the overhead of a fully serialized format.

Most likely the special things you're talking about are part of ShapeShifter's engine and not the theme format. Color and texture correction would all be part of that, as Jason has previous stated many times when people have tried to get themes working without ShapeShifter.

If you want to see anything, feel free to look at the source to the theme format. Beyond that I have other things to do than continue to reply to you. I have already stated my reasoning for not "putting up". You're free to take your own look at the guiKit format and make your own deductions.

Bottom line: what is the benefit of reworking SS to read .skins? It may be a more logical format, but in the end it's just data. SS is the heart of this entire theming community.

[goMac]

Originally posted by cgc:
Bottom line: what is the benefit of reworking SS to read .skins? It may be a more logical format, but in the end it's just data. SS is the heart of this entire theming community.

I wouldn't assume SS would ever add support for it. That said, we have our own plans for the format. Developers we have talked to about those plans want to see actual source. So, we're taking it one step at a time, starting from the bottom up.

[smeger]

Originally posted by goMac:
If Jason comes into this thread and proves that guiKit <blah>

Maybe its time for you to put up or shut up.

'Scuse me? I'm not sure why I need to prove anything to you.

guiKit is an opaque file format. The implication of this, which seems to escape you, is that it does whatever I need it to do. Your remarks regarding it illustrate an astounding lack of "getting it".

I suggest that you get your stuff working and give SS/TP some competition. Right now, all you're doing is making asinine claims with nothing to back them up.

I don't like to argue in public, so I'm not going to continue to do so, especially when it's about obscure file formats. Write good code, and stop bashing other people's.

[digitaljames]

Booyah! Way to go Jason!

[.saNNic.]

Originally posted by Maflynn:
I have to say these Gomac threads are by far the most entertaining here at Macnn.
You may not produce any software but at least you produce some good chuckles

Man, ain't that the truth!

LOL.


Oh and goMac, I think it's waaaay past time that you put up, or please, shut the **** up.

[siMac]

Originally posted by smeger:
The implication of this, which seems to escape you, is that it does whatever I need it to do. Your remarks regarding it illustrate an astounding lack of "getting it".

pwned.

[MacMan4000]

Originally posted by GoMac:
Im better than everyone... blah blah blah... Jason is a 'tard... blah blah...

Douche bag.

[goMac]

Originally posted by smeger:
'Scuse me? I'm not sure why I need to prove anything to you.

guiKit is an opaque file format. The implication of this, which seems to escape you, is that it does whatever I need it to do. Your remarks regarding it illustrate an astounding lack of "getting it".

I suggest that you get your stuff working and give SS/TP some competition. Right now, all you're doing is making asinine claims with nothing to back them up.

I don't like to argue in public, so I'm not going to continue to do so, especially when it's about obscure file formats. Write good code, and stop bashing other people's.

[dupe]

[goMac]

Originally posted by smeger:
'Scuse me? I'm not sure why I need to prove anything to you.

guiKit is an opaque file format. The implication of this, which seems to escape you, is that it does whatever I need it to do. Your remarks regarding it illustrate an astounding lack of "getting it".

I suggest that you get your stuff working and give SS/TP some competition. Right now, all you're doing is making asinine claims with nothing to back them up.

I don't like to argue in public, so I'm not going to continue to do so, especially when it's about obscure file formats. Write good code, and stop bashing other people's.

http://www.macthemesforums.net/viewtopic.php?t=354

I would not assume that we don't have other stuff already ready.

We already released a .Skin changer on here in this forum before we even announced .Skin. It was released in the file based changer thread. Proof of concept has already existed for quite a while.

guiKit has no programming end support. It's very cumbersome under most modern Mac OS X applications. It may be perfectly fine for what you do, but very soon its not just going to be about you. You have no idea what apps we have been working on, and I suggest you wait and see what we do with .skin. Hell, most of .skin is based on stuff YOU created when working on XScheme in Duality 4. .Skin is heavily based on hashes and is extremely fast because of this. You should see the technical advantage of a hash based format, because you're the one that originally designed one. For one who complained so much about DLTA, you designed a format much like it. Yes, you could change guiKit to do whatever you want it to do. Only if you kill backwards compatibility and re-write a lot of code. But then you don't really have guiKit anymore, do you?

.Skin is much faster than guiKit. Give Catalyst a spin. Theres no waiting when you add variations. The whole application is very fast actually, and the code is no where near optimizied. The interface is very clean. And in two days of development, its grown into a theme editor with pxm browsing and exporting to Photoshop, application skinning (of any Cocoa application and a lot of Carbon ones), and the beginnings of a icon editor. And the next build will contain an editor for creating a theme preview in HTML with support for anything Safari supports (CSS, Flash, Quicktime, etc). This is another thing that .skin can do that .guiKit can't, but hey, you can add it if you want.

[G0Ducks]

Originally posted by goMac:
http://www.macthemesforums.net/viewtopic.php?t=354

Give Catalyst a spin...

Your getting closer man. But both you and smeger need to be careful with this kind of open bickering... It really doesn't make me want to buy either one of your products. Admittedly, I already own SS

However, if something came out that is better... I can switch in an instant.

R