Sad news, everyone. After months of deliberation, I have decided to stop the development of Classic Shell. It was a great adventure for me that lasted 8 fun and exciting years. It started back in 2009 as a simple weekend project and over time grew to be a hugely popular software brand with many millions of downloads. It was in large part due to all of you, the active Classic Shell community, that reported issues, suggested features, provided translations, developed new skins and participated in forum discussions. My thanks go to you for your continued support and encouragement.

And of course, special thanks to, who stuck with me from the early days to the end. His passion for all things Windows was instrumental to the Classic Shell success.

There were few factors that led to my decision: 1) Lack of free time. I have other hobbies that demand my time, some related to software and some not. It requires a lot of effort to add new major features to Classic Shell and keep it relevant. Even keeping it running on newer version of Windows is a lot of work. That leads me to point #2 2) Windows 10 is being updated way too frequently (twice a year) and each new version changes something that breaks Classic Shell. And 3) Each new version of Windows moves further away from the classic Win32 programming model, which allowed room for a lot of tinkering. The new ways things are done make it very difficult to achieve the same customizations So, moving forward, I am making the latest version of Classic Shell open-source and adding it back to SourceForge , where it all began.

I encourage other people to fork it and go with it. I will keep the MediaFire download mirror for another 6 months. The forum on will stay open until the end of 2018, however I will not frequently participate in the discussions.

Update: The source code can be also found on GitHub here. I just wanted to say a heartfelt 'thank you' for keeping it up for so long and making it in the first place. It made using Win10 acceptable for me. I use it on basically every machine I run. I would also like to agree with bb010g's post about putting it on GitHub: It makes most things like collaborating, contributing, forking, tracking issues and more much easier. In any case, once again thank you for making Classic Shell for as long as you did, and thank you even more for making the source available (no matter if sourceforge, github or somewhere else) and not just dropping it. Much appreciated!

Hi, I registered this account just want to say thank you, I've been use it for long time, it works great! It looks like you are very busy, that you won't have time for this project anymore, as such, I've created an repository for this project as an tribute to your hard work, all credits goes to you.

Here's the link Hopefully others will continue on development of this wonderful project. In case if you want to get it back under your name/account, just send me an email or reply to me, I think it should be able to transfer ownership of this project to you. Edit: In order to give the community a place to discuss in the future, in request of and I tried my best to research and come up with two places for this purpose: Hopefully the community will retain there, unless something happen to the original schedule of this classic shell forum which we all wish I guess. Thanks again! Last edited by on Thu Jun 07, 2018 7:13 pm, edited 1 time in total.

Hey, I'm sorry to hear the news. But hey, why do you not move up the source code to github and give other the possible for make the project further.

I bet with you, the one or other programmer want support this project on github with code! And by the way, do you know reactos.org, the (at moment) XP successor and if the stage of xp done, i bet, goes further up to Win7 like and so on. For this it is important to give this code on github and maybe unter gpl2 or something where it is compatible with Reactos.org You should move it on Github there do you not need many time, easy maybe add the one or other programmer where have the possible to continue this project because Classic shell it's now around of the world well known. And hey, how many programmers on the net? So, what speaks against to move it up to github as gpl2 project? Best regards Blacky blackysgate.de Last edited by on Mon Dec 04, 2017 11:10 am, edited 1 time in total. I'm willing to host the forum for posterity after the renewal period runs out in 2018, as well as the parts of the website that contribute to instructional pages for end users and developers alike.

I'll keep logs from SourceForge there too, in case SourceForge goes the way of Codeplex. The other advantage of this is that my infrastructure can perform on-the-fly checksum matching. Should a breach occur like the Classic Shell/Audacity breach of 2016, I can automatically notify developers. After going open source, this will be a whole lot more important.

Naturally, in the spirit of FOSS I will do this free of charge, permanently. About the suggestions to take Classic Shell commercially - that's not a solution for me. It has never been about the money.

I have had a well-paying job in game development for years, even before Classic Shell started. The main goal was to have fun coding, to create a tool mostly for my own use (at least initially), and afterwards to support the awesome community that formed around Classic Shell. Thanks, thx4thehardwk, for the GitHub upload. I do not need it to be under my name, since I don't have an account there. I will add the GitHub link to the FAQ page when I get the chance. I would like nothing more than somebody else picking up the mantle and continue the development.

