Re: TI-H: PIC's & Litestep

Re: TI-H: PIC's & Litestep

• To: <ti-hardware@lists.ticalc.org>
• Subject: Re: TI-H: PIC's & Litestep
• From: "David Knaack" <dknaack@geocities.com>
• Date: Tue, 3 Aug 1999 14:55:43 -0500
• Delivered-To: ti-hardware-outgoing@towerguard.unix.edu.sollentuna.se
• Delivered-To: ti-hardware@lists.ticalc.org
• References: <01BEDDF2.CD13BEC0@C_Room>
• Reply-To: ti-hardware@lists.ticalc.org

From: Peter Matthews <Peter@snap.clara.net>
>Also, Litestep is great. I've used it for about 6 months
>now, and I haven't hit any compatibility probs at all. 
<snip>

I tried Litestep a couple of times and didnt' like it.
I don't really care for backgrounds on my desktop,
or fancy graphics for my menus, and it didn't really
do anything that explorer didn't already do, so it
was basicly a bunch of configuration work without
any major usability advantages.

To be fair, if you want much better control over the
look of the desktop, or don't like the standard 
look and feel of windows, litestep is a good way
to change it.

I happen to like the way windows looks (for the
most part, microsofts giant IE toolbars not
withstanding), so its just more trouble than its
worth for me.

YMMV
DK  

• RE: TI-H: PIC's & Litestep
• From: Peter Matthews <Peter@snap.clara.net>

• Prev: RE: TI-H: PIC's & Litestep
• Next: Re: TI-H: I know I'm going to regret this...
• Index(es):
  • Main
  • Thread