Slashdot Mirror
For Windows 8 Users, Stardock Revives the Start Menu
jones_supa writes "By reinventing the Start Menu in Windows 8, Microsoft has caused some resistance to the new Start Screen. For those longing for the classic way of doing things, Stardock comes to rescue. The Start8 is a piece of software which replicates the functionality of the button and menu found in previous versions of Windows. Supported is starting applications, the Run and Shutdown features, and search."
People get set in their ways, no question about it. Plenty of OSs don't have a start menu and they're quite usable. While I don't think the start menu is inherently bad OR good, I think people get way too hung up on the way a proprietary OS used to be - up to the point that they mod the hell out of the interface. I use MacOS and Windows 7 and Windows XP and Linux all quite regularly. People need to give more and be a little bit more mobile.
Nothing is more dangerous than a programmer with a screwdriver.
Stardock, please bring back the Win3.x Program Manager!
Same as ME and Vista, skip it.
"When information is power, privacy is freedom" - Jah-Wren Ryel
The only way I'm touching Windows 8 is by slapping it with the aborted late-term fetus of Usability.
i kinda understand why Microsoft taking this stance on start menu, they need to get the Metro UI on desktop so that developers will make applications for Metro, and in turn it will help the Win8 Tablets gain massive apps in short period of time
I can see the bitching from users already. I tried Win 8 myself and was immediately stuck on how to quit an open app or even how to run another one and switch between them. It's just not obvious, and that's going to be a problem.
When Office 2007 was rolled out at my org, even with loads of advanced notice and training, the phone was ringing for weeks "How do I print?" "How do I copy/paste?" etc, etc....
I have a better plan. Keep Windows 7 deployed for as long as XP was before upgrading users.
I should, however, be thankfully to Microsoft for all of the job security they provide.
A pity, looking at the screenshot, I was hoping that it would actually enable a taskbar while using the Metro interface. Instead, it just displays the start screen in a quarter of the display area - a size for which the Metro interface is ridiculous. Vistart ( http://lee-soft.com/vistart/ - no affiliation) is a better alternative if you want the start button back.
It's good to hear that the Windows users out there are suffering as much as us Gnome3 users. Why is it so hard to understand, most of us don't even want to be aware of the UI, it should 'just work'.
Start8 screwed up my Win8 preview install.
Vistart works better and doesn't jack your system.
Mod me down, my New Earth Global Warmingist friends!
I had the urge to change the metro interface to the classic one in my copy of the Developer Preview and, after some googling (google is my friend indeed), I found that it only requires changing a certain value in windows registry. So this Stardock changes only that? Seems to be just a glorified way to set a registry value. Citation!
Democracy: Crowdsourcing a country near you
A lot of folks tend to banter back and forth over classic vs. the more modern metro and metro-like shells (such as Unity or the iOS, or Andriod). What it really comes down to is the type of user behind the computer. The more modern mobile/touch interfaces like Metro are an application-centric approach that caters best to a user who is interested in doing a specific thing quickly and easily. Older interface types with taskbars, window lists and so on are task-centric shells that cater more to power-users and/or administrators who tend to have a lot of things going on at once, and who need to be able to manage all the open applications with ease.
As such, task-centric shells are likely to always be preferred by the one group while the more average user will prefer the updated shells (even if some of them will initially complain about the need to relearn things). The most effective way to manage this situation is simple - just make sure to offer both worlds.
A good example of this is that recently Mint Linux made the move to Gnome 3, and with it, a more Application-centric shell. They provided a number of applets, and soon after a fork of Gnome 3 (Cinnamon), that were able to offer the user either extreme, and even multiple points between the two shell types. Ubuntu, on the other hand, did not really offer a choice and forced the users' hands in shifting to Unity. The result was a very large shift in popularity to Mint as the current preferred Linux distribution (as seen on Distrowatch's listings). As long as Microsoft offers a choice, I think they'll be able to keep both worlds happy. Well... as happy as can be expected for running Windows anyway. ;)
Why did MS make the build in e-mail app a full screen on in windows 8?
