Moreover, Microsoft had 6 years to put together Aero. The typical skinner has a few weeks. It's natural there will be some errors in a given skin. Aero has its share that's for sure.

There is a single-pixel positioning error in XP's ShellStyle for the top (Special Pane) titlebar button that you wouldn't notice unless you looked real close. Without a separate image that compensates for it, the button is shifted 1px to the right compared with the Task Pane titlebar button. That is an error in MS's OS that a skinner can manage to fix. Not sure I'd want WB to fix it - all the skinners who have spotted this and made skins to allow for it would suddenly find their skins "broken."

You are good at vocally & arrogantly pointing out things you consider flaws, JRSCCivic98, often pointing the finger at the wrong party, but your expectations of SD and skinners are completely unrealistic. Just out of curiosity, do you skin? Or do you just use the program & other folks' skins?

Hell man, not all my reports end up being a "SD was right and I was wrong" so shove it already. Anyway, it's amazing how it took 6 pics (which I didn't post) to finally see the redraw problem on the Start Menu under Aero itself. Obviously this is because of the coloring choices of Vista, but up until today I didn't notice it. If the combination of WB6 and some of their skins wouldn't have made it so blatant I probably still wouldn't have noticed it. Hell, I had to get super close to the screen to see it in Aero.

Anyway, part of the reason for me not believing this is because every time I point something out it's always "not" a WB issue, but something else. Case in point, the CMD prompt. (Don't you just love how I keep bringing that back.) Besides, it's not like WB6 is perfect. I've found some issues in it that others have supported as well, so I'd say it's not perfect... so don't make it out to be "flawless", which is what Daiwa (yeah you) always seems to think.

Flawless? I think not, and I've never claimed it to be - I've posted about dozens of glitches in WB over the years, so you'll have to try putting that word in someone else's mouth. Most of those problems have been successfully addressed by SD, who happen to be outstanding in devoting a lot of effort to resolving even minor problems affecting small numbers of systems. Sometimes, the OS coding can't be overcome or safely worked around - God knows MS does some weird shit for no apparent reason.

You simply bitch that a damn good product isn't perfect, as defined by you, abusing in the process the people trying to be of some help to you or to explain things to you nicely. You're an arrogant spoiled brat who thinks he's God's gift to Stardock, whatever your age. Get rid of the chip on your shoulder and get over yourself.

I take it you don't skin.

I do not skin (don't have the time for it really), but I help people develop software and skins for various platforms. When I find problem I report them and expect them to be fixed. I don't expect excuses for not being able to fix them. I know some things depend on the OS for the "capability", but undoing certain things to be able to do others (like breaking the CMD skinning) I don't like. You should never have to break something to make something else happen. If you have to subtract to "add-hack" the other features then it's not worth it in my book. That's just what I think. I also help devs develop Blackberry Themes and the guys/gals that do that know me as a stickler for perfection. If the theme is off on a certain screen or whatnot by even a small margin I will point it out and get them to fix it. Some of them think I am too picky, but when the product it done and they compare it to the first release they really see how much better it is visually. It's not about pissing anyone off, but I'm just a person who don't like half-assed things. In my book, if you don't want it to look really good, then don't do it at all. Now, like I said, I hadn't noticed this little Aero glitch until yesterday and now I know it's not WB6, so I can't hold that against them and have put it to bed, but the other small glitches I will continue to bicker about because they keep creeping up and it keeps this product from being "really good".

As for my attitude, well, you'll have to deal with that. Don't take it personally, I like to be arrogant and a smart-ass about things I find displeasing. Sometimes it puts people off, but most of the time and when it matters people get the point behind it and fix the problem that caused this type of remark from me. I'll praise your stuff all day long if it's really good. I'll even politely tell you where the issues I'm finding are, but when you're "too good" to fix it I will turn and get on your case until you think I'm being a dick about it. In the end I want the same thing all you guys want. A perfect product that does what it says it does. Right now I have a piece of software that I paid for and loaded which I'm not running due to issues like hibernate hangups and windows not skinning. I am still waiting on a good theme to load which will actually cause me to have it skin my Vista systems for more then 10 minutes before I unload it. It's a shame, but it appears I'll just have to weather it out until the big boys decide it's a good time to start fixing things.

Let me say this.... WB4.6 was freaking AWESOME!!! I loved it and still run it on an older XP box because it skinned everything I ran without any apperent glitches. Some of you might know it had other issues, but it did everything for me. So what if it didn't have transparency or blur or whatever, it did everything else really well. Step forward to WB5.x and above and well........ Seems to me that in the process of trying to bring "Vista like" skinning capabilities to the XP users they had to kill off some things and I don't think it was a good move. I would have done that to bring those new capabilities to XP when Vista was not available and that's what WB5.x did, but once Vista became available for the public I would have fixed the skinning issues in WB and if I was limited to only supporting Vista for the advanced affect, so be it. Either that, or give the people two versions. One for XP with the cutdowns and Vista like affects for those of you who don't care about completeness and one version for Vista users who did everything Aero does and bonded perfectly with the new OS and it's skinning capabilties. Sure it would have been a little more work, but in the end I think it would have been a much better/complete solution. Unfortunatly I don't make those decisions for SD, but I do think it would have been a better approach. That's my viewpoint anyway.

No one objects to anyone posting valid bug reports, everyone's problem with you is the way you post, it comes off as arrogant, self serving and biased, no one "has" to deal with it.

Cut down on the "what the hell's" and other phrases of that nature, do your homework more thoroughly and realize that Rome wasn't built in a day and your criticism's will be better recieved.

I'm under no obligation to "deal with" anything or anyone. We are all here voluntarily. Treat those of us who volunteer here with respect or you'll get nothing useful out of your time here. Same goes for your dealings with the SD staff - whether it suits you or not, they are also participating here voluntarily. They can ignore you or help you - all depends on you.