Jump to content

Talk:LiteStep

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Notability

[edit]

I think that the notability is established in that it's one of the oldest and most widely used shell replacements for Windows. As for sounding like an advertisement... well, yeah, the article does, but the notability is definitely there. -- 134.173.56.177 20:50, 11 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

It's been several years since I've thought about the history of Litestep. Litestep was mentioned as well as featured on the Lockergnome mailing list several times. Litestep was also featured on Chris Pirillo's Des Moines, IA based weekly radio show in October 2001. It was mentioned on The Screensavers show on TechTV a couple times, and was given its own section of the show on day (I believe this was in 2004 or so. Due to TechTV not existing any more I doubt it's possible to find any reference to that specific show any more). It has been distributed on a few magazine cdrom's over the years and has received mention countless times.

It was well known by the general Windows power user populous, though it was definitely more popular around 1999 - 2003 than it is now. During this time there were numerous Litestep related web sites online. Most notable among those were the old floach.pimpin.net (no longer exists), ShellFront.org, Desktopian.org, Shell-Shocked, litestep.net, litestep.com (no longer exists), litestep.org (no longer exists), LS2k (no longer exists), blizzle.org (no longer exists), etc. I know that ShellFront was at one time seeing roughly 500000 individual visits a month (in 2004).

Litestep had its own official FAQ site, a documentation project, several official IRC channels, multiple mailing lists (http://wuzzle.org/list/litestep.php), and its own newsletter for a while. Litestep had a user count project once which, if I recall correctly, topped around 64000 users back in 2001. All of the skin/theme web sites had specific sections for Litestep themes. Some of them also had sections for Litestep modules. Themes.org, a desktop theme site for UNIX/Linux environments once hosted Litestep themes as its only Windows desktop section.

I understand that this is all largely unsubstantiated at the moment as I don't have the time to search back for articles and references that likely don't exist any more (since so many of them existed online seven or eight years ago) but I can easily go on and on.

Here is one site showing the prominence of Litestep over the years as a Windows desktop shell replacement: http://desktopian.org/shelltree.html

Joel Parker (rootrider), previous Editor of floach.pimpin.net, Founder/Editor/Owner of ShellFront.org, co-maintainer of Modulo, and Co-Editor of Litestep.net

I agree that the article reads. like an advertisement. However, some of the links that were present at the bottom of the page were relevant material, and I used them frequently to look for new shell themes. Why, exactly, were they removed? User:Jfoldmei 05:53EDT 6.12.2007

Timeline

[edit]

Is Litestep still in development or has it officially ended? I understand that the Litestep Installer is no longer available.


Litestep is being officially developed through lsdev.org and #litestep on the freenode irc network. It has been active since 1997, though obviously not as much in the last few years. (Joel Parker) —Preceding unsigned comment added by 131.107.0.73 (talk) 04:53, 4 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

It's now late 2010 and it seems clear Litestep is now done. The last official release is still February 2009 build that had no support for Vista (and Win 7 didn't even exist then). The CVS at lsdev.org has most recent checkins of 20 months ago (around the time of that last release). The page should be rewritten for neutrality and with more of a historical perspective. 66.250.141.150 (talk) 21:34, 23 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Before anyone starts to read Litestep's eulogy, I just wanted to point out a couple of things. Litestep has always been more than just whether the core is under active developement or not. It's modules and themes that drive the existence of Litestep. Note the links below. There are current themes. There are modules being updated/developed (20 in 2010 and 19 more in 2011 if you check my link). And even the core is being looked over (this month), having the source recently moved to git (see link). User 66.250.141.150 is wrong about Win7 support. At the lsdev link you'll see mention of Win7 support (plus, 64 bit module support can be found at the module link below). I am currently running Litestep on Win7 without issue.
Litestep Portal - http://www.litestep.net/
Litestep Forum - http://forums.litestep.info/
Litestep Themes - http://customize.org/litestep/themes and http://browse.deviantart.com/customization/skins/themes/litestep/ and http://www.wincustomize.com/explore/litestep
Litestep Developement - http://www.lsdev.org/
Litestep Source - https://github.com/lsdev/litestep
Litestep Modules - http://www.shellfront.org/modules/
The Litestep article page certainly does come off as an advertisement in the opening, though, and it could use some updating. But, it's now late 2011 and it seems clear that Litestep is not done. Xcal68 (talk) 20:37, 14 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Attempted rewrite of first two paragraphs to more accurately document Litestep keeping in mind Wikipedia guidelines. I removed some value judgments that were possibly causing the "advert" controversy. Please feel free to hit the edit button and wade in there (don't really have to say this I guess, but can't hurt) DJ Barney (talk) 20:57, 18 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Not sure what determines if the dispute has been resolved, but if there are no objections here after a few days I will remove the dispute info box DJ Barney (talk) 15:16, 23 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]
I edited the first paragraph a bit, and changed the website link in the infobox. Tell me what you think. Also, is the German site down for good? Maybe that link should be removed? Xcal68 (talk) 19:45, 23 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Between your edits and mine, I think we've addressed much of the WP:NPOV issue. The original tagging was a WP:DRIVEBY anyway. The tagger didn't seem to follow helpful procedure when applying it. I'll remove it right now. Xcal68 (talk) 19:36, 31 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Basics and Example

[edit]

Basics should be merged in to Example, after the example listed. I should have time to do this at the end of next week. If someone wants to take a stab at it right now, have at it. - Xcal68 (talk) 19:28, 11 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on LiteStep. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 00:45, 11 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on LiteStep. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 16:02, 3 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://wiki.riteme.site/w/index.php?title=Talk:LiteStep&oldid=1203707680"