I hope that they don't do this to notepad and the other windows Accessories.
I'm already using a third party FOSS replacement, Classic Start Menu, in Windows 7 to replace at least one critical bit of capability that Microsoft revoked: folders in the root of the start menu. I've relied for years on being able to create and manage folders in the start menu as sub-folders to manage shortcuts. I eliminate at least one click, I can organize them by task or function, and I don't have to deal with the confusion of developers' sometimes unintuitive ways of placing their apps in Programs.
I expect the author of Classic Start Menu will shift with the tide when Windows 8 arrives and produce a new version, so I will likely just keep using it if he does and it continues to prove necessary for me. That way I eliminate even the learning curve of Stardock's rendition.
Third-party tools also gave Windows 7 back the "Classic Start Menu" that had been available from Windows 95 through Windows Vista.
Note the insignificant installed based of these tools.
When push comes to shove, this is a third-party application, which, while of great interest to a small number of devotees on their personal machines, are not a realistic (let alone desirable) option in a managed network environment. And as you're forced to use the new UI at work, you'll be less inclined to reject it at home.
The new UI is here to stay, and these tools shouldn't be viewed as anything more than a crutch to aid in your ultimate transition away from the old one. If you really don't like the new interface, don't upgrade to Windows 8 to begin with.
I honestly don't think it looks nice to have all of the non-metro apps be tiles. It completely removed any folder structure, leaving me with a big pile of apps with confusing names (for example: I have 10 tiles that are just called "uninstaller," and some other onew where the name is obscure, because the proper name is the folder name). I'd be perfectly happy to have a normal start menu for all of the non-metro apps.
if you want things the way they were you can always just turn Metro off...
Personally I'd rather have my idiots at home glued to the TV than out doing idiotic things
I think (as a server-bod of twenty years) that without a disable-by-group-policy option, most corps are going to skip this one.
I managed to skip Vista, and clung to my XP laptop as long as I could until it failed then I was forced to replace it with 7. 7 was basically what Vista should have been.
Some times, I feel like the OS makers don't know what they're doing. While I seldom ever use the Start menu on Win 7 (I pin the apps I use to the task bar), it doesn't mean I never use it.
Even more irritating are the changes from Snow Leopard to Lion. I understand the theory behind queueing, but I almost never want any application to open up the document I last used. Likewise, I'm irritated by being forced to uncheck the "Reopen windows on next login" or whatever the dialog box is when you go to log out. I'm sure there's a way to disable that in the terminal, but why should I have to go through that. Let me disable/enable it from the Finder as an option if I want it.
Taking guns away from the 99% gives the 1% 100% of the power.
While it's a cool product, Stardock's Windows mods are well known for destabilizing the system. Basic Windows operations mostly go off without a hitch.
But if you're doing high end gaming on a system, all the their products install can make your experience an endless, frustrating bughunt.
Were it just for a group of PC's in an office where no gaming should be happening, I'd say "cool".
Chas - The one, the only.
THANK GOD!!!
It's the fucktard "interface designers" who've been smoking their crack for too long that are fucking this up.
Office 2007's "Ribbon" was the first salvo in this war of dumbing down and obfuscating an organized, intelligent deep interface. And may the stupid ass hair responsible for that atrocity burn in hell.
The new Win8 interface is simply an extension of the "we're too stupid and lazy to expose functionality to you easily" mentality (emphasis on "MENTAL") happening at Microsoft.
Basically, like MacOS, it's a triumph of form over function.
Too bad what people need is functional software.
Chas - The one, the only.
THANK GOD!!!
Call me when the summary says "For Windows 8 Users, Microsoft Revives the Start Menu"
While I don't particularly like the new "start screen" I do understand the reasons behind it.
