Welcome to the Virtus Designs Blog

I have a new home for my blog. You will be redirected in about 10 seconds.

If you are not redirected, please click here

Sunday, June 22, 2008

Mac Version of Aero Fox

I have a test version of the Aero Fox basic for Mac. You can download it here.

For any Mac users of Aero Fox, it would help out of you could test this out and let me know if you notice any issues.

Right now this is not the fully skinned version and has the standard Mac scrollbars and gray status bar. The Windows structure and Mac structure of the default themes are very different so I had to rebuild a lot of the theme in order to get it to display correctly on Mac OSX.

I am sure there are some issues but I will take care of those as I hear feedback. I know now that the drop arrow does not display on the back/forward buttons. It does display when icons and text is selected but not with icons only. I think there is an issue with the throbber but I may be wrong.

To those of you who will help out with this and those of you who have purchased my themes this week, thank you very much. I appreciate your help and support.

Side note to those who continue to criticize me and provide links for people to download my premium versions for free. This is why I am offering two versions. The basic version is for people who only care about the main toolbar and nothing else. I have spent 4 days trying to get this to display correctly on Macs since my Windows theme has issues. It is now almost midnight on the 4th day and I am just getting it ready to have people test it out. In a few hours I have to get up and go to my real job. Then, after they test it, I will have to spend many more hours getting it ready to upload to AMO before I start on a fully skinned version that I can call a premium version.

That is just for this theme. Then I have to create a Mac specific version for Aquatint Black, Abstract Black, Abstract Zune, Aquatint, Abstract Classic, Purpletint Black, Greentint Black, Abstract Amethyst, Abstract Emerald, Aero Fox Silver, and others.

So, before you go around accusing me of being greedy and unethical because I have the audacity to think my time and efforts are worth something and start taking my work and distributing it on other sites without my permission, you should take a long look at yourself and question why you are so upset with me and why you are entitled to have my work for free when honest people are paying $0.99 for it.

It is very easy for your to get outraged and steal my themes while I am doing all the work to make sure my themes are high quality and were ready to be used for the release of Firefox 3.


Trent said...

Your continued antisocial traits with extreme lack of empathy towards the mozilla community is making me think that you might be a psychopath. Your continued stories about teaching, and working all night.. what have you trys to convey to the mozilla community that YOU are the only one with feelings and that your needs, as an individual, superseed all those combined in the mozilla community. Again, most people who are at issue with you is for advertising on AMO. Try as you might, trying to convince others that your opinion is the only one that matters.. The mozilla community is the one place that shares, and where people generally have empathy for each other. I am not saying you are a psychopath, but you surely are acting out like one. And if you are, your in the wrong place my man since many in the community are not going to give up their principles.

Nobody is telling you to work all night. Skins were never meant for self-aggrandizement for individuals. The simple fact is clear...if everyone in the community worked in self interest, there would be no community.

Richard said...

this is a response to trent's comment, if Bodizzle was as anti-social as you claim he wouldn't continue to provide his free versions to the public, free, public, these words should evoke sharing in your mind, that fact that he believes he deserves something in return for his hard work is natural and justifiable. isn't every little hackers dream to be able to make a living off of doing what he/she loves? why do you have such a problem with this? if you don't like the product he provides, leave him alone, and don't harass those who would buy his products.

sbagwell said...

I have no problem whatsoever with you charging for a premium version of your theme. I downloaded the basic version for use on Mac OSX and was having problems with it, the biggest being disappearance of my scrollbars. That's what led me to this site.

You asked for testing and feedback on your updated basic version for OSX. I'm running it at the moment, and it appears to be fully functional. My scrollbars are back and other issues appear to be resolved.

I will download the premium soon and try that. At 99 cents, it's an incredible bargain. You can't even get a cup of coffee for that these days.

Stick to your guns. Developers have a right to be paid. If people don't want to pay, that's their right. Let the free market work as intended.

Jacob said...

Trent is mistaken. Nobody said you have to give away everything for free, this isn't Communism. If you don't like him charging for some damn good themes, THEN DON'T USE THEM. there are plenty of other themes out there that you can choose from, including his free ones.

BTW, the free ones are a lot better than some of the other themes out there.

Trent said...

Principally, there is allot more then 99 cents at stake. I think many people don't really understand how Mozilla evolved and how the community oriented development of software was key to FF's success. Bodizzle's move to forced contribution if one wants full functionality goes against the AMO theme. Others will follow Bodizzle decision and you will have people working independently of each other trying to corner their share of the theme market. Shared ideas could go away as well as the community working together. In the end, you might just have another software site.

