Slashdot Mirror
Microsoft Killed the Start Menu Because No One Uses It
An anonymous reader writes "Microsoft recently killed the Start Menu, and their explanation for it seems fairly straightforward: no one used it. This may be a bit of an exaggeration, but Microsoft explains that use of the Start menu dipped by 11 percent between Windows Vista and Windows 7, with many specialized Start functions — such as exploring pictures — declining as much as 61 percent."
I haven't used the Start menu for ages, the OS X dock took care of that horrible mess...
At work I use Windows only. All the programs I actually use have quicklaunch icons, and most of what I do is in the browser.
At home I use Kubuntu only. I reset the K menu to the Classic style, and use it extensively.
Those rare circumstances when you need something from the start menu, it's not going to be fun trying to find it.
I feel the same way about livingroom furniture. I don't care how it is, just don't move ANYTHING!
When you can't figure out the easy way to launch stuff, look in the Start Menu.
This is change for change's sake.
Obama's legacy: (N)othing (S)ecure (A)nywhere and (T)error (S)imulation (A)dministration
I have a simple rule .... I don't like having my desktop full of icons. So I use the Start menu A LOT.
Guess that "no one" is only at the house of the idiot who said that statement.
Seriously, exactly what data and from where are they collecting it to figure this decline in usage.
"I use a Mac because I'm just better than you are."
Anything but the ribbon.
So removing it for the remaining 89% is obviously the right thing to do. Microsoft logic ftw.
People seem to want symbolic icons that represent the programs they want to run; they don't want to look through a long menu and read a bunch of text.
Palm trees and 8
Once I started using Launchy that pretty much took away my need for the Start button.
Launchy plus the Quick Launch toolbar (for Windows XP) pretty much does the job.
Once in awhile I go to Start and am surprised by how much stuff I have installed.
Maybe I really am in the minority here but I really do use the start menu all the time. I like to keep very few icons on my desktop and just use the start menu. I like to think this is a mistake but perhaps I'm just set in my ways
This is why I'm still on Windows XP; I like the Start Menu and being able to group my applications by purpose in a *menu*.
I don't want them littered over the desktop or in silly toolbars.
I wonder: If you were to look at the desktops of the users who don't use the Start menu, would it be littered with Icons?
I always use the Start menu. But maybe it's because I'm a Sys Admin.
I see, insanity is really taking over.
Contrary to the popular belief, there indeed is no God.
did they get this data ? how do they know where i click my mouse on a windows desktop ?
So if all blackberry users used the phone icon 11% less over a 5 year period the ability to dial would be removed? Personally I used the command on mac or start on windows button very often for a number of reasons. I cannot understand the advantage of removing either.
When the foot seeks the place of the head, the line is crossed. Know your place. Keep your place. Be a shoe.
Where's the run command going to go? I use the heck out of the start menu personally.
Pretty much will work the same as the dock on OSX or Ubuntu Unity. Let's hope they allow customization to remain.
For every benefit you receive a tax is levied. - Ralph Waldo Emerson
Without the Start Menu, how do I shutdown?
Slow down, cowboy! It has been 4 hours since you last posted. You must wait another few hours.
The Start Menu button may not be used as much because many of the apps are now web based. Over that past year, I have not used word, excel and/or powerpoint. I now google docs.
And the QuickAccess browser widget.
Oh sorry the story was about Windows but when you get used to KDE that's sooo past tense.
Back on-topic, I feel there'll always be a place for a menu system to access your applications, not all fit in a bar or have been assigned a short cut.
"The likes of Facebook and WhatsApp are free to those whose privacy is of zero value."
They have destroyed it over and over again, making it a huge colossal mess of a feature.
The only decent thing that they have added to it in recent years (read, last 1.5 decades) has been the search feature.
Classic menu was the last decent version of it. If they had expanded on those menus and just added search in to that, it'd have been brilliant.
But noooo, they had to explode it up and make it all shiny and capable of being viewed by people with no eyes and used by fingers the size of god damn sky scrapers.
And by the looks of it, they are going to break this even more as they focus on touch nonsense instead of business use and professionals, you know, the guys who actually contribute most to your company Microsoft?
Oh well, it is for the better. The quicker Microsoft die, the better. They are already dead to me. XP was the last decent Windows before they let the 10 year old designers loose with crayons as thick as baby wrists.
Most obtuse interface in the history of interfaces.
Someday the UX fad will go away and stop making things more 'usable' and 'discoverable'
to launch Windows applications. Sort of a poor mans Launchpad. The rest of the Start menu is worthless to me.
...please please please tell me that we can turn this back on.
I've managed to make a career by avoiding having to use Windows, but I'm sure one day there will be some pain-in-the-arse employer who enforces it. If that day comes, I really hope that I'll be able to make my desktop work exactly the way Windows 2000 did...
worldmobilenet.com -- World Prepaid Wireless Internet plans
Just hit Ctrl + Esc, on your Model M.
Microsoft killed the start button because Mac OS doesn't have one, and they're successful amirite? The wonder is that it took them so long.
yes, we have no bananas
They've made it take up the entire screen.
In a few decades time, when historians are trying to piece together how Microsoft fell, I expect these blog posts to be very helpful.
This is one area where linux prides itself. Since Microsoft is anti-linux, they generally impose their world view.
To-do List: Receive telemarketing call during a tornado warning. Check.
It takes longer to browse in the start menu in Vista and 7, which trains people to put icons on their desktop, or learn how to use Alt+F2. Sadly both Gnome and KDE decided to follow suit with equal regressions. But it looks nicer!
The odd thing is that Microsoft (along with KDE and Gnome developers) were adamant that people would prefer this and use it more. Now Microsoft is admitting that fewer people are.
http://blindscribblings.com - Tasty pop-culture in conceptual fashion.
I notice on the change in usage table includes things like my computer and my documents. I for one find it much easier to open from my start menu then have to minimize everything to get to it on my desktop.
The Start Menu was an innovative answer to a then-inherent lack of organisation and difficulty in finding things. Yes, you had the File Manager on Windows and Finder on OS X, but good luck if you're looking for that "client document about some paintings" if you don't remember anything in its relative path.
Today, almost all mainstream desktops and laptops have two or more cores per CPU. Dual-core is starting to become a commodity even on phones, where it's use is starting to come to fruition quite nicely (camera enhancements, smoother video chat, better speech recognition, games, etc). 4GB of RAM is pretty common too, with 8GB RAM stock right on the horizon. SSDs are cheap now..and they are FAST. With this much power available to us on the cheap, searching for stuff from the Start Menu (or Spotlight on OS X) is a much better alternative than doing the Start -> click motions of the past. Furthermore, outside of work, most people spend more time on their mobiles than their desktops or laptops...and none of those have a Start menu. (Well, Windows Mobile did but look where that went.)
I welcome this change; it was pretty much inevitable. I'm even more glad that it's only superficial, since Windows 8 can revert back to Classic pretty easily for the luddites! I hope they copy^H^H^Hinnovate on Apple's state-saving feature since that would make Hibernate as fast as doing a Standby without its unreliability.
I've found myself using the Start Menu much less, mainly because it is not functional as it is. It was much easier to drop a shortcut and clutter up my desktop than it is trying to find what I need on the start menu.
So, it follows, make something less useful, people will use it less, then you can remove it, citing as an excuse, it is not used like it once was. Freaking Genius.
Agent K: A *person* is smart. People are dumb, stupid, panicky animals, and you know it.
