Im not that up on this stuff so I need more info on how to do this

Trace route does exactly what it describes, it traces the route a packet takes from your computer to each of teh other PCs, servers, routers, etc to the destination website. Big numbers are bad because that means stuff is getting hung up somewhere.

To learn more about packets, check out the movie "Warriors of the Net" here: http://www.warriorsofthe.net/clips.html (note - not a direct link for those of you on dial-up).

To use traceroute:
Easy method:
Go here: http://www.t1shopper.com/tools/traceroute/ and type in www.wincustomize.com {Go}
Copy and paste the results


Hard method:
Start | Run
Type "cmd" (without quotes)
Click OK
Type "tracert www.wincustomize.com"
{enter}

Fuzzy is faster AND better looking. Why do I bother?

Fuzzy is faster AND better looking. Why do I bother?

well thankyou both for the info - at least I know where to begin.

Microsoft Windows XP [Version 5.1.2600]
(C) Copyright 1985-2001 Microsoft Corp.

C:\Documents and Settings\Karen>tracert www.wincustomize.com

Tracing route to www.wincustomize.com [66.28.242.215]
over a maximum of 30 hops:

  1   128 ms   129 ms   129 ms  ipt-rtcd18.dial.aol.com [152.163.5.114]
  2   130 ms   128 ms   129 ms  iptfarmd-rtc-ve3.proxy.aol.com [152.163.104.126]

  3   130 ms   149 ms   129 ms  172.30.81.60
  4   116 ms   129 ms   129 ms  172.31.9.65
  5   130 ms   129 ms   129 ms  pop2-vie-P3-0.atdn.net [66.185.145.13]
  6   129 ms   129 ms   129 ms  bb1-vie-P6-0-0.atdn.net [66.185.145.0]
  7   130 ms   129 ms   129 ms  bb1-ash-P9-0.atdn.net [66.185.152.98]
  8   130 ms   129 ms   129 ms  pop3-ash-P0-0.atdn.net [66.185.148.209]
  9   130 ms   129 ms   130 ms  Verio.atdn.net [66.185.140.242]
 10   131 ms   129 ms   129 ms  p6-2.core01.iad01.atlas.cogentco.com [154.54.12.
17]
 11   129 ms   229 ms   129 ms  v3490.mpd01.iad01.atlas.cogentco.com [154.54.3.2
26]
 12   130 ms   129 ms   129 ms  v3494-mpd01.dca01.atlas.cogentco.com [154.54.5.4
1]
 13   133 ms   126 ms   129 ms  ten7-2.mpd03.jfk02.atlas.cogentco.com [154.54.5.
245]
 14   134 ms   139 ms   130 ms  g13-0-0.core02.jfk02.atlas.cogentco.com [154.54.
5.233]
 15   146 ms   149 ms   149 ms  p14-0.core02.ord01.atlas.cogentco.com [66.28.4.8
6]
 16   145 ms   149 ms   149 ms  p15-0.core01.ord01.atlas.cogentco.com [66.28.4.6
1]
 17   146 ms   148 ms   149 ms  p2-0.core01.ord04.atlas.cogentco.com [154.54.5.2
10]
 18   154 ms   150 ms   149 ms  g3-2.hc01.ord04.atlas.cogentco.com [204.6.150.34
]
 19   169 ms   150 ms   148 ms  StardockCorporation.demarc.cogentco.com [38.112.
15.250]
 20   156 ms   160 ms   149 ms  66.28.242.215

Trace complete.

ok...someone translate trace for me ......is that good or bad ? 

I don't know what's suppose to be good, but for comparison; here's my trace results. I'm on a 8Mb line (BulldogDSL) located in the UK. I suppose your aren't that bad considering you're on a dialup.