Also remember, Bodizzle had help from the community when he started. They did so freely. Those shared ideas grew and bodizzle has some very nice themes. But as far as Bodizzle is concerned, he is no longer part of the community. And for the most part, I doubt most of the community wants to share ideas with him either. Now if this trend continues, and it disrupts the community as a whole.. do you still think that would be a positive thing?

Bodizzle said...

I didn't know trying to earn money by working was psychopathic?


Trent said...

Earning money on open source project is a bit different. Anyway, all your crying about your life's problems trying to gain empathy and at the same time redefining the open source projects goals to your own personal needs.. that is what I meant by psychopathic tendencies.

Anyway, if anyone's interested they should read the earlier blog "downloads" by wet coaster who clearly defines how you received help from the community and even took over naddude's abstract theme.

Wet coaster says it better then I ever could.. from that blog

"You just don't get it. You developed your themes in and on an open source platform with the help and support of the community. Now you are saying here is a neutered version of my theme but if you want the real deal pay me!"

Bodizzle said...

I believe Wet Coaster is naddude and naddude did not create Abstract. Before you talk you should have som idea of what you are talking about. Abstract was created by Zach Dovel aka Pizzach and I spoke with him.

People that are now claiming to be "contributing developers" are people who offered suggestions when they saw that something was not displaying correctly.

Open source is about earning money. What do you think the Firefox, Flock, and other open source projects are about. I have explained quite clearly that open source is not an idea built on not paying or making money, open source is an idea about not restricting source code by making it secretive and private. The code is visible to the public, not free of charge.

Please get that through your head. Please. Please. Please. I am tired of repeating it.

Firefox and other similar open source projects are about making money. I know. I have direct knowledge of this.

Trent said...

"Abstract was created by Zach Dovel aka Pizzach"

Ok, I stand corrected. Do you not have themes called Abstract? Look, the point is, the community helped you. How much, Its your word against theirs. But without there help it would have been harder for you to debug it. Its still open source, they still could look at the code. I see yourself trying to make out like you never received any help and that its been a individual effort from day one. But that can't be true if ""Abstract was created by Zach Dovel aka Pizzach". Whoever, it wasn't you. My question is why you choose to spend so much time developing for open source community. You obviously have some talents.. i'd suggest a call to MS.

I admit, you have some support from end users. But not much from the community of developers of mozzila FF. And its the community that is what made FF what it is today. Not the end user. The end user became interest because the open source community model works. You do not follow what the other developers believe. Just admit that one fact and I will go away.. I promise. I mean, even you must admit that you are in disagreement with the majority of FF theme developers. Or maybe you don't want to admit to this fact on your own blog.

Yukun said...

This is my response on trent's attack on bodizzle. trent, you are skipping the point that bodizzle is offering free versions of his themes. He's not forcing you to buy the premium version of his themes. If you have a problem buying, then just use the free version. Bodizzle's themes are some of the best i seen and you should be grateful that he is letting you use it for free.

Design X said...

"Abstract was created by Zach Dovel aka Pizzach and I spoke with him."

if you're going to quote trent, quote the whole sentence. So, do you think that when BO talked to dovel he got permission to take over abstract? The free version might not be the best, but at least it is something.


anyone complaing about BO having premium version is just plain retarded.

Say you go to out looking for a new tv, you see a nice lcd tv for 1000 bucks, but they have a better one that's the same size for 2000. do you have to buy the expensive one? no, you can buy what you want.

don't like that you have to pay for better themes? then go for the cheap one (free). would yo goto to a manager at the tv store and complain about one being more expensive? no, normal people wouldn't.

you guys are just acting immature and cheap. immature because you complain like hell, cheap because you want everything free. well not everything in life is free.

richrockx said...

hey trent I am curious are you using Aero fox?

samsung 24 said...

This is a response on yukuns comment. Bodizzle diliberately made the free version crappy and crippled so we would pay for his 'premium' themes. That's how much of a greedy punk he is.

Trent said...

Actually, I am using phoenity reborn theme since it follows FF3 compact theme. With the aero basic, you loose more real state with tabs open. One of ff3 improvements is the redesigned toolbar. The phoenity reborn takes advantage of the compact FF3 toolbar. Its especially nice on my laptop that has a wide angle display with limited verticle real state.