Ah man, this is a sad day indeed! I've been using Classic Shell since version 2. I use it on Windows 7 for the extras, like Classic IE, but would you believe I also use Classic Shell's Start Menu (in Windows 7 skin) on Windows 7? That's right, I use Classic Shell instead of the native menu even tho they look identical - Turned out there is a bug with Kaspersky and the Start Menu that does not happen when using Classic Shell. The day I switched from the native menu to Classic Shell's, I donated; it was worth every penny I gave. Dearly hope someone else picks-up maintenance.

I agree that Microsoft is making everyone's job a major pain in the behind with their ridiculous re-compile of the entire OS every 6 months; everything breaks! And for what? So that Windows looks and feels and programs like a smartphone! Better stop here or I will rant all night.

Hi Ivo, very sorry to read your decision, but understandable nonetheless. As fascinating as information technology may be it is eating it's children on the way. Myself coming from network admin over webdeveloper to consultant say. Go, get a life No really IT still IS fun but ClassicShell is a full grown project now and I can understand totally that you want to move on after eight years of commitment.

Thank you very much for caring. I Hope some people will take up the ball. I'd also be glad to pay for it. Very sad, but not unexpected news. I understand you reasons really well.

I used Windows 10 only a couple of days until now. The first to install it (the last day which it was 'free', last year). The last to update to FCU. In the meanwhile to disable and change to my liking what is still possible to tweak. I had no problem at all, but I really dislike what Microsoft is doing. I still use Windows 7 Pro, and, if this is the trend with every 'new' update, I'll have to find another OS, maybe Linux, who knows. Thanks Ivo for all, anyway.

Well it's not my problem because I don't use Windows 10 and I never will. I have got no intention whatsoever of ever installing Windows 10. But I do use Windows 7 and 8 and find I do need a start menu on 8. I am very sorry that you have decided to discontinue Classic Shell.

I have never used Windows 10 but have heard it's terrible. Not like Windows 7 or 8 at all. I understand the problems with Windows 10 but there are plenty of people like me who don't use 10. And still use Windows 8 who need to have a start menu. I am going to carry on using Classic Shell on my Windows 8 even after it is discontinued. Because I have looked at other start menu options but the other software is not as good as Classic Shell.

Classic Shell is very much like the Windows XP and 7 start menu but other software is not quite the same. So I am staying with Classic Shell no matter what.

Thank you for your work, Ivo. Even if I no longer use it myself, I'm still sad to see Classic Shell go. For many years it was my go-to for anything that had Windows 8.x or newer on it. Heck, once my parents upgraded their computers to Windows 10, I set them up with it, and they loved it too. Beyond even that, your product inspired me.

Classic Shell was pretty much my introduction to the very idea that the Windows operating system can be modified, and my entry point to taking part in such Customizations. Eventually it even inspired me to start developing my own menu, which is kind of exploding into something bigger now, but I won't get too far into that here. Thank you for what you've done for all of us for all these years. Your efforts and source code won't go to waste, that's for sure. No classic shell = no Windows 10, or 8.

Those products are UNUSABLE for anyone who wants to control their own software.Thanks Ivo you helped so many people. I don't mean to be that guy who takes advantage of others' misfortune here, but I would hope that those mourning the impending end of Classic Shell, such as you two, may take some comfort in knowing that, as said above, I've been developing a Shell thing of my own, entitled Start9. But again, I won't get too far into that here. Anyone interested, PM me for more info, either on this forum, or via a note on, for once this forum is shut down. I am a huge Windows enthusiast since the earliest releases of Windows, and helped a little with Classic Shell's testing and usability/UX feedback. Why my interest in Classic Shell's development is ending is: Microsoft has turned hostile towards their own 'legacy' customers to grow their business further and that has made developing Win32 apps on it that closely integrate with the OS a nightmare and even using the OS is a nightmare. Windows 10 is an unacceptable monstrosity the way it is currently designed.

How dare they design an atrocious OS like this and how dare you use it while neglecting its serious flaws but expecting third parties to fix it for free for you! Windows 10 has been the biggest disappointment ever because Microsoft has turned a deaf ear towards most of their user base and is completely disrespecting and ignoring what they are asking for. No one ever asked for Windows-as-a-Service delivering constant huge updates that disrupt your carefully tuned set-up.