Tracing route to www.wincustomize.com [38.99.229.8]
over a maximum of 30 hops:

  1     1 ms     1 ms    <1 ms  192.168.0.1
  2     1 ms     1 ms     2 ms  192.168.1.1
  3    12 ms    12 ms    12 ms  host-83-146-18-71.bulldogdsl.com [83.146.18.71]
  4    11 ms    12 ms    11 ms  ge-2-0-0.32.bkl-cor-001.bddsl.net [83.146.16.110]
  5    15 ms    14 ms    14 ms  so-1-0-0.0.bsh-cor-002.bddsl.net [83.146.19.38]
  6    17 ms    17 ms    17 ms  so-3-1-0.0.cht-cor-002.bddsl.net [83.146.19.61]
  7    15 ms    15 ms    16 ms  ge-0-0-0.dcr2.lnd.cw.net [195.10.12.129]
  8    16 ms    15 ms    15 ms  ge-5-0-0-dcr1.lnd.cw.net [195.2.9.89]
  9    15 ms    15 ms    17 ms  so-0-0-0-zcr1.lnt.cw.net [166.63.163.222]
 10    16 ms    15 ms    17 ms  208.175.240.30
 11    15 ms    15 ms    15 ms  ten-9-0.core02.lon01.atlas.cogentco.com [130.117.1.77]
 12    92 ms    91 ms    90 ms  p3-0.core02.jfk02.atlas.cogentco.com [66.28.4.189]
 13   114 ms   113 ms   114 ms  p14-0.core02.ord01.atlas.cogentco.com [66.28.4.86]
 14   117 ms   118 ms   125 ms  p15-0.core01.ord01.atlas.cogentco.com [66.28.4.61]
 15   114 ms   114 ms   114 ms  p2-0.core01.ord04.atlas.cogentco.com [154.54.5.210]
 16   114 ms   114 ms   115 ms  g3-1.hc01.ord04.atlas.cogentco.com [204.6.150.30]
 17   117 ms   118 ms   118 ms  startdock-corp.demarc.cogentco.com [38.99.207.122]
 18   118 ms   118 ms   114 ms  38.99.229.8

Trace complete.

I don't know what's suppose to be good, but for comparison; here's my trace results. I'm on a 8Mb line (BulldogDSL) located in the UK. I suppose your aren't that bad considering you're on a dialup.

I was thinking it looked ok for dial-up too - but im not having any problems with site today at all. The real test will be during times when things arent working well.

kat7,

I for one would purchase WindowBlinds and IconPackager without WC being in existence.

In fact, I purchased Object Desktop about 20 minutes after downloading, installing, testing, and uninstalling the free WB 4.2.

Stardock includes a few themes, and provides a number of suites which can be purchased - known as "Premium Suites" (as does Pixtudio). So I think that quite a few people would install and use Stardock products even if WinCustomize did not exist.

Stardock would of course provide more premium content if WinCustomize did not exist, but as Jafo stated, Brad (Stardock CEO) really cares about this community and has taken many steps to maintain a viable site for all of us by committing funds to support the development and maintenance of the site. It should also be noted that WinCustomize changed to this new site in 2005 and has added personal pages for subscribers as well as a number of other upgrades from the old site.

At this time (IMO), it is a bit like moving from the "Windows Classic" interface, to the XP or WindowBlinds interface. Although the Classic interface is a bit faster, due to it's basic nature, the XP / WindowBlinds interface is just more fun - even if it has it's slow or troublesome days.

As is well known to many of us, this is a community and we are not willing to quit or leave just because things are not running as smooth as we would like. All of us try to point out issues in an attempt to help, not hurt, the community.

Venting should be done in a way that takes into account the community members. It is okay to vent, but attacking (or putting down) is not really constructive in any way.

We all have to live here, as it were. (not to be taken too literally please).

LMAO -My average trace route test being from the command prompt is 250 ms to wc
and i am able to download stuff at an average of 160kb and it does'nt matter if i use IE,FF or stardock central,that's not too bad a speed considering i loose around 800kb to get thru to this and other US sites as a speed test on my isp shows 1554kbps or on a USA speed test site it shows 1245kbps

A good free for personal use screen capture utility is http://www.mirekw.com/ clik on "windows freeware" centre of page near the top


KAT7 your not on a wirless connection by any chance ??? perhaps someone is helping themselves to your bandwdth

Hey Jafo,

If you are convinced that this site is poorly designed and/or managed....kindly feel free to create your own.

The creation is a snap ... finding time is not
Sorry I am stuck here and you are stuck with me

By the way I don't recall saying anything about how the site is managed.
I might though if you are one of the managers

Let's make it clear (since some of you have a propensity to spin and comment on what you think you read rather than address what you actually read).