So Microsoft hired Firefox's UX team? Or was Mozilla beta-testing Microsoft's UX team for them?
Actually, your logic is a bit flawed. The article states that the usage dipped by 11% between Windows Vista and Windows 7. Claiming that 89% of people still use it would only be true if 100% of the people used it with Windows Vista.
It seems that MS intentionally omits the actual usage. Instead, they only show the change in usage between Windows Vista and Windows 7. This data is useless in deciding whether or not the start bar is needed. I'm guessing they intentionally left out the starting figures, because the Windows 7 usage was still over 50%.
>2011
>Fedora 15, Ubuntu 11.04, and Windows 8 demonstrate some so called "stroke of brilliance."
> The end is neigh.
So in Windows 8 (for those that tried the demo, yes I downloaded the ISO and setup a VM to try it) they replaced the simple little menu in the start button with a whole screen monstrosity that takes the entire desktop. Taking over my whole desktop because I pushed the start button isn't the answer to this problem. IMO people don't use the start menu much because they put icons of their most used programs in the quick launch tool bar and on the desktop itself. Instead they take a simple menu, blow it up full screen and if you decide you don't want to pick a program and go back to what you have running, there is no logical way to do it (there isn't a close button that's obvious, ESC doesn't work, right click doesn't work). That's fucked up.
Gnome3 and Ubuntu's solution to doing away with the start button is far better than what MS has cooked up and I don't really like those either but I can see them working better). If I fail that badly using their "NEW AND IMPROVED" start menu I can't even comprehend how disastrous this will be for the less computer literate. The best part is, you cannot bring back the old start menu that I could find. It's not in the control panel, the options are gone from the right click menu, etc.
MS is making a huge mistake overlaying their Windows Phone 7 Metro interface on windows. This is a huge fuckup that's obviously being done to use the windows monopoly against the phone competition. It's going to backfire and damage windows just like Vista did.
Please don't make our computers, especially those used at work, to look like XBox 360.
I don't want to see "Ownyou12345 signed on toLIVE" message while in office. (FYI Windows 8 will have fill XBox LIVE integration.)
Seriously, it is going to be a very long time until my Apple or PC laptop or desktop are touch screen. Whats the rush to turn them into a tablet?
I mean I'm just about never going to go up to my living room TV/Monitor to swipe around for daily computing. I'll probably get burnt from the heat and arthritis will severely cripple my workload. Although the heat will probably help out on the arthritic days.
Removing the start menu is like key mapping return/enter to F1.
Start menu is going to be in the 'enhanced' upgrade.
The scourge of the desktop. We lost the Start menu because M$ has to pander to the lowest common denominator. Which usually means the stupidest of the stupidest. I hate clutter on my desktop. I love my Mint menu in Gnome 2.3. Every major company saw Unity interface and has went full retard. This isn't minority report, fucker I have shit I need to do on my PC, cause you know, its mine!
Visit my Forums?
...while they're at it.
I'm sure Linux users would be thrilled to finally officially get rid of the daft flag-key on their own hardware.
I've always seen this FLAG logo on my keyboards...as me...paying for their branding.
What this world is coming to - is for you and me to decide.
If you start me up I never stop!
I think this should be more telling in how crappy they designed the start menu. I had to manually manage it in XP, but at least I could and group applications in nice neat sub-category menu entries akin to linux's application menu. I think I only use the start menu to 'Run' applications, access control panel, and access the restart/shutdown functionality. Occasionally I use it to find an application I rarely run. Otherwise, I use toolbar shortcuts. It took me awhile to finally get the taskbar where I could use toolbar shortcuts again on Windows 7. I am totally peeved that I cannot create one on the side of the screen anymore too! I have to waste vertical screen realestate instead of the more abundant horizontal realestate.
Don't worry. Somebody will write a start menu replacement. Best of all, it'll come with a special program that helps you buy real estate for no money down, work at home, and enlarge your p3n1s.
For all intensive purposes, "whom" is no longer a word. That begs the question, "who cares"?
I like the W7 start menu. Press one button, start typing what you want, and it's there. In combination with the dockba*cough*TASKbar icons, it's a great system. Desktop icons are for people who use their machine for very few tasks.
usage fell because the start menu with the scroll interface blows, to start a program that does not start with A i have to click the start menu, click all programs, drag the scroll bar looking for that shit, then click the program folder then click the program.
it would seriously take less time usually to winkey+R then type the path.... IF m$ had not decided to separate 32 and 64 bit programs by default install folder (what the fuck?) so in order to manually launch an app i have to remember WHICH folder it's installed in
it's a shame, aside from that BS windows 7 is overall rather nice, reliable and i like the libraries function to provide convenient lists of folders holding similar content on different drives or otherwise in different places on your drive for whatever reason
Snowden and Manning are heroes.
Microsoft might have it's head in the sand and think that we're all going to love Metro UI, but it's just not going to happen. You know that there will be an option to use the "classic start menu" (which will probably now just be the start menu), just like there was in XP/Vista/7. Even in the dev. build there's a registry value to flip that turns off the Metro UI and gives you the regular start menu back.
Plus, there's no way this Metro UI bulls--- is going to fly in the workplace. It will be fine for Windows 8 Home Edition, but I'd be willing to bet that most of IT would rather switch their systems to Linux or Mac rather than try to get people to figure out how to use the Metro UI. I know I would.
I use the free version of Stardock Fences, I used to be a big Start Menu user and extolled the virtues of it to others. I'm not ready to go to giant boxes in Win8, but Fences and the Win7 taskbar works 90%+ of the time for me. http://www.stardock.com/products/fences/
HEX
Horror & SciFi Erotic Nudes
Microsoft killed the Start menu because they want to force everyone to use Windows Phone, even if they aren't (initially) buying a Windows Phone. They failed for years to sell phones that look like a Windows desktop, so instead they're changing the Windows desktop to look like their phones, and hoping that iOS and Android end up looking "foreign" to phone users as a result.
People click on the Start menu when they want to find something to Start. Imagine that. The bottom line is that the Windows 95 UI (which is to say, Microsoft's ripoff of the RiscOS UI) was the pinnacle of personal computer desktop UI design. Everything that's happened since then has been change for change's sake and has only served to annoy users and get in their way.
Tired of FB/Google censorship? Visit UNCENSORED!
How da hell do they know that usage of start menu decreased by %11 ?
Will they ever stop spying on US?
or am i paranoid?
*enlightenment is missing*
Of course no one was using it. Who would think of clicking 'Start' to shut down the computer?
I installed it on a four year old laptop and holding the power button does absolutely nothing now. I used to think this was a BIOs thing, but it appears not, or something in Windows 8 has changed it. Pressing it does absolutely nothing now. To shut down, I need to do CTRL-ALT-DEL, then go to the lower right power icon, click, select shut down.
They say start menu usage dropped by 11%, therefore "no one used it". Well I.E. market share dropped consistently for a couple of years. http://www.w3schools.com/browsers/browsers_stats.asp So why not drop I.E. also if that is the logic.
They removed the traditional menus in Office 2007 and Office 2010, and used the fact that people used the ribbon in Office 2007 and Office 2010 as their justification to add the ribbon in Explorer in Windows 8. That's like giving a multiple choice question with only one option, then using the fact that 100% of the people chose the same answer as proof that's what is correct.
