SkinKrafter not working on W11?

[ricardo]

Hi,

I dont know if i change something in W11 but SkinKrafter is not working here anymore.

Its that it does not work on W11?

Another method to skin windows?

Best Regards

// Moved from "Coding Questions" to "Off Topic" (Kiffi)

[RASHAD]

Yeees
Just Uninstall the last Update

[ricardo]

Yeees
Just Uninstall the last Update

Last update of Win11?

But the problem is that if i compile and distribute a program with SkinCrafter it will not work on many PCs and i cant ask users to unisntall lst update

[Bitblazer]

Hi,

I dont know if i change something in W11 but SkinKrafter is not working here anymore.

Ask the Skincrafter support.

Another method to skin windows?

There was another method that was actually better. I remember it was something about combining a stardock product with windowblinds compatible skins.

Maybe Infragistics AppStylist or Krypton are solutions in 2023.

[ricardo]

But i want to skin the window for some application that i want to distribute.

Krypton is the only that its free but it uses .net

The other one is more than 1k dollars

[Kuron]

Krypton also looks outdated by about 20 years...

[pamen]

Well,
I tried in the last months following:

- SkinCrafter - fails on many systems indeed. Support is non-existent or just does not reply.

- Beautiful Winlift (past: PowerBasic, now rewritten in C++ for 64 bit) - after 3 weeks tests and exchanging examples with the developer (a really nice and helpful person) we did not manage to make it work without crashes (it works with pure windows API apps, but not with PureBasic). This can work with simple project with one window, but as soon as there are many windows or complex menus - all goes still sideways with kernel and user memory access errors,.

- CodeJock (around 900 USD/EUR) - this is sort of up to date and works (after some input from Idle and Olli) without any bugs with PureBasic up to Windows 11, but delivered skins are mostly based on msstyles from 2005-2010 , the only new skin "Windows 10" is ok-ish but without any dark mode (and no automatic Higg-DPI support). Their Skin Builder is unusable - it does not save projects, so one can spend hours designing a skin, save it and then all the work is simply gone...

- When it comes to Devexpress, Infragistics and the likes: those are for .NET Forms or Universal Windows apps, they do not have any "skinning" for plain windows API based 32/64 applications at all. Devexpress is excellent and has great support, but that is not for PureBasic.

Under the line - CodeJock could be a solution, but only if you dig through 10,000 lines of C++ code by yourself (there is no documentation for code and no documentation for skin design). Make your skins by hand using text files and never contact support - as the chances that they will just tell you to "figure it yourself" instead of giving a helping hand are at least 95% from my experience so far.

So - anyone knows a better "skinning" product which actually works?

[ChrisR]

@pamen , @Patrice Terrier
Thanks for your research, comments on the different skinning engines.
A recurring topic that comes up from time to time here.

- Beautiful Winlift (past: PowerBasic, now rewritten in C++ for 64 bit) - after 3 weeks tests and exchanging examples with the developer (a really nice and helpful person) we did not manage to make it work without crashes (it works with pure windows API apps, but not with PureBasic). This can work with simple project with one window, but as soon as there are many windows or complex menus - all goes still sideways with kernel and user memory access errors.

Winlift looks really great for producing state-of-the-art GUI.
Is it possible to have an inventory, a summary, on the problems encountered and why it could not be used with PB or what should be done for it to work ? if I'm able to understand!

[pamen]

Thanks Chris
In meantime - most showstopper issues with interoperability of WinLift with PureBasic are solved.
The engine is not ready yet for PureBasic - there are still some minor (mostly flicker) issues with PB which are not present in C++/C, but it is close, handles any combo boxes, free areas of ListView and so on. Unlike CodeJock - it is not ready for any dark mode as it does not handle quite a few controls/gadgets.

When it is production ready for people who do not want to spend too much time - I will reference it in a new post or here with new pricing.

Object Color is though quite fine for simpler applications, free and it is written in PB - so I'm all for using it (thanks ChrisR), if it fits the purpose!

[Patrice Terrier]

So far WinLIFT64, dispite my efforts, doesn't work with PureBasic.

[Fred]

Hi Patrice, you can contact me in PM if you need more info about PB internals to try to solve your issue

[pamen]

Hi Patrice - I wouldn't agree - it works now, after solving GDIPlus loadlibrary thingy.
I just run an application with some 20 different screens for nearly 2 hours, used all features and closed / opened all screens (also dynamically created or those which open themselves, including tool windows, with and without menus etc.) and I see only cosmetic issues, some may be related to PureBasic, most are not.

As before - I will help further and thanks to Fred you will get all the additional magic knowledge I do not have !

[Kuron]

Well,
I tried in the last months following:

Keep in mind that most of those you named looked horrible in their prime, even moreso now. The accepted norm for skinning is not what it used to be, and more modern methods are used now, of which there are numerous threads here with different methods being used. That said, with Windows 10 and 11 being so configurable by users in aesthetics, many users will not be happy if you plunk an app on their system that looks like it crawled out of some grave from the 90s or early 00's. They want their system to look the way they set it to look or they expect if something is skinned, it to be more modern looking. There are lots of examples here of more modern skinning, but not enough screenshots, IMHO.

If you want to go retro a couple of years, this look would still be very acceptable to EUs. Beauty will always be in the eye of the beholder, but all platforms today aim for clean looks, not something as gaudy as the necklace from the 70s somebody found at a flea market. The latter will make your app stick out like a sore thumb.

[pamen]

I fully agree Kuren, that is exactly the point:
Windows does not update how native controls look in Win32/64 controls as MacOS does - one needs to "fake" modern toned down looks in PB applications.
You cannot make PureBasic UI with MS methods as this would require all controls to be based not on native controls and juggling with UI on each OS.

Do you want to make multi-platform app and spend 3 years of just coding everywhere "CompilerSelect", making your home brew HTML or Sciter , Avalon / B4J, Java... interfaces and maybe use Canvas on Windows and Native controls on other systems - then good luck with that. You are tinkering, not writing functional and useful applications.

I do not see a different approach from just making modern skins - at least light and dark with "stolen" palette, highlights, borders, hover effects and so on.
And the toolkits may be old, but if they work well, support Windows native controls well and give you the ability to make a OS matching skin without rewriting your code or breaking it - that will work and save you endless headaches.

"Aw, cute, does really more than my current cool app[Plug here your competitor name], but I don't want to have this ancient looking application on my screen" - this is the killer for your project. Skin it with a skin designed (by a graphic designer) with a sense and understanding what is modern, currently accepted, how it works graphically and psychologically - it may spare you that opinion and allow you have some users.

We do above at my work with .NET (and DevExpress) - in most cases look of the UI seems more important than the actual functionality. I can tell customer - we do more than SAP but simpler! And that may be true, but he/she will reject it anyway in many cases if the UI does not look at least consistent with what they are used to and appropriate for their culture.

Back to subject PureBasic - [Modern] "Skins" or colors or call it whatever are a must outside hobby or project based development, isn't it?

[ricardo]

But if you look at the market, many well known software as Norton, Adobe and many more uses its own skinned GUis.
And nobody get angry or stopped buying it and if those big companies used this own skins are because it works, because they dont do silly movements.

Best Regards