I have 2 criticisms ... they have not changed since I started the thread:

1). The site is deadly slow while trying to navigate it and at least a third of the time I have to click a link 2 times or refresh before the page loads.

2). No one in their right design mind would set up a site to have 4 or 5 frames on one page.

A picture is worth a thousand words.
Count them Jafo my man ... 5 operable frames ... you think this is even a marginally acceptable design?
Please note (after our ridiculous exchange so far) your "yes" answer would NOT come as an ultimate shock.

Your issues are not common among most users, hence the issue is in your own back yard... period.

Phoon, Phoon ... sorry but the "it's not happening to me ... so it's not happening period" logic seldom works ... and it does not now ... it is an equally lame response as are some from others. From your comments to "snowman" earlier apparently I am NOT the only one who has had/is having a problem ... did that slip your mind?
Treading down a path of destruction?
Now that is "drama queen" with a capital DQ.
And no Snowman was NEVER right especially if he has any kind of authority here.
You should have stayed your first course.



DigitalDanes ... thank you for your thoughtful response and you are right I do know enough behind the scenes stuff to have already tracked down exactly where the problem lies and IT IS with Stardock and WinCustomize not my isp or someone else's stuck router in a hand off on the way. I reach stardock in 72 ms with 16 hops. The trouble begins after reaching SD Central.

For those less knowledgeable about these things than I (and maybe some far more knowledgeable) ... that means the hang up is either on the stardock server linking to wincustomize but more likely at wincustomize. Probably further flawed script or design ... maybe both.

Perhaps a better analogy (over your home away from home example) would be if someone came into my 5 star restaurant and complained they found a hair in their Caesar Salad.

I WOULD NOT say any of the following:

1). Let's see if YOU can create a similar popular salad that is flawless 5 days a week 52 weeks a year (snowman style)
2). my guess is a little hair can not be TOO bad...not if you have managed to eat here every week for 5 years. (jafo style)
3). kindly feel free to create your own salad at home (jafo style)
4). The hair in your salad is not common among most patrons, hence the issue is in your own back yard... period. (phoon style)

I am absolutely awestruck at how helpful these comments are and they certainly did target the issues didn't they?
Is anyone (other than me) rolling on the floor laughing yet?



Oh wait guys ... let me guess ... no one else gets these error messages either ... so it's a mirage right? (on a positive note I learned to screen print on this new laptop )

Anyone reading this thread by now is well aware of the "shut up and go away" attitude that permeates a few of the posters here (if you guys can't stand the heat YOU get out of the kitchen). By the way do any of you guys officially speak for Stardock or WinCustomize?
This is a support group right? Well some of you lend new meaning to support ... lol

Jafo,

Society is made up of those who do and those with their butt in the air, head in the sand, waiting to get screwed while pretending to have their feet firmly on the ground.

Bottoms up buddy

Touché

The "Frames" problem is not the site.... it's the way Stardock Central works. Open WC in IE, Firefox, or Opera, and there will be no frames. 

Kat7,
I don't use SDCentral too often (only when I need to update my software; I read the forums strictly from the WCBrowser), but I would say that something looks goofy with your screen shot of the SDC discussion threads. On very rare occasions I will get something similar in my WCBrowser if I click on a link in the thread and instead of opening in a new browser window it opens in the lower panel area where I was reading the thread contents/posts. This may well be the case you're seeing.
Might I suggest 2 things without being told that I'm stupid? Since I rarely use SDC, I don't pretend to know much about it, but I would suggest to update and make sure you're using the most current version of SDC. The next option to help speed things along might be to change the server you're connecting to. I know that it can be done in SDC (but I don't know where that setting is; maybe someone more knowledgeable about SDC can tell you where to find the server list). Frequently I've read that some are having difficulty in downloading updates or connecting to the chat/forums and a change in the server is what is generally suggested first.
I do hope that you get the problem fixed and you find enjoyment and a place to call "home" here on the forums. And in case no one said it... "Welcome to WinCustomize!"
DD

Well lets see if we can put a little logic on some of these arguements and hopefully calm everyone down a little in the process:


1.) "It is painful to search the site. I just ran a test on my download speed and its running at 2456 kbps ... why is it taking at least a min. for a page to download? Half the time I have to refresh to even get the page to load."
This is not a fact, it is an assertion or complaint because the author provides no documentation as to the complaint. Also, running one speed test, as every speed test site clearly documents, is not indicative of actual speed. I offer as my proof the following statement taken directly from http://www.dslreports.com: No single speed test is going to give you an exact answer (nor does an exact answer mean that much - the internet, and your ISP, has "weather" that can vary the answer hourly or daily).