Whenever I am on W7 I always use the windows key which launches the start menu and puts the cursor in the search box (which can be used to launch applications). So, for example, if I want to launch chrome I just hit windows key then 'c' then enter. This is also useful for finding and opening specific files very quickly. If this functionality remains, where windows key basically launches search, then I am perfectly happy.....I never use the rest of the start menu (why would you when it is faster to just start typing what you want after hitting the windows key)
It's no wonder that most users have 3 pinned programs to the task bar, it comes that way by default! Seriously, Microsoft has their head way too far up their own ass.
With stupid changes like this, Microsoft will be unseated as the primary OS... I just hope it's by Linux and not Mac OSX
I use slickrun, http://www.bayden.com/slickrun/1033/SlickRunHelp.aspx
It's fine if you just use 2 or 3 programs, so your average slashdotter finds it a bit limiting.
Yeah the GP already said that more eloquently than you did. So why are you repeating this?
Why are you repeating this?
Why are you repeating this?
I guess to you that looked like I asked it once.
I have a few programs (Eclipse, Chrome) pinned to Windows 7's taskbar, and then about 20 items on my Quick Launch toolbar for things I use Fairly Often and don't want to hunt for (Winamp, Gimp, command prompt, projects folder, etc). For other programs which I open less often, it's very handy to type in the beginning of the name, and then click:
[win], n o
Click Notepad++ link
Maybe it's because there are a bunch of idiots using computers who want an easy to see desktop icon for every program, application, and file. I've worked in several offices, and if anyone needed to find a program that was NOT on their desktop, they did not even know how to use the start menu. It usually involved me or an IT guy having to explain an easy situation to these computer illiterate people.
Home computer users are even worse.
I've been in various IT roles that involve direct user support and to my experience the Start button is a box of secrets of mysteries to average users. They don't use it and have no real interest in even trying. If they don't have an icon on their desktop, then the software/word document/powerpoint/whatever simply doesn't exist. There is a staggering number of people who don't even understand how to use the primary input device on their laptop. Every day I have walk-ins who report issues only to discover it's because they're trying to operate the touchpad by randomly banging on it like a bongo drum. Even after you politely explain to them the very complicated concepts of left click, right click and scrolling. Or they've decided to only use the right button under the touchpad- just because. "Why does it keep bringing this menu up?!? It's broken!"
Reminds me of that Star Trek:TNG episode.
"It doesn't go...can you make it go?"
Microsoft ... it's been a hell of a road. I started programming on my Commodore 64 long ago using the Microsoft Licensed Basic language and compiler. When I left college out of need, Visual Basic 3 provided a landing spot from which I launched my 15+ year long career. I've spent countless hours on my Windows PCs. But the "helper" features of Office 2010 that drive me insane, the lack of commitment to nearly every product / technology you've launched over the preceding decade, and now this abysmal and seizure inducing crap that is the Windows 8 "wtf" bar has pushed me over the edge. My computers gain more power, which you squander on pointless features and stupid glossy crap. Ubuntu or Mint ... here I come.
I've had it on my laptop since it was released publicly. I use it daily and I have been hoping I get "used" to it, or something "clicks". So far, no such luck. The entire Metro interface is designed for tablets. On a normal computer, it is 100% totally and completely useless. Half the programs you install don't make icons on it. Since there is no more start menu, the programs are basically "lost" until you explore your drive and make a shortcut for it on your desktop. So now I have a Metro interface and the normal Desktop littered with 30 icons. It's ridiculous. I hope every day that a new patch will be installed and the start menu will reappear, or the Metro interface actually becomes useful. Right now the entire OS is a mish-mash of really poorly ideas that simply do not work as a desktop OS. I have a feeling this is going to bomb worse than Vista and Windows ME combined. It really is terrible. I will keep it installed and keep using it, but I really wont get my hopes up.
The Windows XP start menu worked great. It was crowded but accessible. And simple at that. Windows 7 start menu is a little give and take, but the "All Programs" folder is just sweeping a bigger problem under the rug. Like searching in the Windows attic for your programs. In Windows Vista they should have released an Explorer SDK. By now there would be several community based shell options available, based on a common framework. At least they are consistent about keeping Microsoft components closed to customization. Instead we get clunky Windows Desktop Gadgets and gradient wallpaper options.
The fact that they collect this kind of data is creepy, and a good reason for me not use their products.
It's true, I use it less. But only because they turned it into a godawful mess. I (and probably most others) also used Windows less over that period. Does that mean they're going to retire the entire OS? This lunacy is right up there with ribbons.
" Engineers.... They LOVE to change things! "
If telephones are outlawed, then only outlaws will have telephones.
All it does is clutter my desktop, i use 4 programs, and they're all on that handy start menu, i don't have to search or look all over my big screen, i just go to one central place, and anything I REALLY use is pinned up there. I don't like things pinned at the bottom, I don't like being reminded of what I will be using later. It just causes stress "citrix program neighborhood" means I will be working later. I'd much rather hit start and look at it there.
I find MAC OS infinitely more annoying to use. The only person who ever asks me to help them find something, is the person with the big Mac all in one monitor machine that she can't figure out. It takes 5 seconds just to watch the graphics "wisp" away the previous program.
Doesn't everyone use desktop icons for launching apps ? Based on my experience of helping others, fixing their PCs, and so on, that's what I see !!
And I've NEVER seen anyone search for a document and simply double-click it to open unless I told them to. To open a Word DOC, for example, most people I know will launch Word and then try and find the DOC.
For 30 years, people have understood file directory trees. That's why so many users can use windows explorer so seemlessly. It's simple and it just makes sense.
It made perfect sense in Windows XP to model the start button in the same way - on a tree system. It worked. Everyone got it. Right click to explore and organize. The only confusing part was that sometimes you would see all the icons when you right clicked to explore because of Microsofts idiotic ideas about file structures.
Then came windows vista. What did nearly every person I know do? Changed the menu back to XP style. Vista's menu sucked. Extra clicks to get to the directory tree, kept recent documents there (I do NOT want the next user to know I was looking a text file called "Debbie does Dallas".... put 'special' stuff up on the top that had to be deleted...
Then came 7. Even worse. Libraries? Totally screwed up. Impossible to organize the start menu. I've always used functional groups - multimedia, office, internet, system..... but that's nearly impossible with the horrible 7 system. To the rescue comes the open source community with their free windows XP start menu look alike. It's no wonder windows users stopped using it. It's freaking ATROCIOUS in windows 7, and everyone I know hates the damn thing.
So now.... you're going to make me move my mouse further. A couple years ago, Microsoft was preaching ribbons in their office apps because of fewer mouse motions and clicks, and now we're going to completely OPPOSITE direction (assuming MS was telling the truth) with the start menu. Inefficiency and taking up huge amounts of realestate for the simple function of opening a program.
MS has gotten so big they don't know what they're doing. There's no consistency across their products, and that stems from a total lack of cohesive direction from their leadership. They're failing, and their idiot executives don't even realize why..... hint.... take a look at what FORD did by grabbing every single person in the company and forcefully turning them to move in the same direction.
I use Ubuntu...
How many people are just using a browser to do whatever they do on a PC? Whatever else they do there is an icon on the Desktop for launching the program. A business user might have some special apps but average users have a very small selection. Except of course gamers and even those are starting die off.
.
Either Microsoft is collecting information they should not be collecting, or they are basing this percentage on a survey that they themselves sponsored. We know from a long cast of historical references that Microsoft always hears what Microsoft ask to hear from their own funded surveys. If they don't get the 'right' answer that they paid for then it seems that the survey didn't really exist.
