Mobility Site - View Single Post

Double-Trinity · 06-19-03, 07:47 PM

EDIT: Since this is longer than I ever expected it would be, I formatted it so you could get the gist of it at a glance, and read in detail to the areas that interest you.

Well, this is far from in depth, but there are a few points I would like to make in the comparison of the following two freeware task switching programs: Wisbar advanced and Icbar, two different derivatives from the original wisbar product. The review will be devided into three areas: Function, Aesthetic and performance

Aesthetic:

This is one of the major reasons that people choose these task switcher programs, the ability to skin an additional 12,480 pixels (half on the top of the screen, the other half at the bottom of the today page) on the Pocket PC screen with a greater degree of control than the simple gradients that come with Pocket PC 2002. All of these projects have yielded hundreds of skins, most of them mimicing existing operating systems with slightly different touches, including a number of OSx skins, windows XP skins, and even Pocket PC-style graphical skins. So When it comes to graphics, which is better: Icbar or Wisbar Advance?

Similarities:

skinning of background
Support of only the .bmp image format, with one color for transparency
Custom skinning of icons, custom or standard
Custom skinning of Battery/Memory meters
System Tray Skinning (bottom of today screen)
Different states for volume control
3D Effect for running tasks
Small Date over Time, optional
Clear Type text rendering
Color Gradient Support
System Color Support
Rearrangement of all of the above, stacking from the right

Differences:

WISbar: Support for 3d look for ALL icons
WISbar: Separate states for "X" icon, and others
WISbar: Dropshadowing on text
WISbar: Support for skin files
WISbar: In sysetm color mode, ability to decide if gradients are used overall or just on today page
WISbar: Ability to change date formats (large-font style only)
WISbar: If you click on battery and memory, a dialog pops up with percentages (optional)
WISbar: Pocket PC 2002-style dialog boxes, rather than plain white dropdowns
Icbar: With Tap-and-hold there is an option to show the little red circles, or not.

Wisbar is the clear winner for aesthetics, if you are mainly in it for skins, hands down, go for Wisbar Advance

WINNER: Wisbar

Fucntion:
I have to admit that this is major reason I use these task switchers, even more so than the skinning ability, because i often use multiple applications. This category of program has made the multitasking ability of the OS become quite a bit more useful, as I can easily switch between applications with hte running task icons, launch others, and keep tabs on my memory usage.

Similarities:

Running Task Icons
2 Custom Icons
Dropdown Task Manager/menu
Connection Icon
Volume Icon
Ability to set Close/Minimize to Tap/Hold
Abilty to pull up menu by hardware button
Battery/Memory Meters
Ability to map custom icons to two prorgams
Option to automatically go to today page after close/minmize
Ability to map icons to today screen

Differences:

Icbar: Clock acts as a clickable button
Icbar: More special mappings, apart from just programs and files, such as PIM etc.
Icbar: Ability to hold on running task icons to close them
Icbar: Ability to map separate left/right or top/bottom commands to memory and battery meters
Icbar: Tap-and-hold support for EVERY icon, not just custom
WISbar: Only one click with hardware button is required to activate the dropdown, as far as I've heard this is a bug in icbar
WISbar: A dedicated icon for notifications, with dynamic featres
WISbar: Buttons OTHER than the X can be mapped to minimize, though this should work in Icbar, this is another bug

This time it is closer than the last category, for someone mainly interested in multitasking, Icbar clearly wins this category as more space can be saved by mapping things to the clock, two functions to memory/battery, and there is tap and hold support for running task icons. I personally find these to be more major than the WISbar advantages in function.

Winner: Icbar

Performance:
I ran a few benchmarks, with BMQ, rather than post tons of stats I'll sum it up, With an Axim X5 PXA-250, 400 MHz, Wisbar used up the least memory, and performance hit, given the same skin. Both however, were fairly incrimental, at roughly (highest numebers best: 490 for system alone, 470 for Wisbar advance, 460 for Icbar. With the functionality they add, this is pretty much negligible, barely larger than the benchmarks marging of variation (I averaged 3 tests on each, and rounded)

As for the inteface, all I can really say about this is different but equal, however, this is nearly 100% subjective so I'll spare you.

However, the menus and so on of WISbar lack a fraction-of-a-second lag, the whole thing feels a bit zippier, so I'll give this to WISbar, though they are pretty close, and either one's utility outwighs this system slowdown 10 to 1.

Winner: WISbar

Overall:

This is tough, were these two not so close, I woudln't have gone on for nearly this long, the functional differences in Icbar are significant, and I have gotten a bit used to them. However, the performance (minor) and aesthetci (major) differences are still quite convincing. For this reason I'm worried I'll find myself playing "ping pong" between Icbar and Wisbar every version, however, at this time Wisbar seems the best balance of Aesthetics, Fucntoinality and Performance.