I don't want to hash over anymore about open source but here is my final thoughts on the matter.

I will add that many in the community including myself are at issue with Bodizzle using AMO as a advertising portal. I would feel much better if Bodizzle just said he would not provide any crippled version and say he would send a FF3 version to anyone who wanted to contribute. This is what the authors of other themes are suggesting they may do. I know this sounds the same but it isn't. If Bodizzle is unwilling to provide a fully functional theme on AMO, then I don't think he should provide any version at all. Bodizzle made damn sure the basic versions would not be popular and in some cases, people have reported these themes to be unusable (transparent scrollbars etc..) I briefly did use the basic version of aero and found the drop down bookmarks to be hard to read.. not really usable.

The basic themes were more a less an insult to the community of AMO. Bodizzle should have just said he would not support the community and just told everyone that he would send upgrades to supporters. If he is unwilling to share his time and skills with the community, then he should not be allowed to post crippled themes as well.

Bodizzle said...

I think some of you people may be insane. How is my theme unstable and a crippled version? It is missing the customized scrollbar, the black status bar and uses the default preference menu window and icons.

The real issue you have is that I am asking that you support my project by giving me a dollar to compensate my time. It has nothing to do with the theme. You want the fully skinned theme without having to contribute anything. The issue is not how much space the toolbar takes up (it is built off of the default theme so any difference is size is minimal). The issue is not that it is crippled because it is what it is advertised as, the default browser base with the customized toolbar, buttons and tabs. It is designed for people who don't care about anything else but that.

The issues with the scrollbars not showing us has nothing to do with purposefully making a crippled theme but the fact that people are running a theme built for Windows on a Mac. I am currently working on a Mac specific theme to take care of that issue but you are whining so loud and often that you haven't heard that yet.

As far as advertising on Firefox, I advertise Firefox on my site and I bring a lot of users to their product. Firefox makes money on the number of users they have. Me advertising themes from my website that cost a dollar does not hurt them at all. Having my free themes available on their site helps them quite a bit. My top 5 themes have had close to a million downloads in the first week of Firefox 3 and most of the users are happy. (I get a lot of emails so I know). I also get a lot of emails from happy users who paid a dollar. It is the small, yet very vocal, minority that won't stop whining that they have to use the basic version for free or pay $0.99 to get the fully skinned version.

Trent, you and others keep talking about how you would donate money if it was optional but when I was doing this for a year and a half with a donate button on my site, I got very few donations and they were likely from the same people that are paying a dollar now. It is very easy for you to say that if I would just make it optional and ask for donations, everyone would be happy and would gladly donate. The opposite is true. When it is optional, people choose not to donate. I even did a survey for the tutorial on how to develop themes and asked people if they would be willing to pay and how much. Almost everyone who took the survey said they would love a tutorial, would not pay for it but they all said they would donate. Virtually nobody donated for the survey after I spent hours working on putting it together.

$0.99 to purchase what I have worked on and put together for users of Firefox is very little to ask and most normal people are happy to pay it. The other normal people who don't want to pay for it are thankful that I provided my free versions and are happy to use it. Then there are those of you who won't stop whining about how greedy I am and how I am going to destroy the open source community. I didn't know I had that much power and I didn't realize you guys were in charge of the GPL and the real meaning of open source software. When I read the GPL and the definition of open source and it said that you are free to charge anything you want for your product and can use the code to make your own as long as you don't force people to pay a licensing fee or royalties for using your code to develop your own, everything was fine. Apparently the phrase you can charge anything you want really means anything you want as long as it is free.

At least public opinion seems to be swinging back to rational as more people are coming to my defense.

Trent said...

Well you twisted my post so I will repeat my position........ again. Basically, I'm just rewording my last paragraph from my last post:

I agree most won't pay for a voluntary donation. That's not what I suggested. I'm saying don't put up crap (meaning no free crippled versions) and just tell people they have to contribute or live without it. I think that would be good for you and it would also respect the community by not using them inappropriately. By doing this, FF will not actually host any of your files. People will go off site to yours if they choose to pay. Simple solution and everyone's happy and the community is happy. Since you are no longer part of the developing community it only makes sense to go this route.

I just don't see any point in sabotaging your own themes. You spend allot of time trying to make them perfect then you sit there and think of ways to screw them up.... I can't think of anyone else ever doing that to their theme. And we are talking about themes.. not shareware, etc.. But it seems thats the direction you are going.. towards a commercial model.. thats cool.. just needs to be off site.