Yes, I'm guilty of using desktop icons for my most often used applications, but they happen to be on a Linux desktop. I'm actually using the Windows Start Menu 100% less than the year before, by my own non-Microsoft funded calculations.
It has a "Classic Start Menu" option, as well as a lot of other features for people who prefer the XP UI over Windows 7. No mention of Windows 8 yet though: http://classicshell.sourceforge.net/
This is not the sig you're looking for.
the good of start menu comes with search option but sometimes you can'T just find what ever you what (especially applications) by search so you gotta dig in it. It is very useful. They may change the look but DO NOT TAKE OUT THE FUNCTIONS.
At least make something like in Ubuntu 11 but please don't make it suck like that.
I was asked to test out Windows 8 for my employer and give them my opinion.
The lack of a start menu severely pushed my opinion into the negative.
Guess who isn't upgrading to 8 unless this is fixed?
Considering I had to explain just this morning that just because a program's icon isn't on the desktop doesn't mean it isn't installed to multiple people, I can totally understand this move.
PETA pickets outside Redmond campus, demands Microsoft stop using mentally retarded chimpanzees as user interface testers.
They killed it in 64-bit land. Bring it all back, even the look of 16-bit windows. Yes, I prefer the old ugly look of Windows 3.1.
Granted, it is now bearable since they did the folders. But seriously, before that. I thought it was the most useless launch tool ever.
Granted, I love it's "activity" indicator and bouncing icons.
But it is woefully pitiful for organizing your apps. I like my app grouped, and even sub-grouped. Essentially, to me the Dock is nothing more than the Windows taskbar "quick launch" area with some nice intuitive activity behaviors.
I did the same thing, loaded it into a VM to give it a whirl. Guess what? Metro sucks! It is a tablet interface and needs to stay on tablets. It looks like a Windows phone raped Windows Media Center and this was the result. There are already utilities out to disable this "feature", so what does that say about it?
Well, the not that people don't use the Start menu (that doesn't seem right), but by pinning all your applications to the taskbar, you actually do save time. I've been running Windows 8 and was a bit frustrated with the bad mouse/keyboard experience of the new start screen.
After reading the b8 blog I've pinned all my apps to the taskbar and I haven't had to use the start screen for anything anymore. I go hours without ever seeing the big green screen. It's created a nice separation between the touch-oriented stuff (I have a typical 24" monitor and keyboard/mouse so I don't use it). Pretty much the same experience as Windows 7 really, only a bit faster.
Considering... http://www.destructoid.com/pc-vs-console-gaming-infographic-pc-is-making-a-comeback-212611.phtml
There is really nothing wrong with a start menu. Microsoft however never enforced a good practice with their start menu, the signal to noise ratio is VERY low. It's cluttered with company names, uninstallers and readme files. Why should I have to know the name of the company if I want to use a program, looks very much like advertisement to me. Instead of enforcing a good practice they have extended the start menu with "most used programs" which really doesn't cure the underlying problem, and to me it's even more cluttered. They should get rid of everything but the program starters in correct folders, Games in games folder and so on, one program has one menu entry, this was probably how it was meant to be by the original designer but never enforced. Look at Gnome, very simple, and very effective. And now MS have come to the conclusion that nobody uses their cluttered mess of a start menu, and are killing it. I say it could be fixed, but MS doesn't seem to know what's wrong with it...
Curses!
Now how am going to get to telnet so I can get back into my Sun workstation so I can reset the X server?
XKCD:Xeric Knowledge Comically Dispen
The growth of iPads and Android could account for the drop in Windows Start menu usage. Just saying.
The start menu was a nice one-click or one-key access to all your programs. But a combination of Microsoft watering it down + installers misusing the start menu have damaged its usefulness:
HOW TO USE THE START MENU
1. Don't use the start menu for branding. Example:
Start\Symantec Applications\Norton Antivirus\Norton Antivirus.lnk
should be
Start\Norton Antivirus.lnk
(*) This is usually committed with Sin #2 below
2. Don't make a group for one icon.
Start\Super Editor\Super Editor.lnk
should be
Start\Super Editor.lnk
3. Don't place icons in 3 places
- Quick launch
- Desktop
- Start menu
Put them in the start menu, and let the user decide what applications are important enough to put on their desktop.
4. Don't put multiple icons where 1 will do
Start\VideoLan\Documentation.lnk
Start\VideoLan\VLC Media Player.lnk
Start\VideoLan\VLC Media Player Skinned.lnk
Start\VideoLan\Readme.lnk
Start\VideoLan\Configure VLC Media Player.lnk
Documentation is part of the application. Skinned/non-skinned is an option within the application. Configuration is part of the application.
5. Don't put control panel icons on the start menu.
Ex: Start\ATI Catalyst Control Center.lnk
should be
Start\Control Panel\ATI Catalyst Control Center.lnk
6. Don't modify the start menu when I run your app or update it. Ex: I move Quicktime under "Junk" but it reappears whenever it updates. Another one is FinePrint which re-adds itself when the driver starts.
7. Microsoft: Don't limit the size of the menu menu then add a scroll bar. Windows Vista and 7 limit it to 1/2 the screen then add a scroll bar, even if everything would have fit just fine had it resized.
8. Microsoft: The icons need to be clickable size. A 16x16 icon at 1600x1200 is inappropriate when the app provided a 128x128 icon.
9. Don't forget keyboard support! This has gone down hill since Windows '9x.
10. Don't place icons under Start - Programs. Everything is a program. Just place them under "Start"
11. Don't place applications in the registry startup - place them in the start menu's startup group so that the user can remove it easily if necessary.
I don't care what you call it, but you can pry that key out of my dead fingers. I hit the Windows key 10 times more per unit time on Linux than I do on Windows.
I have a nice rule I adhere to: keyboard shortcuts not involving the Windows key are for programs. Keyboard shortcuts with the Windows key are for the window manager (switching desktops, opening a run dialog, reordering windows, etc.). Works really really well for me. I have too many WM shortcuts to use just ctrl or alt with them, and I use the WM shortcuts enough that having to do ctrl-alt or something like that would get really annoying really fast.
Someone please remind me of some history.
Back when Win95 came out, programs designed for Win3.1 created entries intended for the Program Manager. Did Win95 have any sort of mechanism for accessing these items? I think the Program Manager was still around (for those who cared), but I don't think there was any sort of entry automatically created in the Start Menu.
My point? What you're seeing is exactly what happened with the move to Win95. Nothing new, and I'm sure there will be some sort of workaround in place before Win8 is launched.
That said, I doubt the solution will be pretty, obvious, or intuitive, just like with the transition to Win 95.
Look at all this discussion about Windoze. "Change for change's sake", I think not. Change to stir up discussion, thus creating advertising through blogs and developer interviews explaining the changes, I think so.
Ms claims they diabled the start menu because nobody uses it. To validate this statement, they give a nonsense statistic about a tangental feature of the start menu being rarely used. This means that their logic for disabling the start menu asserts the only use of the start menu was to view documents and images, otherwise the argument does not follow.
For the win8 afflicted though, there is hope. There is a DWORD named RPEnabled in
HK_Current_User\Software\Microsoft\Windows\CurrentVersion\Explorer
That controls the activation of Metro. Setting it to "1" enables Metro. Setting it to "0" disables Metro.
A curious bit of trivia to liven up discussion:
Setting RPEnabled to 0 turns on additional scare text on the win8 developer preview, which threatens job termination for unauthorized distribution and leaking.
10 guesses what the MS developers keep this key set to.