Classic Shell has been fixing and enhancing Windows since Nov. 2009 but Microsoft has moved away from Win32 programs and towards UWP.

They have also moved away from Windows as a product to a service that is a tremendous bandwidth burden on everyone. The frequency and size of updates is a joke and a huge disruption to an existing system on which Windows has been installed and carefully fine-tuned. It is pointless to even try to improve an OS when its own developer is making things worse and less customizable and so disruptive as part of their planned obsolescence.

Microsoft is no longer maintaining proper continuity of features in new releases of Windows. They are just arbitrarily adding new features without even considering how bloated and.seriously unproductive. their updates have become. If the nature of Windows changes in the future from a service, back to a product, that doesn't bombard you with tremendously bloated, intrusive, disruptive, rude, worthless updates that leave you with no real control, and if it gives you sufficient freedom to tweak or keep the features you like, and if any fork of Classic Shell happens from the code released on SourceForge/GitHub, then I am definitely interested in testing it again.

However at the moment, Windows 10 is such a nightmare that it makes no sense to develop a quality app for it. Why waste time on fixing utter crap like Windows 10 when its user experience is intentionally broken by Microsoft?

Forum.419eater.com View Topic Configuration

Even if some other developer takes up the Classic Shell project, it just doesn't improve the horrible Windows experience in any way. Out-of-control bloat-filled updates make the OS waste your bandwidth, storage space and time continuously and are an epic pain to deal with. It is highly unlikely that Windows will get any better unless the management changes at Microsoft to focus on the quality of the user experience.

For 10 years since Windows Vista, Microsoft has been unable to develop a decent servicing mechanism for Windows. On top of that, the quality of code and features delivered by updates is very poor. And that is just the tip of the ice berg. There are so many problems with Windows 10 under the new management that I can't even begin to list them. But despite horrible flaws, only a small subset of its users seem to care and the rest are accepting anything that Microsoft offers them. It doesn't make any sense to build an intelligent productivity-focused free app like Classic Shell with so much effort and attention to detail if the majority doesn't care about productivity and if the UX is such a nightmare for everyone, including us. You can choose to stay with Windows 7 or 8.1 where it should continue to work for years.

Right now, Microsoft keep on adding new features but breaking old ones - they do that on purpose but they're only going around in circles. When Microsoft brings back Windows to a reasonable level of productivity, usability, and solid, steady improvements (not 'improvements' that slap you in the face and abandon all previous innovations) then it might be worthwhile to make something like Classic Shell for it. You deserve to have full control over your PC's operating system and the right to reject what you don't see as progress or improvement.

Right now, you don't have these on Windows 10 or Windows-as-a-Service. So until Microsoft gets their act together, adios. If the nature of Windows changes in the future from a service, back to a product, that doesn't bombard you with tremendously bloated, intrusive, disruptive, rude, worthless updates that leave you with no real control, freedom to tweak or keep the features you like, and if any fork of Classic Shell happens from the code released on SourceForge/GitHub, then I am definitely interested in testing it. However at the moment, Windows is such a nightmare that it makes no sense to develop a quality app for it. It just doesn't improve the horrible Windows experience in any way.

Out-of-control updates make the OS waste your time and a constant pain to use. It is highly unlikely that Windows will get any better unless the management changes at Microsoft to focus on the quality of the user experience. So until then, adios. Well the answer is simple.

DON'T upgrade to Windows 10. Stick with Windows 7 and 8 as I am doing.

I don't understand why people are using Windows 10 as it is so terrible. A good chunk of people were upgraded 'automatically' while they were away a good chunk of people bought systems pre-installed with Windows 10 a good chunk of people don't have the technical skills, or care (because it does facebook just fine) a good chunk of people fell for the hype train and found out it isn't as bad as it seems. Personally, I agree with the constant updates, in an attempt to make the OS the best it can be out of the box. Sadly this means it has to break 3rd party mods. But you can always turn off non-critical updates and then these breaking changes simply won't roll out automatically. I also like windows 10 better than windows 8/8.1, however I would prefer windows 7, with exception to 1-2 critical feature, though 10 is good enough, that Ill keep it.