All of the "ordinary" users Ive ever encountered avoid the start menu like a plague. It's an unfamiliar and arbitrary abstraction that really is very confusing. Most people absolutely do not think about multitasking. The idea of calling something up that covers what they're working on is really too much when they've got actual work to do.
Watch any non-techy user. They will close a program to free up their screen, then open another. To us this is maddening but to the ordinary user it makes sense. This is why iOS is so popular. It's designed around switching between full screen applications and it does it very very well.
The new start screen is just that. You call it up, it covers your screen, and you switch to a different application. It's that seamless mode switch of application->home->application that ordinary users crave.
Windows XP's theme support was written by Stardock; It's ugly but it's pretty stable.
MS makes hammers and screwdrivers. They want everything to be a hammer. So now there's a secondary market for customizing your mandatory hammer to look like a screwdriver again.
Maybe instead of going lowest common denominator, MS should enhance their development wizards and such so that an app can be easily generated for either platform or something...
Check your premises.
I used the windows 8 developer preview and I noticed that metro was completely optional. As in, you can turn it off entirely. It's a gimmick if you're using a mouse. If you're using a touch screen like some of the newer HP desktops, it's useful.
I don't know what the fuss is about, I'll probably upgrade to windows 8 when the time comes.
They're using their grammar skills there.
This. As soon as I saw "Stardock" my response was AW HELL NO.
I think there is something that many people need to understand: the new w8 start menu is not designed as an improvement to desktop. It's designed as a measure to push microsoft's tablet and phone offerings leveraging their desktop market share. Note how it was published after MS was taken off "probation" for its similar leveraging efforts to push IE market share up, which resulted in anti-trust violation case and eventual settlement.
As a result, desktop users are getting the shaft. The idea in itself is brilliant in terms of getting catastrophic lack of sales of WP7 and lack of interest in W8 tablets to go up. But it comes at direct expense of desktop usability, which will come crashing down in comparison to XP/7.
...often has problems reading the small font of tool tips etc.
That's a design flaw, and a bad one. Anyone over about 40 or 45 (except me and by bionic eye=) is farsighted because the eye's focusing lenses get hard at that age. And many young people have that problem as well.
The kids at Google are just as bad with the new gray on black links at the top of the page. Is there anybody over 30 working there???? Bad design! Bad bad bad!
Probably the worst is red on green. It is completely invisible to someone color blind (my dad is, I'm glad I'm not). Don't they teach design in college any more? I'd never have made these mistakes when I was in my 20s.
He used IE8 and was used to type into the "Google Box" to search. Along comes the change to IE 9 and all of a sudden he has to use the URL bar to search.
Why? You can still set Google as your homepage. In fact I still do, just to see the ocasionally cool Google Doodles (there's one today but it's lame).
A Hammer is a hammer is a hammer. In the real world tools do not change how they are operated.
Incorrect. In my grandfather's day there were no power tools. A drill had a crank. In my dad's day carpenters used clawhammers to build houses, now they have nail guns.
While *I* love new UIs and shiny things in general, there are lots of people out there who cannot abstract computers and are lost when small things change.
I can't agree. Yes, I can change habits, but change for the sake of change is stupid. It hinders productivity. That's one thing I hated about being married. Are you female? You sound female. Women are notorious for never putting anything in the same place twice; evolution has made them good at hunting for stationary objects while it has made men to see movement.
"Well look for it," she'd say. Well dammit, I shouldn't HAVE to look for it. It should be where I left it.
Now, if the change is actually an improvement, like going from DOS to Windows, that's good. But moving the damned menus around with every new release is just plain stupid. My tools should not hinder my productivity; that's the exact opposite of what tools are for.
Free Martian Whores!
No, Stardock wrote some of their horrible boggy skinning UI with the ability to use XP's theming technology.
If Stardock's software was decent, Microsoft would have purchased it.
But they didn't... draw your own conclusions.