I read somewhere that studies found that inexperienced users are more comfortable starting applications by typing (part of) the name of the application, than they are searching for graphical icons in a nested hierarchy of menus. It makes sense: you probably already know you want Firefox, and with menus, you have to figure out where in the hierarchy Firefox will be.
The Ubuntu Unity interface all but forces you to launch most applications that way, and I found I quickly got used to it -- then noticed it's easier to launch applications in pretty much the same way in Windows 7 and Android, and even in OS X, where it's not quite so encouraged.
The difficulty lies in finding out the names of applications you have installed, or would like to have installed. I like Unity, but it's biggest shortcoming is that it's really difficult to find a proper list of installed applications. That's where the Windows Start Menu, and similar menu systems, is really helpful.
I used to find the GNOME Human Interface Guidelines for the menus surprisingly misguided, in this respect: you're not supposed to actually use the name of the application in the menu system, but rather list it by the intended use of the application. "Web Browser" is a silly way to label Firefox, and it makes things worse for less obvious applications. I had to resort to command-line tools to work out that the "Disk Usage Analyzer" that was crashing on start-up was actually named "baobab".
The start menu has a very specific use. When you want to find a program and you don't use it all the time it's neatly organized and relatively easy to find. If you can't find it easily, you use the search bar. It has a very logical and concise layout designed to give you what you need, when you need it. It's relatively easy to walk someone through finding items on it because it has a very easy to use hierarchy.
Of course people put all their most accessed stuff on their desktop, it's like a drawing board them. They throw whatever they want on it. Turning their desktop into a start menu WILL NOT be conducive to either helping them find stuff on their desktop faster or if they need to resort to the start menu.
This is similar to the abomination that is the ribbon. It's nice if you've NEVER used word, but after you've used it a few times and you need specific things and you can find your way around it's really quite terrible.
They could even look at this in a different way. WHY when they first made a GUI OS, didn't they just slap all the programs across the screen? Is there a reason why options are under menus and sub-categorized? What is the reason why there is a hierarchy in the first place? It's like they didn't even take the time to assess why the current structure is in place in just about every operating system in existence except for devices with relatively little in terms of input devices (touch screen).
IMHO this is extremely shortsighted.
I use it all the time in Windows including Vista and 7. I also organize them too. KDE v3.5.10 has one too so I use that too.
Ant(Dude) @ Quality Foraged Links (AQFL.net) & The Ant Farm (antfarm.ma.cx / antfarm.home.dhs.org).
ISTR that MS did that right. Program Manager entries went to the Start menu.
General Relativity: Space-time tells matter where to go; Matter tells space-time what shape to be.
Typing and searching isn't the answer. Occasionally I don't even know the actual file name of what I'm looking for in Start, but I can easily find it by the name of the folder (application) and where I've stored it in the start menu hierarchy. Searches on my system (with several 2 TB drives) can take prohibitively long, particularly since I don't store all applications on the C system hard drive. This change is a big mistake, and will cause a flood of third party solutions. Unfortunately, although the Start menu was populated automatically by the install process, third party applications will miss this capability and thus will fall short as a substitute. But it isn't as if Microsoft really cares about their users.
I'm an American. I love this country and the freedoms that we used to have.
Absolute BULLSHIT to be blunt about it - Yes, even though I like MS & their product lines & a lot, sounds like complete bullshit if I ever heard it...
How/why?
Well, first of all, from my having taken stat I & II (& got A's in both during my collegiate academia/degree #1 of 2)??
There's NO WAY IN HELL THEY COULD HAVE SAMPLED EVERY WINDOWS USER TO DETERMINE THAT IN THE 1st PLACE (unless they monitored every mouse-movement (or keystroke) users make, & they do NOT do that).
* Please - someone TELL ME that Ms' marketers are NOT THE STUPID & UNDEREDUCATED to try to "pull the wool over everyone's eyes" that way... lol, please!
APK
P.S.=> Personally? I think MS is "shooting itself in the foot" with this new interface paradigm, but... time WILL tell! apk
I use it all the time.
Hit the Windows key, then arrow down to the app I want? 40-50 times a day.
Their solution had better be something at least as simple to do when working on a laptop with a crappy touchpad or, worse, a clit-stick.
So no one uses the Start Menu, huh? Do they include computer-savvy people in their focus groups? I kinda doubt it after declarations like these.
If people don't like the start monstrosity in Windows 8, MS will push for a windows button on mice and other pointer devices.
Those keys they forced onto keyboards are so incredibly useful. /sarcasm
And speaking of the most wrong solution to a problem, why does /. now have a captcha for posting comments?
People can be put in different groups when it comes to organizing because that is the way their brains work. Some people need to organize some things one way but other things another way.
The windows 7 menu is better for me >90% of the time....but the other 10% is a real pain. For others it might be better 60% of the time.....
Some of the people will be please all the time. Some will be pleased some of the time. Some will be pleased less.
It sucks that MS did not recognize the bigger picture.
I use it daily!
If Google really cared they would fix Android Chrome to reflow text, instead of discriminating
I stumbled across how to make a second toolbar. (I think I dragged a folder to a far side of the screen... I can't test here at work). So I filled and arranged it with shortcuts to apps and folders, made it auto-hide, and now I use the start menu only for control panels and shut down- if I think I've been hibernating for too many days in a row.
Dear Microsoft,
You are assuming causation. Let's look at the facts.
1. You had a good thing going in 95-2000
2. XP introduced some changes, but let me still use the classic menu.
1. In WIndows Vista, you changed the UI in the start menu, as compared to Windows XP
- Different hotkeys
- Type to search
- Extra menu
- New interface suggested things to the user—this changed based on usage habits.
- The familiar 'Programs' menu was renamed and moved.
2. From XP to Vista you saw decline in the usage of the Start Menu
3. In Windows 7, you kept with the changes you made to the Start Menu, and added a few.
4. Yet again, you saw a decline in the use of the start menu.
Granted, you saw a decline in the usage of the Start Menu. This does not imply that users don't want such a menu. Please remember that many of your users are returning customers—people who have been using Windows for years.
Personally, I loved the Start Menu in Windows 95, 98, (and ME, I guess), 2000, and XP. When I bought a new machine in 2004 that had Vista on it, the changes to the Start Menu were one of my biggest objections. Sure, the spotty performance, frequent crashes, large updates, massive footprint, and the fact that it some how un-activated itself were all contributing factors, but the Start Menu was really the big one, honestly. I used Vista for 6 months and finally decided that I needed to have XP back. When you released 7, I tried it out, thinking, "Maybe they fixed the problems." But the UI problems were actually worse, so I stuck w/ XP. I eventually decided that the ability to play Age of Empires just wasn't that important and switched to Ubuntu, and finally Mac.
I'm really not trying to bash Windows. I used Windows for years and thoroughly enjoyed it. The reason I haven't liked any of the new versions, is that you, Microsoft, keep removing the features I liked—you have effectively removed my familiarity. I liked that Windows 95-XP felt like a system where I could get some work done. Vista-8 feel like toys.
Just my 2 cents.
Sincerely,
-A former customer.
I very rarely touch the start bar at all. I just open my command prompt, taskkill out of explorer.exe and start whatever I need from there. /s /f /t 3.
If I need to shutdown or whatnot I just use shutdown
Most GUIs slow speed of access considerably against trained keyboard shortcuts or batch files.