Well the answer is simple. DON'T upgrade to Windows 10. Stick with Windows 7 and 8 as I am doing. I don't understand why people are using Windows 10 as it is so terrible.

Yes you and I and some others on this forum are smart enough to understand that Windows 10 is crap and won't ever 'upgrade' to it. But not everyone. There's not enough time and resources to convince everyone in the world how crap it is. Most people don't care as long as it does their tasks like Facebook and email and games, while some are of the opinion that they must obey/comply with any change that Microsoft does because they blindly trust Microsoft to always take the best decision for them. So even if the Windows team might be full of incompetent or dishonest people, it makes no difference to the company's bottom line. They have worked with PC manufacturers and their partners to eradicate Windows 7 and 8.1 from the market.

For example, without the necessary drivers, you won't be able to properly run Windows 7 or 8.1 on newer hardware. Without Windows Update supported officially on newer CPUs (which it isn't), it won't be patched or updated. Microsoft can force Windows 10 as long as people tolerate their nonsense. But it looks like a lot of people are not tolerating their nonsense which is why PC sales are down for so long. There are ways to do many tasks without a PC (mobile devices) and that's exactly what people are choosing. Even if i personnaly don't intend to change from Windows 7, there could be a technical reason to upgrade (i'm not concerned with).

The new AVX 512bits registers on new CPU (ZMMxx) (SkylakeX and future) are only supported on Windows 10. This concern very few people, mostly in video processing/encoding, but, this could be a reason to upgrade. To have access to theses features if the your program support them, you'll have to be under Windows 10. As the 'why' Windows 7 for exemple doesn't support them?

Just because they didn't exist at the time. Principal issue is multi-tasking and context saving, the OS can't save/restore registers he doesn't even know they exist. First of all, thank you. This software is the first thing that I add to any install. I absolutely loved the options, the ability to see what I changed, and most importantly, how much of an improvement that it made on the usability of my machines.

I can totally understand your reasons for moving on, and wish you all the best. On a selfish level, I am totally bummed that this is the potential end of the road.

Have a great holiday season, and if you are ever bored, feel free to update it! (j/k) I have an idea, maybe you could just join the microsoft team and fix it from the inside? That sounds like a good plan! Thanks again, DrFunny.

Classic Shell was the only way Windows 7 and above were usable by me. I've been using the classic start menu, status bar and every 'classic' feature since I got into PCs.

It's my workflow, I've been doing it for 2 decades now. XP changed the start menu, kept classic features from 95/98 though; no problem. Vista changed the UI, explorer, a lot. But kept classic features. Despite the pointless UI change (beta taskbar, horrendous 'painting' lag), it removed all 'classic' feature support, despite being extremely similar to Vista (which even got DX11 support that W7 had). It was at that point using Windows became a nightmare, and I stayed on Vista for many many years. Applications started breaking, then Intel dropped support for it, forcing me to upgrade to 7 to even use newer PC hardware.

8 changed so much I didn't even bother with it. I had to fix a laptop with it and Windows 8 made me want to smash it to bits.

And now Windows 10. The apparent 'final' version of windows. The version they forced on everyone even though they didn't want it. So many atrocities committed, so much underhandedness. And still full, full, full of issues.

Even the FCU is full of issues and I was forced to just rollback, then W10 decided to auto-update right after and break the whole damn thing. Windows 10 is garbage, yet we're being forced to use it to stay up to date with hardware/software. W10's exclusive DirectX12 will become mainstream, open platform Vulkan will sit by the wayside; if you game, you'll be forced to use W10. If you upgrade your hardware, Intel/NVIDIA/AMD will eventually force you to use W10. I've already been forced into using 10 due to compatibility/performance issues with 7.

For the people who can switch to something like Linux, it's alright with them. For the vast majority who can't. We're forced into using 10 whether we like it or not. I dread the day when classic shell truly stops working.

Thank you for the years of development. And thank you releasing the source code.

I only question if it's too late.

For full details on how to design and machine V-Inlays read the attached PDF document. The steps listed below were Paul's original thoughts on a generic procedure for cutting inlays, but he later found they are not always correct. I have wanted to make some inlays with my shopbot but there were two issues: 1. The artwork has to be revised to accommodate the bit size and that would require a fair amount of CAD work for each inlay 2. The resulting inlay would have rounded edges. I remembered that people who do intarsia will often angle their blade and rotate the piece as they cut to make up for the thickness of the blade. The resulting pieces fit perfectly even though they fit on a bevel.

