brazil: nah it just generally annoyed me So I visited Hoverdesk.net and have stayed there ever since

Thanks for the tip Madam Snowman,I have never tried HD.LS annoyed me as well.I thought the look and concept were for me, but even when I got a "theme" to load I got a hundred freaky warning screens telling me what the "OTS theme" I was trying to load was missing.Tried to get out and walla,frozen on every reboot,no way home.It,LS,seems to have eaten Bryan King.He loaded it on XP and the last post we got from him sounded like he was taking on water.Never to be heard from again so far.I also have noticed the lack of comments on LS themes and I have to wonder how many of these people loaded it like everything else on the WC Browser only to be hobbled on reboot.Then,after recovery, go to the page where you downloaded the theme to try and get help and click, no page to be displayed.Very poorly supported here and there.The kind of money needed to make a site like this fly will need mainstream money not fringe coinage.Either LS will join the cause or the Bandwidth Hogz gonna eat it,,and when it does the Litestepers will have no one to blame but themselves for ignoring the crys for help to crush the 'Steep learning curve"

The concensus is that LiteStep causes brazil problems (as does the space bar), while everyone else says it runs a-okay.

Thing is: LiteStep is for power users. If you're not comfortable with your machine, you shouldn't run it. Documentation and what not is out there, you just have to dig deep these days.

Experiment-ware so to speak (as opposed to one-click-install-ware).

bakerman: HvD CAN be used as shell, you just won't have the systray + some other "normal" windows thingys... but hey.. who needs'em anyways

gef: I don't think that LS it self is the cause for all the problems mentioned. I do believe that it is a "Fail 40", as in wrong/faulty "installation" of LS that causes these problems! If LS ain't setup correct it might "blow up" your system. First time I tried LS was two or three years ago before the OTS was "invented" and you had to edit like 117 diff system files in order to get it to load/work. Gave me a great deal of hairloss and sleepless nights

To clarify the initial question. Personally, I find Litestep quite easy, that wasn't the question. I just wanted to know if many people were interested enough for me or anyone else for that matter, to go to the trouble of creating a theme. I havn't tried since the old '98 days and wasn't sure if XP posed any problems.

gef: when XP was new LiteStep had some problems with the systray. of course LiteStep development has not stopped and the systray works fine now

some modules work under XP/2K only (eycandy stuff as per-pixel alpha-blending). examples are layercut.dll, grdtransparent.dll

your graphics have always been some of the really beautiful around, so i´m pretty sure a lot of people would appreciate new stuff from you please have a look at layercut.dll btw.

been to lsthemes.com recently?

For a 'normal' user, who has the capacity to read and comprehend, LiteSTEP will not create any problems.
People themeing for LiteSTEP naturally run the risk of doing 'odd' things while coding and can expect a bit more 'fun', but so too would Joe Average delving into Explorer.exe with a copy of Reshacker.
A MS OS is quite capable of giving 'trouble' with or without the assistance of an alternate shell.

Win2000 and XP both created problems for LiteSTEP's systray but it wasn't too long before that was sorted.

Shell handling in a NT-based OS requires registry mods, rather than via system.ini as in Win9x, and the 'moron's solution to LS in NT' [the one I personally use...] is to handle that with ShellON. Works for me....

,,,and I thought it was just me,,not.Thanks mrbiotech.It seems as though Litestep iz a great party if ya can find it.BTW there are at least 3 dead links on the LS page.

I'm with moshi on that one....[I'm usually with moshi on lots of things - kindred LS-spirit]....

Longest that I have ever had LiteSTEP up and running - just over 13 days.
Longest I have ever had a computer up and running? - just over 13 days.

That included a lot of shell changing, theme changing, recycling, step coding, theme creating, installing, uninstalling, you name it.

Did LS cause the stop after 13 days? No, I simply needed to turn the thing off to swap out a drive-caddy....

LiteSTEP 'can' be as stable as you want it to be [or let it]..

Sure does...

Well, I don't know if I can let it go at that...

The thread topic is "dead or alive". I won't flood this thread with the entire editorial; so if your interested check out my site: http://www.leechprint.com/phil/start.htm

The editorial speaks to where I see Litestep going and where perhaps it needs to go. It's a different view than already expressed by others in this thread, but that's cool

brazil...Litestep is not in any way related to Stardock and WC, just as WinAMP is not.
The difference however is that the former is a shell requiring 'understanding' in its use, and the latter is just another dopey MP3 player of which there are squillions..

I read all that on your site, Phil....and at Shellfront....and agree with your 'concerns'...