Mostly because the search for files function in Vista no longer works. How do you ship an OS when search works in the previous version, but no longer works in the 'upgraded version'. We upgraded your car. You can no longer shift into reverse.
God spoke to me
Odd (or even, if you prefer) numbered release from Microsoft; who cares, noones going to use it anyways.
I did some more digging on this. Apparently, when upgrading from Win3.1, Program Manager groups are converted to start menu entries (citation). Installing a legacy program on a clean Win95 box doesn't create convert them automatically, it seems, but opening a .grp file adds the entries for you.
So, I think MS did it mostly right, or at least as well as can be expected.
Read today apple has 23% of the desktop market. Looks like Microsoft playing right into their hands.
And let the Microsoft hate parade roll.
Where's your start menu in iOS? Oh but iOS is the best OS in the market! It doesn't need one cause they have the dock bar at the bottom.
Have any of you used windows 7 lately? Guess what that bar is down there. Yeah that's right.
I see no use in the start menu what so ever.
There's the window key+typing, there's the new dock bar+pin funcionality and the good old search for your software.
Other OS's don't have a start menu.
Certanly pab and mobile users never used such a thing.
Why the trigger happy? Why the gratuitous hate for the company that granted most of you the means to be the engeniers and IT guys you are today?...
geez...
I propose an open source fork of the start menu... Lets call it begin box (so as to avoid patent / trademark / copyright suits),
Wait...
I use this:
http://classicshell.sourceforge.net/
Here is my Win7 Start menu:
http://imageshack.us/f/801/startmenu7.jpg/
I blame the world of stupid users for skewing these stats. They all seem to think a program is not installed on their system unless there is a shortcut on their desktop, thereby eliminating the use of the Start Menu except that one time they go to it to move a program to the desktop. FML
But Searching works so well.
http://imageshack.us/photo/my-images/51/startmenuu.png/
Absolutely! And that's the same reason I am still using my abacus.
And you're posting here on Slashdot? That's *way* cooler than browsing in Lynx!
"What in the name of Fats Waller is that?"
"A four-foot prune."
I'm not sure why people bag on the start menu so much. If used properly, it's the most helpful tool in all of windows, particularly with Vista and Windows 7. I think the real problem is most people have no idea how powerful it is or what you can do with it. It's always available and can be customized to fit pretty much any type of user.
However, I rarely see anyone who fully takes advantage of it's fetaures. For example, almost noone knows the difference between the "pinned to start" icons and the "recently used programs". I wish the default setting for "show recently used programs" was set to 0. When those icons change positions (and not always predictably) it confuses the hell out of regular users. However, the "pinned" ones stay in the same spot and are always available in 2 simple clicks. And with even modest resolutions, you can get quite a few pinned to start icons that are always available. If you have good vision, you can choose to show the small icons and have room for even more. This feature alone covers the majority of basic users who only typically use 5-10 programs anyway.
For power users, i'm not sure what more you can ask for. Your common programs can be pinned and 2 clicks away. Virtually all major settings and documents can be shown or hidden directly on the start menu in either as a link or as a menu. If that's not enough, you have the all-programs view that shows everything installed in an alphabetized list. And if that's too much of a pain, just click the windows key and start typing what you want. The search is very fast and you typically don't get more than a few characters in before what you are looking for is at the top of the list. And if you wait for even fractions of a second, you will see any relevent control panel options, documents, images, etc etc. that match your search.
It's really the best of both worlds for keyboard and mouse users. The hard part is getting people to understand it. Very few people are taught the "pin-to-start" concept and even fewer know that you can just type to find what you want. Combined with the confusion from the "recently used programs" mess, most people just resort to using a sea of icons littered across their desktop. Virtually every time I show someone how simple it is, and remove the hundreds shortcuts on their desktop, they come back and thank me for making their computer "less stressful".
It's SOP for a new incoming television executive. Find the previous exec's biggest success and kill it at all costs. If it's too big to kill, schedule it for a different and random night and time every week, but double up on the graveyard slots. If it's still kicking, demand that they add/remove characters until the chemistry fails. Then, as soon as the ratings slip, give it the ax and declare it to be a flash in the pan.
I hate the Start menu as an app launcher because they didn't even get the app list right. Linux did. At least on any Gnome or KDE system (I don't have much experience with other environments), the app list has a proper arrangement by categories: Graphics, Internet, Multimedia, Office, Settings... and from there, apps organized alphabetically. But on Windows, there is no such arrangement, everything goes together. It's a mess.
Circumcision is child abuse.
The real question is "How did they determine no one was using the start menu?"
Unless, of course, that every windows system tells MS how an application is started, and how often.
Makes one wonder just how much "phone home" windows does.
i must be no one.
So how many of you opted out of Microsoft's usage statistics because of 'privacy' issues?
This reminds me of the Windows 95 ad campaign, where they used the Rolling Stones song titled "start me up" to publicize their addition of the start menu.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=P0AJM6HMYjM
Unfortunately, they loop the title phrase over and over instead of playing the next line which is "you make a grown man cry..." how true.
'Beware of the Leopard'.
It's about time Microsoft caught up with Leopard. There've been two major releases since then! How long until they're aware of Lion?
The whole story sounds to me like Apple mocking on the way Microsoft handle design problems. Ok, is good to ask people, But good design choices never come from a comitee; you need to be focused on keeping things simple, which is what they never got right. Instead they go always for the nerdy "5 kind of pens and a pencil (just in case) in my pocket" way, which always end up with too many things, everywhere, all the time.
Legacy apps still went into the Start menu. I'm certain of that.
As for some apps not going in there, it's possible that some legacy apps' installers tried to write directly to the .grp file instead of using the normal API. That'd probably cause problems.
Microsoft pretty much crippled the start menu with vista, and continued that particular downward spiral into 7. When you make something less efficient, people tend to use it less. The basic idea is that Microsoft is crying because they sat on their own fist. It's only a matter of time before they get rid of the GUI and give us back DOS. When that day arrives, technology will not be here to advance us, but only to usher in The New Dark Age that much more effectively. Enjoy your light fixtures while you still can.
A lot of people use the integrated search in the start menu, often using the Windows hot key to pop it up, type something, hit enter. Power users especially work this way, it's the sole reason I keep coming back to Windows7 is the start menu with it's search and the taskbar is a productivity combo I don't seem to be able to match anywhere else.
Don't get me wrong metro is nice.. but I don't see it being productive. Microsoft seems unaware a good fraction of their users use their OS to get stuff done. Leave the idle content consumption and finger swipping to Apple.
After logging in slashdot still does not take you back to the page you were on. It's been that way for 20 years.
Removing the start menu is all fine and good if it's your machine and you know what's loaded on it, what about when you sit down at a machine that isn't yours?
Playing a game of 20 questions by typing names of programs until you hit a match isn't good UI.
Hate trying to use the start menu on my wife's laptop... it has Win7... maybe that it sucks ass is why there is a decline in use.
I can easily modify the start menu in XP, and it makes things quick and easy. Added icons for "my computer", each drive, and various categories such as "multimedia", "graphics", "net", "text", and so on. Everything I use regularly is there, rarely nested by more than one level.
I leave all the other crud in "programs" the way XP does it, in case I ever need to find something a little more rare.
I hated using computers that have so many things in the "quick launch" that it is no longer quick, since many are hidden, unless it's taking up half the task bar.
I have show desktop (also sadly missing on wife's computer?), browser, email, music folder, and blank screensaver there.