2.) "I am using IE and would consider the browser problem if I had this slow download on other sites.
I but do not."
Unfortunatey this is also not a fact but a continuing assertion or complaint of number 1 above as again there is no supporting evidence. We are also not provided with another speed test result so we are again relying on a single number which means nothing as stated by dslreports.com.


3.) "And since I just checked my download speed right before I made the post I assume it is correct."
Now we are getting some where as the author has admitted two very important things:
a.) These are not facts, they are assumptions, because she doesn't really know if her results are true or not.
b.) The author does not investigate nor read the speed test FAQ posted, or she would clearly have known that the speed test should be run multiple times over different hours of a day to get somewhat accurate results.

4.) "My complaint IS VALID no matter how many sites I do or don't create and host.
If one of my sites loaded this slowly (I have 43) I would have already booted my server and the techs who manage it into the next millennium no matter how many people visited it.
Finally we have at least some semblance of an arguement - all customers complaints are valid until proven otherwise. That being said, she complicates her statement by throwing out more assertions, "(I have 43)", without offering one bit of evidence to bolster this rather lofty assertion. Also, I doubt that she is actually hosting these sites, assumming there are 43, but is actually paying a hosting company, but that is a supposition on my part. I also very much doubt that any of the 43 sites have near the complexity, ingenuity, or bandwidth that StarDock or WinCustomize have, but this is also a supposition on my part as the author has provided no evidence thus far.

5.) "I have had as many as 5 frames on this one page at the same time ... who the heck thought that up? ... don't tell me it was a Super Wizop. What the heck is a Super Wizop anyway?"
I have viewed the website using SD Central, Mozilla FireFox, and Internet Explorer and can not find any evidence of these "frames" so I am clearly confused by this assertion. And it is an assertion as again the author has not provided us with even one screen shot to point out the "frames" she is referring to. Additionally she now stoops to the level of ridiculing the name "Super Wizop".

6.) "Not to mention there is no way to get back to the thread you were on if you want to venture off to look at someone else's work."
Based on this statement, I begin to realize that the author does not know how to use either the back or forward buttons of Internet Explorer, nor how to use the history function, to return to previous pages. Addtionally, I suspect that she is not using a "tabbed" browser, which would make this statement obsolete as new pages would open in a new tab, leaving the original page still open.

7.) "One I would expect from a 13 year old "techy genius whiz kid" who knows absolutely squat about how to run a business or satisfy the customer who supports his income."
Now the author begins the "name calling" phase of their arguement, which gives all of us a much better idea of what her "facts" are. Nevermind that with a simple click on Snowman's name she could have given us the facts instead of what her "impressions" were. She also asserts that she DOES know how to "run a business and satisfy the customer", but again provides zero evidence to back up her assertions.

8.) "Stardock is selling product and service in their Stardock Central package.
I don't care what the problems are ... as a good provider you fix them or find someone who can ... you don't lure clients in ... take their money and then give them crap for service."
As anyone who knows StarDock and WinCustomize, this is just clearly wrong in so many ways, as has been pointed out by numerous others, so I won't even comment other than to say again, the facts are sadly misrepresented by the entire statement and proven to be in error.

9.) "In site design 101 EVERYONE knows frames are an iffy thing.
There is NO EXCUSE for having a window cut into 5 pieces. For that to happen not only are the designers at Stardock to blame so are those at WinCustomize. Both sites have paying customers who deserve better."
See response number five above.

10.) "I don't mind paying good money for good service and product NO MATTER the cost ... I do however expect to at least get what was advertised and I pay for."
I am very confused by this statement. Is the author asserting that she did not get the software that she payed for? Is she asserting that the software does not work? Based on the original post, I believed this was a browser/connection/slow speed issue, and yet I have never seen WinCustomize give any performance or connectivity promises or advertisements anywhere on the website, though I may have missed it, it is after all a very large site. Again, only allegations, no evidence to support the statement or even what the statement really means.