Basically many people on the review site on FF has expressed this same thing. I don't care if you agree with us. Just so your clear on why some are not happy with what you are doing on the themes page at FF.

Wet Coaster said...


There seems to be some misconceptions here.
First I never claimed to develop Abstractt. Zach Dovel did. I however, did contribute in a minor way by extensively testing the Mac and PC versions in various stages of developments and make suggestions as to changes and errors. I mentioned this to you not to claim an proprietorship (which is evidently so important to you) but as an illustration of how the community contributes to the development of themes and extensions. I have always been a big fan of your work, and admire your creativity. Furthermore I do not begrudge you charging what ever you want for your work.
AMO and Mozilla in general however are not the place to advertise or ask for such contributions. My criticism is not that you charge a paltry 99 cents but that Mozilla Firefox and AMO pages are not the place for any of it. If you feel so strongly about being paid as an artist then remove all mention of the ability to purchase your work from AMO and place it all on your own page as does Frank Lion (who BTW does not charge for his themes.) The irony here is that you are so indignant about being paid for your work that (given you spoke to Zach) I would hope that you share your profits with him since Abstract and Cobalt themes were inspired and created by him. You added and perhaps improved them but legally and morally those designs and concepts are his. I may be naïve but to me and many other open source means that the community contributes for the greater good, Evidently you seem to infer that open source = open for business. If that were true it would be tragic for the continuation of any open source projects.

Best regards to you.

Bodizzle said...

Wet Coaster,

You are mistaken on several points you just made in your comment. You did make a claim that you are entitled to any earnings that my themes bring in because you used my themes and informed me of bugs. As far as naming you as the developer of Abstract, that was not me but Trent. I was informing him that he didn't know the facts.

You are also mistaken about Frank Lion. He is charging $9.95 for at least one of his themes, and maybe others. That seems like a high price to me but if people are willing to pay that, all the power to him.

Again, I keep repeating this but apparently none of you will listen, open source does mean open for business. A few Linux distros sell their product. Firefox and Flock are businesses that earn money through open source software. You are equating free distribution with not being a business.

There is no indignation on my end about being paid for my work. To clarify, however, I am not being paid for my "work" as you put it but for my time spent creating my themes and supporting their users. If I were so indignant as you say, I would not offer a free version and I would go to much greater efforts to secure my product so people could not distribute it as they have without pay.

The indignation has been coming from your end because you, and those who are vocally outraged, feel that you are entitled to my "work" without having to contribute a measly $0.99. I have gone to great efforts to create a quality product, set a fair price, and accommodate those who don't wish to pay. I have also done all of this under the intent and permission of "open source" and the general public license. If you look at the GPL, it explicitly states that open source software can be distributed for whatever fee you decided to as for. I happened to ask for $0.99 which is very nominal and fair to the end user. The large majority has expressed gratitude for my time and efforts and those that don't want to pay have been very grateful for providing a free version.

I am not forcing anyone to pay, as a few of you have suggested. I have not offered a "crippled" version as others have suggested in some grand scheme to force people into purchasing the fully skinned and supported version. The basic theme works just fine for people who only care about the main toolbar. It is missing a thin black bar at the bottom and customized scrollbars yet people have convinced themselves that I used crappy icons, lower quality backgrounds, and purposefully made it not work with some features which is silly.

Trent said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
Trent said...

Bo, the problem I see is you are NOT responding to what people are saying. Maybe Wet coaster is wrong about Frank Lion charging or what not. The main point he made is he does not do so on AMO. That is the key point that everyone keeps making to you and you always ignore it on your responses. Who cares if Frank charges 20 dollars.. its off AMO he can charge whatever.

Wet coaster and I both have stated that you ARE intitled to compensation. But using AMO open source site is inappropriate place to ask for money. Yet you constantly ignore that people acknowledge your right to make money.. from your last quote with your own words:
"The indignation has been coming from your end because you, and those who are vocally outraged, feel that you are entitled to my "work" without having to contribute a measly $0.99."

Wet coasters quote: "Furthermore I do not begrudge you charging what ever you want for your work.
AMO and Mozilla in general however are not the place to advertise or ask for such contributions.

Also, you fail to even respond to wet coasters saying:
"The irony here is that you are so indignant about being paid for your work that (given you spoke to Zach) I would hope that you share your profits with him since Abstract and Cobalt themes were inspired and created by him."

People have some valid points but you continually keep your blinders on tight and keep spewing out the same canned responses.