So Microsoft claims 11% less users use the start menu in Windows 7 vs. Vista. I'll believe that; I assume everybody using Vista uses the start menu, so they're only deprecating a feature used by 89% of all users.
... at least for the Desktop. Right-click on the taskbar. Find the "toolbars" option. Add the Desktop toolbar. It doesn't put it in the place it's been since late 1994, but it's at least a useable menu.
to the applications folder.
Shoes for Industry. Shoes for the Dead.
Once a long time ago I installed a program and some data into some folders. I used the start menu to list the contents of program files, and from that browsing, I found the program I needed. (I was misspelling it on the command line)
For data, the search button is needed. The previous doorway was the start menu. What will be the new doorway?
Leslie Satenstein Montreal Quebec Canada
There are three kind of lies: Lies, Damn Lies, and Statistics. MS just feel like to kill the Start Menu, and is using statistics to justify it. :D
If only MS uses reasons other than statistics, we MIGHT still believed it.
Heavy start menu user here. Windows 7 was my first transition to new craptastic interface. I never could get comfortable and settled on an alternative, bblean.
...after the KDE's crazy drop of functionality in KDE4, and GNOME trolling us with 'we want to make it so simple you cannot do real work in GNOME 3', now Microsoft is following the pioneers of interface hell! What a wonderful way to go!
Now, let us imagine the future...
[Random user] "Will Mac OS X v10.9 "Lazy Kitty" have a dock?"
[Apple dev] "No, it's too boring and like, yesterday. But it'll have so much eye candy that your eyes will develop diabetes!"
[Random user 2] "Where are my icons in Xfce5?"
[Xfce dev] "They're too resource-heavy, we let them out. You ain't gonna need them!"
Nerdy news for your nerdy needs? http://www.soylentnews.org Soylent News is people!
Figure 4 reveals that 85% of people have three or more items pinned to the taskbar compared to a mere 23% who have the same number pinned to the Start menu.
Guess what the default configuration of Windows 7 is? Three items pinned to the taskbar, nothing pinned to the Start Menu.
So most people running with the default configuration is indicative of a trend?
Wow. I don't mind the idea of a "start page" one bit, but I do think this is some of the worst data analysis I have seen in a long, long time.
They probably just can't remove the start button from the taskbar because then it would essentially be a dock, and Apple would come a-suing.
...since they've changed their name with each new version for the last 3 releases. Sorry, that's IBM SPSS now. I can hear our users whining already....
Never let a lack of data get in the way of a good rant.
nt
Never let a lack of data get in the way of a good rant.
You love to search alphanumerically through thousands of programs and directories.
http://imageshack.us/photo/my-images/51/startmenuu.png/
productivity vs failed deadline
Let's do a quick exercise in Microsoftian design: The week has 168 hours.
Shall we assume the typical adult male has 4x 15-minute sexual intercourses per week ? It's probably pushing a bit, but fine, let's exaggerate. That'll be 1 hour per week.
Shall we assume the typical adult male urinates 8 times per day (once every 2 hours while awake), and each event lasts 1 minute ? That'll be 8 minutes per day, 56 minutes per week. Let's round things up and call it 1 hour. We're exaggerating anyway.
166/168 = 0.9880. On our typical adult male, the penis is idle and unused 98.8% of the time. If the human body was designed by the Windows 8 design team, we would be dickless.
For me, in windows 7, the start menu search does not even work anymore. Simply no results, ever.
My guess is that the original deal with NeXTSTEP, that gave Windows 95 many of it's UI elements, finally expired. :-) This leaves only MacOSX still running NS code.
There was an unknown error in the submission.
The are bringing this crappy Windows Phone 7 Metro UI to the XBOX 360 as well. I'm not happy about that. Its fine that they want to make these changes, but at least give us the option to choose the UI we want to use. Don't force us to use something we don't want. I think Windows 7 will be the last Windows version I will ever use.
They already fubarred the StartMenu with Vista by not expanding like in XP and earlier.. Ofcourse people are gonna use it less if you cripple it.. I use it a lot as I find it a good way to find all the program's I have installed (yes I do some archiving/structuring with my startmenu).. I've even installed 'Classic StartMenu' to get the same XP startmenu back (but still retain the current too).. In Windows 7 I find myself much more searching for stuff as in previous windows (I can't say anything about Vista as I never used it).. Also looking at Windows 8 with it's Metro style look, yeah it looks great, but having experimented with it some, I found myself still using the 'classic desktop' much more as it was more convenient for me.. (why the hell do I need to use the scrollbar when using the mouse compared to using a finger anywhere).
Want your Start button back? Don't worry... there's an app for that.
I know this is /. and I know we don't like Windows and I would have thought XP would still be very popular here... but what the hell. The Windows 7 start menu is by far the best for development I have seen. Start, Type... There are people here saying they use the run command and goto the full path... why? I normally have to hit no more than 2 letters in the application name before it is at the op of the list and I hit enter.
I don't pin too many applications because I don't always run the same ones.... And as for those saying put them on your desktop... if you see your desktop other than on a fresh boot, clearly you aren't working hard enough.
Having tried Windows 8 out I found myself feeling very lost. I tried to find shorter ways of doing things but every simple task for more complicated. Short-cuts that worked before no-longer worked. Logical routes (well logical to me as a Windows user for god knows how long) just didn't exist any more. I don't know know what they think they are up to with this, but I don't expect businesses to put up with this crap.
Go ahead Microsoft ignore us, think you know better. We are all just change adverse loosers.
Go for it... the desktop is "dead" and everyone will be fondling their screens and likeing it in the next two years anyway. I mean it is not like you are depending on *us* to actually spend money to purchase a new version of windows?
P.S. Do you believe the nerve of all those trolls clinging to their 286's during the Vista beta bitching up a storm about system requirements and performance?
When they changed the way Start works since Vista, it sucks bigtime. Having lot's of programs installed makes that list too long and the hassle of finding your program becomes too great to bother with it. The way XP works was better to me: Expand it all over your desktop. Nice a grid of all your installed apps in one sight.
Switching to classic isn't an option, it removes the shortcuts aswell. It really goes into primitive mode, 98 style.
Now I use 3rd party tools to get my OS to do what I want with it. How absurd is that?
Microsoft! Stop telling me on how to use my pc please! And bring some legacy options back that WILL enhance usability.
One of the problems with launchy I found was that you need to know what you want to launch.
So, yes, I can remember a few of the programs I've used recently and for years.. but for ages ago? No.
For a long time I kept a folder on my desktop with shortcuts to all of the games available.
I can understand why MS think that less people use the scroll bar start menu in Windows 7. It sucks compared to the XP menu. It's simple logic - as a user I want to see all of the programs installed, even if it does take up the whole screen to do so.
The windows start bar 'search for programs and files' has bugs. For example, a search for "office" does not return a match for "OpenOffice.org Writer".
A couple of days ago, I thought (for a very short time) that OpenOffice was not installed. I searched in the menu, and yes.. OpenOffice is there..
Before they remove the start menu they would need to fix the weird search behaviour.
Also, technically, programs will still want to install to the 'start' location. Does this mean that someone will write a 3rd party application to provide a start menu for windows?
Let's see what Wikipedia says:
"The Start Menu and Start Button are user interface elements used in the later versions of the Microsoft Windows operating systems and in some X window managers. The Start Button provides a central launching point for application and tasks."
So, considering this.. they are .. killing it?
You have a sick, twisted mind. Please subscribe me to your newsletter.
Or maybe I'll persuade the IT guys to pass this new version too. Or just stick to using one of the older laptops until they've all burned out.
