May 15th we had the "goldfishes animated wallpaper". I liked that one and I'm very pleased to see this "forrest aninated wallpaper" today.
It is pleasant to look at. Little flies catching the sun are the animated part. Very realistic and good atmosphere.

The makers really paid attention to the critics last time (comment 30, may 15th) because there are some improvements also.

Your background gets restored on exit, even if the background was stretched (with the goldfishes they got tiled)

Settings were only remembered when "start with windows" was checked, but now settings are remembered independant of that (exception is the "stretch" option).

There was no interaction with the background but now there is; rightclicking shows the appropriate menu (sometimes it hesitates though).

Icon-background still gets changed and transparancy still gets lost though.
Compatibility with "fences" is still troublesome.

A new bug, focus somtimes gets lost (flashing tasks in the taskbar) when more tasks are runninig in the taskbar.

Zerebral Pony  –  16 years ago  –  Комментарий оказался полезным? да | нет (+27)

Перевести

Installed ok on Vista Home Premium.
Uses over 60 megs of ram when running (uninstalled)

Brewster  –  16 years ago  –  Комментарий оказался полезным? да | нет (+20)

Перевести

While this isn't a very interesting scene, it works well with very low overhead on my Vista PC, but I did have to set XP SP2 compatibility. Minimizes applications on startup, which is annoying.

Fubar  –  16 years ago  –  Комментарий оказался полезным? да | нет (+16)

Перевести

Animated wallpaper? Well yes, if you consider tiny dots floating around as an overlay to a static forest scene. I cannot see why anyone would use this let alone buy it. In my opinion this has no use whatsoever. The only saving grace is that the static pic is kinda nice, but with a web search one can find many scenes like this.

Terry  –  16 years ago  –  Комментарий оказался полезным? да | нет (+15)

Перевести

@Brewster (6) & John (7):

Memory and cpu-usage are high when nothing else is happening at your pc (just watching the desktop-screen).
I get max just below 40% CPU-usage.

But this is not telling anyone anything. All processes also have a priority level which is very important.

As soon you start doing something like opening a browser, the amount of cpu-usage (used by the wallpaper) suddenly drops way under 10 percent due to a low priority-level.

This means, when you are dong nothing it uses quite a bit of CPU, but who cares when you are doing nothing.
As soon you start something, cpu-usage drops substantially, which means the wallpaper is not in the way of the things you are doing.

This is a mistake very commonly made, just taking a quick peek in the taskmanager and that's it. But you always have to be aware of priority-levels and check while doing some other things too.

Fubar @3 already stated "it works well with very low overhead on my Vista PC". I wholeheartedly second that.

The wallpaper is made to not interfere with the things you're being busy with. That is rather quite good, isn't it (no more resource-hog stories).

Ofcourse in order to run, it will take resources perse, but this is meant to be eyecandy not to speed up your pc. When you like eyecandy, like I do (computers have to be a bit of fun too) this wallpaper is not to bad on resources an rather nce to look at when you return to your computer.
Only when your computer is still combustion-driven with stone components from the prehistory you might have an issue. -lol-

Wallscreenpeeper  –  16 years ago  –  Комментарий оказался полезным? да | нет (+6)

Перевести