Could one achieve a similar effect using v bits? It came to me that I might already have the necessary tools, both hardware and software (V Carve).

Here is the process that I used: 1. This test was done with a 90 degree bit (‘cuz that’s what was in the router and I was too lazy to change it.

Forum.419eater.com View Topic

A 60 degree bit might have produced better results.) 2. Pick a graphic. I used inkscape (free on the web) to generate an outline of the graphic. (One could also start from a DXF file or even make the design in V Carve.) 3. Start V Carve and import the path file. Check for open or duplicate vectors and correct them if necessary. Copy the path; paste it; and, using the mirror function, flip it horizontally.

Move it to the right to get it away from the original path. (Top figure) 7. Now decide how deep you want the inlay to be.

Keep it relatively deep to make the inlay piece less fragile. For this example, let’s use 0.2 inches. Create a V Carve tool path with the original path (the one on the left) using a flat depth of 0.2 inches.

This will be used to create the pocket for the inlay. Now create profile tool path 0.2 inch deep on the flipped path (the one on the right) using the Machine Vectors “ON” option and no tabs. This will be used to create the inlay itself. (Middle Figure) 10. Cut the pocket into your base material.

Cut the inlay into material that is thicker than the cut depth. Sand the back of the inlay until the inlay falls away from the rest of the material. Glue inlay into the pocket.

Here are the pocket and the inlay and below that is the inlay in the pocket. (Bottom Figure) The inlay rides a little high because I haven’t cleaned off some “fuzzies” from the cutting. When I press the inlay down, it fits almost perfectly. I am working on a slight modification to the process of cutting the inlay to make it thicker than the pocket. This would allow cutting the inlay with tabs and eliminate the process of sanding until the part becomes free.

The inlay will be higher than the pocket when installed but it can then be sanded flush. The result of this method is that graphics (many? Most?) can be used without alteration and that the inlay can have sharp points. I hope some of you find this useful and please let us see anything you might create. Paul Z Attachments PDF document describing the V-Inlay procedure (1.09 MiB) Downloaded 9967 times Vectric Wizard Posts: 516 Joined: Sun Apr 30, 2006 10:04 pm Location: New Hampshire, USA Model of CNC Machine: shopbot PRT Alpha 96x48. Nice work Paul!I'll give it a shot.

Have you tried cutting your inlay piece from the back? I use a 30 degree v bit and cut the inlay that has been flipped upside down. For thin veneer type inlays it seems to work ok. For scroll saw inlays I tilt apx 3 degrees per 1/2' and tape the the pieces together and try to keep the piece cutting with the angle facing inward the top will fall into the bottom.

That is where i thought of getting the angles needed for the machine to cut out. Anyway your ideal sounds like it would be easier, I'll try it on my next inlay project, thanks! Chuck Vectric Wizard Posts: 1150 Joined: Tue Mar 28, 2006 4:21 pm Location: Longview, Texas. I forgot to mention that since one uses 'normal' size bits, the cutting speeds are much faster than when one uses small bits. In this test case I used a 1 1/4' V bit and an 1/4' end mill. Both were run at 1.5'/sec. With a 40% overlap the end mill cut the bottom of the pocket very quickly.

Had the pocket been smaller, I would have just used the V bit with a 1/32' step over. Paul Z Vectric Wizard Posts: 516 Joined: Sun Apr 30, 2006 10:04 pm Location: New Hampshire, USA Model of CNC Machine: shopbot PRT Alpha 96x48. Here are the modifications of the previously posted procedure. The modified procedure insures a better fit of inlay to pocket by accommodating the inevitable inaccuracies caused by both the machine and the materials. Note that the inlay is upside down in the diagram as compared to when it is cut. Also note that all cut depths are measured from the top of the materials. Both the pocket and the inlay are V Carved.

The flat pocket depth should be a little deeper than the inlay start depth to make sure that the angled sides contact before the flat portions of the pocket and inlay contact. The inlay flat depth provides that extra margin should the pocket be a little larger than intended or the inlay be a little smaller than intended. If the overall project is complex, one could cut matching numbers in the inlay and pockets to identify what part goes where.