(I leave the question of "Why should I care?" as an exercise for the reader.)
Birds are not dinosaur descendants;birds are dinosaurs, for all useful meanings of "birds", "are" and "dinosaurs"
They have the largest installed base of OS. 11% fewer people are using that Start Menu, so obviously, nobody is using it. Oh, what about the 89% people who haven't stopped using it? Amounts to nobody, using MS Arithmetic for Windows!!!
Time to introduce the pre-1995 Keyboards - remember, the ones w/o any Start buttons? Just make them ergonomic enough, maybe w/ some new special Metro keys. Oh, while @ it, lose F1-F12 - who still uses those? Must be even fewer no-ones!
I'm sure the decline in the use of the start menu that started with windows vista and windows 7 is due to the change in it's default behavior. It no longer worked in a straight forward, simple intuitive manner. Naturally people will find different ways for launching their programs.
Correct, messing with the Applications folder is bad news. Here's how to arrange things how you want (this works up to 10.6, and assume Lion)
1. Create a folder somewhere in your user directory, call it something like "Apps".
2. Drag shortcuts of your apps (not the apps!) into that folder (you can also make subfolders and put the shortcuts in those)
3. Drag that folder to the Dock. Once you turn off the lame default "fan" display, you will have a nice menu of apps. Apps in folders will have cascading menus.
Only downside is it is strictly alphebetical sorting. That can be fixed by renaming the shortcuts/folders
This is just the sort of thing that is so annoying about Microsoft. Someone decides how we're going to work, and not so much how we might be working already, or even how we want to work.. That's how we get masterpieces like "The Ribbon". Completely useless contrivances that at their very best are just different, but in practice tend to slow things down. I don't care about the "Well, you can just....." Sorry, if you just have to put that priceless ribbon, put it in, but leave an option for the old menu based system.
This isn't get off my lawnism, the OS is the lowest of the low, and shouldn't be changed just because they can change it. Microsoft seems to have this idea that we sit around and get all excited about the OS, that we sigh contentedly when we see all the wonderful things it does. Bull. the best OS is the one that keeps out of my way while I'm using my applications. Which is to say that if someone wants to use the start menu, it should be there. If a person has been using Windows since 95, then they should have the option to do just that. (Windows one and 3.1 excluded for obvious reasons - 1 didn't work, and 3.1 barely qualified as a GUI)
The shepherds did so well protecting the flock that the sheep no longer believed that wolves existed.
Then I remembered I haven't used windows in years. (ok not counting the occasional "fix" relative's comp for food)
No one used menus in Office, right?
Classic Shell in Windows 7 FTW, and Microsoft UI designers can kiss my ass.
amen brother
Sounds like they're going more the Finder type route from OSX. I don't think hitting one (or two) keys and typing in "Word" and then [enter] is exactly "using the command line" as someone earlier implied.
It seems that all AMERICAN ICONS have foreign grafitti covering the beginings and endings.
Let the Rag Heads, Snake Charmers, and Elephant Mahouts write their own computer OSs from scratch and adorn them with bangle and buttons, ribbons and gold multi armed godesses.
Gates had balls and held development to a vision and a standard, Ha Ha Microsoft, what have you now?
Microsoft introduces the Start Menu Ribbon!
Planning to be moderated ± 1: Bad Pun.
I will miss the Start Menu, but not for long i bet. I missed the C Promt, and Directory Magic programs and BBS sites too. But now i look back on them as learning tools for future generations. I know my kid will benifit from my years of working in DOS and programming in Basic and Pascal, and HTML. I hope he will enjoy a good read/laugh of my DOS 3.11 hard cover books i have ;-) I wonder what the PC 15years from now will be.. lol
More people will install classic shell. There we go, problem solved. I mean, Win7's start menu is already an ugly piece of garbage, who cares whether they take it out? (Unless it were to replace it with something that wasn't an ugly piece of garbage, but we all know how likely that is.) I have Win7 at home, and almost none of the UI is native. I predict, for computer-savvy people at least, that will be increasingly common as the Windows UI team goes more and more bonkers changing things for the sake of it.
the Start menu has been replaced with a screen full of live tiles that can serve as both as an application launcher as well as widgets containing information.
I think Microsoft is trying to realize the 1990s vision of Virtual Reality, where you log on, you see words floating around in the sky, you reach out and grab the word you want, and it takes you there.
Classic Shell
Customisable start menu and added Explorer functions. I've made it a standard feature on all my computers.
Am I the only one that uses the Win Vista and Win 7 Start Menu like launchy?
1. Press Windows Key
2. Type what I want
3. Hit enter
If there's a faster NON-MOUSE way Microsoft, let me know.
Isn't this like returning to Windows 3.1? "Now the circle is complete." -Darth Vader
I have show desktop (also sadly missing on wife's computer?)
Open notepad, paste:
[Shell]
Command=2
IconFile=explorer.exe,3
[Taskbar]
Command=ToggleDesktop
Save as "Show Desktop.scf".
WinKey+D is easier though.
And to get the Quick Launch toolbar back, right-click the taskbar, make sure it's not locked, then Toolbars->New Toolbar. The Quick Launch folder is "%userprofile%\Application Data\Microsoft\Internet Explorer\Quick Launch".
Windows 7's Start Menu is far from bad, it's just that it's both outdated and clunky. The current Win7 taskbar is nice, but I'd rather have the small shortcuts that show up above the "All Programs" and Instant Search bars removed completely, and JUST have the list. It's also a tad slow in opening. Even then, I run Executer, which both comes up faster, and looks far nicer then the current Start Menu. Windows 8's Start Menu, once people stop griping about how it looks, I can see being very nice for icon-clickers. Once they add the ability to add a shortcut to that without needing to edit anything, it'll actually be far more useful than the current one. But the main problem is that...many of the things we're used to that ALL OS's have is that the powerdown, restart, sleep, hibernate buttons/links are no longer there. That alone will frustrate more people than it's worth. Microsoft may be trying to make it to where people don't need to shutdown that often, but they're forgetting that it takes a lot of electricity to keep something running. You people who use the desktop for all of your shortcuts...the Metro-style Start Menu is EXACTLY that, and will BE that once it's finished. Just without the desktop. Now tell me which is easier, tapping the Windows button/clicking or getting to the desktop and then finding it. ...Arguably, both would take the same time, sometimes.
This is what I do.. I have 3 folders (offline, games, online) for programs next to start menu: http://img543.imageshack.us/img543/8332/applaunch.png
I click the folder and it opens a list of software I have installed. You can have folders whithin folders (ie. for different ffdshow config windows, office..) too.
Of course it takes a bit of effort to manage the list, but it's better and faster than whatever the start menu OR Microsoft's new Metro interface offers.
Hit the Windows button on the keyboard (or the start bttun on screen) and starting typing the name of your application, a key word from an e-mail, the title or content from a document stored on your PC or a network share or UNC path, whatever...if more than one entry, move cursor up or down to select the item you want - then just hit return; in short - it is the fastest route to the fastest and most efficient indexing system on Windows.
Geeks may like tidy sets of lists and folders that they browse to get to a program launch icon - I just want to get on working, whether the mnemonic for getting there is the app I used or something else I remember, I don't care and shouldn't have to.
The (powerful) functionality of Windows search is behind that button. I don't care if it goes, as long as there is an equivalent easy route to get where I want to be.
Am I the only one that is wondering HOW they're finding this out? Simply surveys, or ?
Stone