Frank said...

Bodizzle wrote - "You are also mistaken about Frank Lion. He is charging $9.95 for at least one of his themes, and maybe others. "

No, Bodizzle, you are wrong. My BMV theme has not been available to the public for 3 months now and even then was just a present for anyone who made any donation over £4.50 (which is not $9.95) on my own website. The 'maybe others' is misinformation. You only had to check my site - http://franklion.co.uk

Please cease and desist in bringing my name into this whole sordid business of yours and spreading misinformation about me.

There is no comparison whatsoever between us. As you would know if you made your own graphics.

Frank Lion.

Wet Coaster said...


Let me correct the misstatements you have made herein:

1. I never claimed that I was entitled to compensation from you.
2. Nor did I claim that I developed the theme that you appropriated from Zach Dovel. (Ironically you clam that you are entitled to compensation for a theme that you did not create originally)
3. I suggested that the whole community contributes (in in your case did contribute to the development) and that maybe you should consider contributing back to that community IF you persist in charging anything.
4. I did not take issue with your charging anything for "your" work just that it should not be solicited through AMO or Mozilla.

Finally I must ask (as others have has well) that you cease spreading misinformation about me and making false accusations.


Trent said...

I would like to break this down even more. First, if you go to http://www.mozilla.org/ yes that is the url for the mozilla foundation.

Next.. the definition of .org and mozilla being a non profit organization http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mozilla_Foundation

From wiki it quotes "The Mozilla Foundation describes itself as "a non-profit organization dedicated to preserving choice and promoting innovation on the Internet".

This clearly demonstrates why its not appropriate for individuals to "set up businesses" on AMO. I support your efforts Bo.. Just NOT on AMO.

Consequently Bo, this is not about who's definition of open source is right or wrong. This is about starting a business on a non profit .org web site which is clearly wrong. Either your missing the point or just don't want to admit to it. Obviously, you have allot to gain to ignore the truth on the matter. But that still does not make it right. This is why many have called you names etc... Its your unethical and immoral actions on AMO why people feel the way they do.

Bodizzle said...


I am sorry if what I said was inaccurate. I was going on what a user of my theme said in an email. He told me that you were charging $9.95 for a theme. I should have gone directly to your site and for that, I apologize.

Treadstone said...

Bodizzle wrote - As far as advertising on Firefox, I advertise Firefox on my site and I bring a lot of users to their product. Firefox makes money on the number of users they have. Me advertising themes from my website that cost a dollar does not hurt them at all. Having my free themes available on their site helps them quite a bit.

I'm a little confused in what you've written here why would someone find a theme first and then go looking for a program to install it in by clicking on your firefox link surely they only end up at your site purily because they want to change the look of firefox so i would think it's the other way round and they bring a lot of users to your product and more likely helps you out a lot more.

And as a user of your abstract zune theme from FF2 i can say that i found not having a black status,scroll bar completly spoiled the theme and made it unatractive so much so that as someone who had never even looked in side themes files i decided to mod the theme myself

By the way your orange buttons look a hell of a lot better and finished with a dark background
which is missing from your theme

Trent said...

I agree with Tredstone.. Bo's setup brings people to this site.. Not the other away around. But I did talk to some people at Mozilla IRC and they said its ok to charge for themes on AMO. Whats not ok, is to plagiarize others ideas and turn around and make a buck. There is no question that Zac Dovel inpired and created abstract. You can still find his themes and screenshots if you google them. I had no idea Bo stole that much from others. That
is why its really hard to justify selling themes on AMO.. You really have to build them up from scratch with no help from the community to justify it. So in theory, yes, its ok to sell on AMO. But in reality, doing so usually violates others copywrites.. as in this case Zac dovels.. And for that I am told can get you knocked off AMO.

Its really up to the creator of abstract to determine Bo's fate. At least from what the folks at Mozilla are saying. All one has to show is documentation that one created the initial source code.. which should be easy to prove in this case.

Bodizzle said...


Now you have really gone insane and crossed lines of decency. First off, I thought you were a great defender of "open source" which means it is hard to prove that I have "stolen" anything as you put it. Second of all, the theme that you are mainly referring to, Abstract, was abandoned and I spoke to Zach about continuing it. He was fine with it. There is no copyright violation because there is no copyright. You are just trying to find something else because your first objection of advertising a website that had themes for a dollar download fell apart.

I have not stolen anything and I find it really funny that now, all of the sudden, I am a thief when that has not been an issue for over a year.