By the way, I have cut all of the pockets for a project at one time and then cut all of the petals of a flower as a single inlay. This does make the wood grain go in just one direction; however, it can speed up the process quite a bit. Vectric Wizard Posts: 516 Joined: Sun Apr 30, 2006 10:04 pm Location: New Hampshire, USA Model of CNC Machine: shopbot PRT Alpha 96x48. Hi Paul, First off I'd like to say what a great way to make inlays you have come up with. I do have several questions though. If you make a pocket and vcarve of.2', do you make the inlay piece by using profile machine vectors 'on' or 'outside'?

I tried several with the 'on' approach with a starting depth of.18' and the inlay fit loose. When I did it with it on the 'outside' I get the results like your modified procedure shows. The inlay is higher up and contacts the sides before fitting all the way into the pocket.

I haven't got to sand the piece as I had to leave for work before the glue set so I will know better tomorrow. Just wondering if I did something wrong. Thanks again for showing this very useful way to use vcarve. Damian Vectric Craftsman Posts: 180 Joined: Wed Mar 01, 2006 6:52 am Location: Weirton,WV USA. Glad to hear (and see) that you were able to use the inlay method. The modification of the original method means that both the pocket and the inlay are V Carved without any offsets.

Note that a profile cut is the same as a v carve with a start depth of zero. The only problem using the profile cut is that it doesn't leave any margin for machine or material errors. I also broke off a piece of the fish inlay (the tip of the dorsal fin) because I didn't wait for the glue to dry. Do you have any ideas what this method should be named? Vectric Wizard Posts: 516 Joined: Sun Apr 30, 2006 10:04 pm Location: New Hampshire, USA Model of CNC Machine: shopbot PRT Alpha 96x48. I ran a simple test and proved to myself that my last post was in error.

The profile with a start depth of zero does NOT produce the same cut as a v carve. I think both parts MUST be V Carved. This MAY account for dmans issue with a sharp inside corner. The fish inlay has many sharp inside corners and they all seemed to work. I'll run some more tests when I get time. Very sorry for the bad info. Paul Z Vectric Wizard Posts: 516 Joined: Sun Apr 30, 2006 10:04 pm Location: New Hampshire, USA Model of CNC Machine: shopbot PRT Alpha 96x48.

I also deleted my last post as I was not able to repeat the process. However, in the below example, I have tried yet another method that is similar to Paul's and had some great results. Before posting the method I am going to try it on several other shapes and see if it can be repeated. I think this method is close. This inlay came out about as perfect as I think they can with some very sharp clean edges and a beautiful fit overall. The colored MDF from Great Lakes makes it look very nice as well.

Damian Attachments Vectric Craftsman Posts: 180 Joined: Wed Mar 01, 2006 6:52 am Location: Weirton,WV USA. OK here's how I made these inlays. I have the original picture/text vectors I want to inlay.

Use the standard vcarve toolpath with a flat depth of.08' - I used a 60 deg vbit and a.125 endmill for this. This is the pocket cut that the inlay will fit into.

Now I make a mirror copy of the original vector and do not resize or offset it in any way. I then select the profile toolpath and use a 60 deg vbit.

I choose to follow the vectors on an 'outside' toolpath with a start depth of.04' and cut depth of.2' (I am using.25' material for the inlay). By selecting the 'outside' toolpath the options of sharp outside and inside corners is available. I have both checked. Once this is cut, I sand or use a knife to release the inlay from the waste material. Now the inlay when flipped over into the pocket will fit down into the pocket but not bottom out on the flat depth until after all the sides of the inlay contact the sides of the pocket and I have sharp corners where I need them. When glued and clamped it gives a very tight fit. Since I used.25' material, I have a good bit sticking up above the pocket.

I just put the piece back on the router and used.75' router bit to level the inlay so it is very close to the pocket material and then sand it until it is flush. I think what happens with this method is that since the start depth on the profile toolpath is.04' it gives a slight offset to the inlay and allows it to sit down inside the pocket. The inside corners on the inlay end up not being sharp for the first.04' but this in on the bottom when assembled so it is not seen.

So far on the two I have tried it has worked very well and is easy to setup. Damian Attachments Vectric Craftsman Posts: 180 Joined: Wed Mar 01, 2006 6:52 am Location: Weirton,WV USA.