11.) "Wincustomize sells a service also.
If I am correct (not sure since I am very new here) the artists pay for space to display their work. What good is that if no one can get to it when they click the links."
"So who is at fault?
Looks like there is a lot of blame to go around and it really does not matter.
The first priority should be to fix your service ... forget the upgrades to software until the service you already promote and sell is running at its best."
Well once again, the author admits to us, that being so new, that she might actually be wrong. And as has been pointed out, she clearly is mistaken in her allegation. I do however have one question of her: Is she a subscriber to WinCustomize? If the answer is yes, then at least her arguement has some merit, though again, she has provided no evidence to support her allegations.

12.) "P.S. Stardock and WinCustomize you might want to consider what one client says outloud ... probably another thousand think but say nothing. The smart business owner PAYS ATTENTION."
While one could argue this statistic, the basic premise is correct, many will not complain, but one would first have to prove their arguement was valid, and as of yet we have seen no direct evidence of this fact.

13.) "Jafo ... I don't know about you but 700 megs of data I can download in less than 20 mins on a bad day. It has taken me how long to get that much in at LEAST 3 hours a day?"
Well here again we have assertions based on guesswork. However, if we take her assertion that her speed truly is 2456kbps, the fact is that her download would require a minimum of 36.91 minutes if she was doing a single batch download, which I don't believe is possible on WinCustomize.com. If it is possible, please tell me how, I'd like to get in on that little trick. If she were running concurrent downloads, her speed would be significantly lower resulting in even longer download times.

14.) "So just anyone can put their work on WinCustomize?
You do not have to be a paying member?
And WinCustomize provides this service out of the goodness of their heart ... for what reason?
Stardock owns WinCustomize?"
If the above is true then I suppose Stardock has a vested interest in having good artists post their work for FREE or not. Like I said without the artists that abound here there would be absolutely no need for Stardock software and they would have gone belly up with the 2001 dot.com bust. Right?"
Well at least the questions are finally starting to be asked, which is an important milestone as it points out that the author is thinking with "grey matter" versus anger. But even here, the author goes out of their way to belittle Stardock and make the ridiculous assumption that were it not for people providing their skins for free, StarDock wouldn't even exist. This always reminds me of the "chicken or egg" theory, which totally misses the point that both exist, regardless of which came first.

15.) "Presuming? Alleged?
There is no presuming/alleged about SD Central being either slow or designed poorly.
That is a cold hard fact and quietly sitting around observing unfortunately will not correct it ... ohmmmm"
Again, stating facts that are not in evidence, so they are merely allegations. Saying something doesn't make it fact.


I could clearly continue, but to do so at this point would be almost surrealistic. What we have here is a disgruntled customer who expects that just because they have experienced a problem, that they should become the center of the world and dictate to the rightful owners that they know how it should be run, how to make it better, how the business should be set up, how to make a proper profit, etc. etc. etc. and that everyone should heed them or the business will clearly fold or go bankrupt. We hear these temper tantrums everyday from the "me,me,me" society we have become. And all this from someone who has been here "for three whole days". I'm sorry, the poster does not speak for me in any fashion or form. When I contrast her style versus Fairyy~, it is clear that both have the same issue, but one prefers to learn and investigate the issue, while the other just wants to "be" the issue.

Hey xSCORPx,

No I am not on wireless.
I have had ISDN then DSL as soon as they were available ... that's 8 or 9 years now ... so I am spoiled. I have long ago forgotten what a 28K was like. This site is quickly reminding me tho   

I finally figured out how to do the screen capture on this computer ... funny how each computer is a little different company to company. The desktops I build myself are a snap (I always use the same keyboard mouse company) ... getting into the laptop stuff is not so familiar.

So thank you very much for your thoughtful link

Corky O,

As is well known to many of us, this is a community and we are not willing to quit or leave just because things are not running as smooth as we would like. All of us try to point out issues in an attempt to help, not hurt, the community.