I have also been very clear on what I am charging for. I am charging for my time. They time that I spend putting these themes together, not the themes themselves. The code and images are "open source". People can use them to create their own themes. I have not stolen anyone's ideas. I have taken over themes that were no longer being developed by the original author, changing them to fit my style, and remaking them to work with the latest release of Firefox. If you are being intellectually honest and really care about "stolen" work, why don't you go after the people that are loading my themes on other sites and distributing them without my permission simply because they don't want to pay. You yourself just said that it is ok to sell themes so you really have nothing to stand on when you come after me.

I am tired of explaining all of this to you and would appreciate it if you would focus your attention on something more worthwhile.

Trent said...

I agree with you Bo. And I hope for your sake, you have a genuine agreement with the creator of cobalt and Abstract. Because once you went to a pay model on AMO, its a little different according to the rules of AMO. If all you were doing were sharing and altering others ideas for free that is one thing. But if you take an idea and start making allot of money with it, that changes everything, if the creator of that idea objects. I am not just making this up. This is what I was told from Mozilla.

I don't know much about business law except one thing. That an oral contract is usually never bindable in a court of law.. Your word against theirs. I hope for your sake, that Zac is a honorable man and I am thinking he is. I also hope you explained to him your exact intentions with going to a pay model on the AMO site itself and are completely transparent about your intentions.

So if you have his blessings, fine. But I am afraid I side with Frank Lion and other developers in the way you are setting up your business. Regardless of what Zac ever told you, I personally feel you owe him some compensation after looking at the original Abstract and cobalt themes.. Actually, I don't think you are charging for cobalt yet.. but if you do, he should get something for that as well. I mean much icons etc.. are virtually unchanged from those themes. Frank did have a point when he said "There is no comparison whatsoever between us. As you would know if you made your own graphics."

Its more then obvious you are using Zac's graphics on Abstract. If I were you, I'd get something in writing. But ethically, I don't think I could ever agree with you for asking for money on the AMO site unless Zac is included in any compensation. Lucky for you, I believe the AMO site is part of the corporate division. I doubt you would be able to set up business if it were part of the non profit division of Mozilla. I think allot of people don't realize this.

Trent said...

Bo, I just have one more comment to make. I am about done bugging you believe me. I know you think I am insane, and I agree I had that coming for sure. What you are doing is pretty much a radical change from the existing format at the AMO site. The reason I persisted was I knew something did not seem right. Anyway, I am now satisfied and agree that you could be good to go.. depending on your agreements with Zac etc.. One last troubling concern is some people at AMO support you in the believe these are your themes so you should be compensated etc.. Looking at your comments on the abstract Zune on AMO all I see is you stating, "Abstract Zune, formally Firefox Zune, was inspired by the Windows XP Zune theme". Now if this were offered freely I would not have any beef about that. But once you start asking for money on AMO I think you should also give recognition to Zac. I mean, if I were zac, and offered my graphics to you to do as you wish.. thats one thing. But if I noticed you started to sell a theme I inspired without even mentioning my name.. well that would hurt. So was it inspired by the Windows XP Zune or was it inspired by Zac? To be honest, it was inspired by Zac and XP zune was inspired by Zac's abstract theme. Its not right when people buy your product when they believe you are the creator that inspired it.

At any rate, if you have a mutual agreement with Zac, as you say you do, I don't think it would do any harm to give the guy some credit here. I think that would be nice courtesy for you to do that. Take that a bit further and you could even compensate him as well.

Many of your abstract zune descriptions on AMO can really mislead one to its origin:

"This theme is MY basic version"

"The fully skinned, maintained, and supported version of MY themes"

"For MY premium version of Abstract Zune along with other themes"

See what I mean? Its quite easy for one to assume you inspired Abstract.

phil said...

get over yourself, your themes dont even work properly. definitely not worth paying a buck just so my FF is a different color. you suck.

phil said...

"Open source is about earning money." hahaha that made me laugh really hard...

Bodizzle said...

Nice Post Davey Jones. Your attitude and language is well representative of those who side with your position.

As for stealing, nothing was ever stolen. I have commented on that many times. I am not sure why you people can't get it through your head that the themes on AMO are FREE of charge. Nobody has to pay for them. Nobody is being charged to use those themes.

As for spamming AMO, not sure what you meant there. I have responded to idiotic "reviews" which are nothing more than a small group of whiners who want to attack me and falsely accuse me of doing things I have not done.