StealthOS is the closest to a fully compatible skin that I have used.

The fact that WB has changed over the past two years (sometimes in big ways, and sometimes in small ways) does not seem to affect this skin from performing on a consistent basis.

Due to my now using the Adobe CS2 series of programs, I have seen some small issues with the WB5 program and these programs, but it appears to be linked to either the handling of the shell frame components and/or the use of video resources to accomplish performance. For instance, when multiple files are open and I mouse over the control buttons of a file behind the foremost file, the control button becomes active, yet the window does not move forward. The workaround I found for this was to click the file titlebar to bring it to the front and make it active, then click the file that was in front to reset. A bit of extra work, but not enough to condemn anything.

There are other small issues like this one, which I will assume that Stardock will correct in the upcoming builds.

This makes it a bit more difficult to assess the performance of the skin(s) vs. the performance of the WB5 program - IMO.

All in all, for anyone wanting to have control of the GUI shell look and feel, WB5 is still the best bet, and StealthOS is still the standard that I measure all skins by.

No highjacking intended, just some additional comment content.