As a beginner here you might imagine I do not have the same allegiance to the community as you or others.
Being met on Stardock Support (while already frustrated beyond belief with a snail paced site and viewing perfectly wonderful art thru a postage stamp size frame) with a few smart ass retorts from people who are suppose to be solving problems?

It's not a good mix is it?

Could/should I have been a bit wiser in my approach? Sure! Being frustrated is no excuse for being rude ... for that I apologize.
However for people representing the company support ... if they don't have what it takes to keep an even keel (with a frustrated pissed off customer) then maybe they need to leave the work to those who can. Keep in mind I am a Stardock customer accessing Stardock support.

I can understand those of you who love the community staying thru difficult times ... I have been there done that ... when back in the old days we beta tested for MSN. In the end we all got dumped for our effort AFTER they fine tuned the system and software (that a young Australian developed and they essentially stole from him) ... we too worked for FREE.


Fairyy~,

I really like your work ... nice feminine touch.

Your friend teddybearcholla has some of the most stunning original art I have ever seen.
I used one of her wallpapers to make a bootskin, used her logon and her wallpaper with danillo's WB ... it's an exceptionally nice look for my laptop.

By the way I use to have a cupid font that fits your style perfectly. It was really beautiful ... all victorian letters with twining vines/flowers and little cupids sitting on each letter. As I recall the set was originally hand made by a calligrapher who sold her work to graphic artists. I was lucky enough to purchase all of her work (nine disks I think) before she gave up and quit.

Anyway I hope you get to the bottom of your difficulty on this site.

Your trace is not that bad so any techie guy on here (if he is honest) will admit ... it's not your problem it's the sites.

Thanks ... Koasati ... the links once at the site still open very slow but at least I have a full page that is not all chopped up. The trace to WinCustomize is the same as to Stardock 71 to 73 ms.

#38 whizkid ... I sincerely hope you posted your comment before you read my post which is above yours. If not you probably have a bunch of people scratching their heads. I don't think it indicates they have lice. It however might indicate you flunked reading comprehension.
Well I suppose it could indicate a number of other things which I choose not to pursue at risk of further fluffing your fur.

Thanks DigitalDanes for the welcome

The creation is a snap ... finding time is not

Would it really be that snap? From your screenshot, what you call frames aren't part of the website, but SCD itself. So if you can't tell the difference of what's part of an application and what's a webpage, how you claim that making a website, espesially one the size of WC would "be a snap"?

Also, from that screenshot with the frames; that is not the browser aprt of SDC. That is the Discussion part of it. It provides a central navigation of the various forums throughout the various sites related to Stardock. That's why you got those extra "frames" there with the lists.
If you want ot use the Browser part of SDC you have to click on "Web Browser" which is two items under "Discussions".

Now, if you don't provide some evidence for your claims, such as a tracelog I'd simply say your out here to troll because you are mkaing things alot more complicated thatn they have to. And for this:

erhaps a better analogy (over your home away from home example) would be if someone came into my 5 star restaurant and complained they found a hair in their Caesar Salad. I WOULD NOT say any of the following: 1). Let's see if YOU can create a similar popular salad that is flawless 5 days a week 52 weeks a year (snowman style) 2). my guess is a little hair can not be TOO bad...not if you have managed to eat here every week for 5 years. (jafo style) 3). kindly feel free to create your own salad at home (jafo style) 4). The hair in your salad is not common among most patrons, hence the issue is in your own back yard... period. (phoon style)

Not that good an analogy because, is the salad also served for free to the majority of people?

kwkid ...thanks for #38.  It pretty-well covers all the salient points....

The real advantage of Stardock Central is not necessarily its 'browsing'.... but the convenience of its integration of 'all things' Stardock....specifically the access to and updating of Stardock's programs and games and its IRC client to facilitate easy 'instant' communication with fellow users [and provide assistance with issues].

If the browser component feels less than satisfactory [for whatever reason] well, hey, there's a whole swag of alternatives...IE/FF/Opera for starters...

 

In SDC clicking the divider seperating the far right colum hides it. You can use the Network menu option to navigate if you want. [You can also choose to uncheck "Show Network banner" to get a little more real-estate.] {- 1 "frame"}

As reported by Digital Danes, it is apparrent that you were reading discussions (which loads a browser in the third "frame") and clicked on a link. The expected behavior is to load that link in the existing browser.