Overall winner: BOTH! WISbar for aesthetic, Icbar for Utility

Where to download:
Wisbar Advanced 1.0: http://www.lakeridgesoftware.com/
Icbar 1.1 Beta: http://icbar.ictinus.com/

06-19-03, 07:47 PM	#1 (permalink)
Double-Trinity Aximsite All Star Join Date: Feb 2003 Posts: 619 Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts	Wisbar Advanced vs. Icbar, a review EDIT: Since this is longer than I ever expected it would be, I formatted it so you could get the gist of it at a glance, and read in detail to the areas that interest you. Well, this is far from in depth, but there are a few points I would like to make in the comparison of the following two freeware task switching programs: Wisbar advanced and Icbar, two different derivatives from the original wisbar product. The review will be devided into three areas: Function, Aesthetic and performance Aesthetic: This is one of the major reasons that people choose these task switcher programs, the ability to skin an additional 12,480 pixels (half on the top of the screen, the other half at the bottom of the today page) on the Pocket PC screen with a greater degree of control than the simple gradients that come with Pocket PC 2002. All of these projects have yielded hundreds of skins, most of them mimicing existing operating systems with slightly different touches, including a number of OSx skins, windows XP skins, and even Pocket PC-style graphical skins. So When it comes to graphics, which is better: Icbar or Wisbar Advance? Similarities: skinning of background Support of only the .bmp image format, with one color for transparency Custom skinning of icons, custom or standard Custom skinning of Battery/Memory meters System Tray Skinning (bottom of today screen) Different states for volume control 3D Effect for running tasks Small Date over Time, optional Clear Type text rendering Color Gradient Support System Color Support Rearrangement of all of the above, stacking from the right Differences: WISbar: Support for 3d look for ALL icons WISbar: Separate states for "X" icon, and others WISbar: Dropshadowing on text WISbar: Support for skin files WISbar: In sysetm color mode, ability to decide if gradients are used overall or just on today page WISbar: Ability to change date formats (large-font style only) WISbar: If you click on battery and memory, a dialog pops up with percentages (optional) WISbar: Pocket PC 2002-style dialog boxes, rather than plain white dropdowns Icbar: With Tap-and-hold there is an option to show the little red circles, or not. Wisbar is the clear winner for aesthetics, if you are mainly in it for skins, hands down, go for Wisbar Advance WINNER: Wisbar Fucntion: I have to admit that this is major reason I use these task switchers, even more so than the skinning ability, because i often use multiple applications. This category of program has made the multitasking ability of the OS become quite a bit more useful, as I can easily switch between applications with hte running task icons, launch others, and keep tabs on my memory usage. Similarities: Running Task Icons 2 Custom Icons Dropdown Task Manager/menu Connection Icon Volume Icon Ability to set Close/Minimize to Tap/Hold Abilty to pull up menu by hardware button Battery/Memory Meters Ability to map custom icons to two prorgams Option to automatically go to today page after close/minmize Ability to map icons to today screen Differences: Icbar: Clock acts as a clickable button Icbar: More special mappings, apart from just programs and files, such as PIM etc. Icbar: Ability to hold on running task icons to close them Icbar: Ability to map separate left/right or top/bottom commands to memory and battery meters Icbar: Tap-and-hold support for EVERY icon, not just custom WISbar: Only one click with hardware button is required to activate the dropdown, as far as I've heard this is a bug in icbar WISbar: A dedicated icon for notifications, with dynamic featres WISbar: Buttons OTHER than the X can be mapped to minimize, though this should work in Icbar, this is another bug This time it is closer than the last category, for someone mainly interested in multitasking, Icbar clearly wins this category as more space can be saved by mapping things to the clock, two functions to memory/battery, and there is tap and hold support for running task icons. I personally find these to be more major than the WISbar advantages in function. Winner: Icbar Performance: I ran a few benchmarks, with BMQ, rather than post tons of stats I'll sum it up, With an Axim X5 PXA-250, 400 MHz, Wisbar used up the least memory, and performance hit, given the same skin. Both however, were fairly incrimental, at roughly (highest numebers best: 490 for system alone, 470 for Wisbar advance, 460 for Icbar. With the functionality they add, this is pretty much negligible, barely larger than the benchmarks marging of variation (I averaged 3 tests on each, and rounded) As for the inteface, all I can really say about this is different but equal, however, this is nearly 100% subjective so I'll spare you. However, the menus and so on of WISbar lack a fraction-of-a-second lag, the whole thing feels a bit zippier, so I'll give this to WISbar, though they are pretty close, and either one's utility outwighs this system slowdown 10 to 1. Winner: WISbar Overall: This is tough, were these two not so close, I woudln't have gone on for nearly this long, the functional differences in Icbar are significant, and I have gotten a bit used to them. However, the performance (minor) and aesthetci (major) differences are still quite convincing. For this reason I'm worried I'll find myself playing "ping pong" between Icbar and Wisbar every version, however, at this time Wisbar seems the best balance of Aesthetics, Fucntoinality and Performance. *Overall winner: BOTH! WISbar for aesthetic, Icbar for Utility* Where to download: Wisbar Advanced 1.0: http://www.lakeridgesoftware.com/ Icbar 1.1 Beta: http://icbar.ictinus.com/ Last edited by Double-Trinity; 07-10-03 at 01:36 PM.