I also note that your first screenshot is not formatted to show the top of the page. You have scrolled down to give the impression that there is another frame. What you are showing is a navigation panel for other galleries. I believe you did this on purpose to bolster your flawed argument. What you did, for me at least, is illustrate a desperation to be "right" when you are aware you are wrong.

Long load times have been and can be addressed. You are not alone in having problems. But be aware that for every database problem that occurs (and is addressed by the Wincustomize admins and such) , there is also some [edited three times] person who's problem is related to their system, ISP, etc.

I hope you got the attention you wanted. It'll be remembered for a long time around here by the people who have been here long before you and know the answers to any future questions or complaints you might have.

Hm. Any chance we can have a little bit of text at the bottom of each apge that shows how much time the site used to process the page like at dA? Then, whenever we have this type of discussion again  it's easier to find out where the bottleneck by comparing the time it took to process the page against a tracert of how long it took to connect to the site.

Any chance we can have a little bit of text at the bottom of each apge that shows how much time the site used to process the page like at dA?

We did that at the office and got burned the hard way. Our timer recorded the time it took the ASP page to load . . not the time it took the database to actually retrieve the data and display it. It did not go well when the client came back with a stopwatch. -=sigh=-

Maybe WC could do it better. 

this thread has certainly taken a downward spiral.   

with all that's happening in the world today, we find time to bicker over the speed of a website.

However for people representing the company support

this thread has certainly taken a downward spiral

It started out pretty far down and hasn't gotten any better.

You know . . . the new users who are quiet and polite never get the attention they deserve. It's the [/me puts on flamebait hat] loud-mouth whiners that drag this joint through the mud.

/me removes hat

Thank you quiet majority.   

Could/should I have been a bit wiser in my approach? Sure! Being frustrated is no excuse for being rude ... for that I apologize.

Thank you for apologizing. Good start.

However for people representing the company support

Unless you see [Stardock] by someone's name, they are not representing Stardock. They are members of the community that hang out here. Once you've been around for a while you'll recognize the smart-asses, the quiet helpers, the expert in this or that. It takes time, give it some.

Also remember, as we all should (myself included), text does not communicate tone, cultures are different, people are different, and smileys only go sa far. Take a little time to read what you are writing and imagine that you are not posting to an anonymous forum. Imagine instead, that you are at the local pub or cafe with all your friends around you (and the owner of the joint and wait-staff about). Think about how what you post might be taken.

Today is a good day, let's act like it is.

Imagine instead, that you are at the local pub or cafe with all your friends around you (and the owner of the joint and wait-staff about).

No. Bad idea. When you sit around your friends and talk you tpoo easily forget you're in a public place and talk out lound about anything. ...you even see that when people are on the phone whilst sitting on busses...

kat7,

Instead of using SDC to access the site, my personal recommendation would be to use FireFox.  I'm currently seeing weird slow-downs on the forums and main pages with Internet Explorer (which is the browser Stardock Central uses).  We've been working through technical issues with the site for some time now and continue to find and eliminate bugs as time goes on.

Also, something else to keep in mind is that while Stardock runs WinCustomize.com, purchasing a product such as Object Desktop does not directly go to covering costs of the site.  WinCustomize is here to provide the skinning community a centralized location to gather and exchange work.  Many people who purchase our software may not ever visit WC.

A WinCustomize subscription goes more directly to covering the site.  The more people we have that actually subscribe, the more resources we can hopefully devote to improvements.

I'm sorry your first brush with the community here has been so negative, I only hope you choose to stick it out and give it all a second chance.  Many of the people here are volunteers who donate a lot of their free time to answering questions/helping out.  Sometimes, an overly-critical/angry post will get everyone feeling a bit defensive.

-Z

If we can't have peace on a silly website, where is the hope for the bigger picture?     

Wha?

I take my kid to the beach for a longish weekend, come back and y'all are arguing for days with someone that doesn't know an application from a webpage? and can't count?

  





The above comment(s) are the sole responsibilty of the Lone Stump Dweller and do(es) not reflect the opinion(s) of the Entities Stardock or WinCustomize (to include any members of said entities (official, unofficial, real, imagined or otherwise).