I think I will just stick with win 7. That works well.
And seeing as I will not have a touch screen, 8 won't.
I don't mind the new start menu in W8 really (go to the tiles and right click and select all apps) but the main issue I have is you can't adjust the tile font size. On a regular pc and monitor this isn't a problem but I'm running this system on a PC hooked up to my TV so 1080P and sitting back 6-7 feet the tile font is so small I can barely read it you can zoom it out but not in for some reason. I'm sure there's a way to set it I just haven't found it. My desktop though is blown up to good size and can be read easily so having the start menu back will be nice.
Unless I'm missing something fundamental about the Metro UI, I just don't see a way to get the 1000+ applications I have installed onto a metro menu. There is no tree view that I can see. Metro may be fine for people that only use a browser and email but what about the technical user?
Back in the early 80s, our computers were, for the most part, text-based. The OS was strictly command-line. Some software incorporated graphics, but your OS was pure text and cursor.
Then Apple made the world "ooo" and "ahhh" with the GUI. It was an instant hit. MS followed suit with Windows.
when Windows 95 came out, the vast majority of the computer-using public was very happy to see the new Start menu. It sure beat the Win 3.1 way of doing things.
Notice: for every one of these innovations, they were overwhelmingly accepted by the public as IMPROVEMENTS.
Fast-foward to 2011. People are starting to notice Linux, most use Ubuntu. Someone at Cannonical decides that the PC needs to function like a smart phone so they totally break the UI with Unity. (Yes, I know ome people love Unity..... but they are in the minority). Many Ubuntu users flee to Xfce, KDE, Mint, or some other flavor that has a UI they like. Notice how this contrasts with the above-mentioned innovations. Shuttleworth can talk all day about how "slick" Unity is but the majority of his users hate it. Does he decide to change it or at least offer an alternative? Nope, his ego prevents that... Tells us to "get used to it".
Remember.... Steve Jobs didn't have to tell us to "get used to it" when he unveiled the Mac. The public loved it. Bill Gates didn't have to tell us to "get used to it" when he unveiled Win 95. Again, the new innovation was well-received.
And now Microsoft, in all their wisdom, jumps on the "let's make the deskop look like your 'droid/iPhone!!" bandwagon. Again, are we seeing people "ooo"-ing and "ahh"-ing over Metro? Nope. Google windows 8 Metro and you'll find that most people can't stand it.
So the moral of the story is: if you build a shit sandwich, don't be surprised if your customers spit it out. And don't expect them to "get used to it" when they have other choices. And as long as there are software developers, there will always be someone out there who will gladly provide that choice.
I think naming the new interface may be a future marketing FAIL.
Think of all of the different kinds of people who use Microsoft Windows. There is a chunk of yokels and very conservative types among them.
To them "Metro" is short of "metrosexual" or "gay". At best to those people "metro" means "urban" with means black people, teenagers having babies and abortions, liberals coming to sodomize them, etc.
Have this unconscious thing going on while NON-COMPUTER-ENTHUSIASTS get frustrated with a FORCED UI change and you have the start of marketing FAIL, possibly a user rebellion as well.
To me, "Metro" means those crappy busses where the drunks pissed/pooped in the back seat. Come to think of it, that might be an appropriate name after all.
Slow down, cowboy! It has been 4 hours since you last posted. You must wait another few hours.
I love the Metro interface, I own a Windows Phone and find it to be very pleasing and plan on buying a Windows 8 tablet. However, I think that for legacy users (so to speak) that windows allows you to select the new start menu or the old Windows 7 style start menu during set up. They can still metro-fie the start menu, but the start button has been around since Windows 95. They can block it out on tablet installations, etc...but the start menu is something that many people and businesses rely on (its nearly universal, not much training involved.) So Microsoft really needs to at least allow an -option- for it. They have an option for the classical view etc in Vista and 7 already...it's not a new concept. Anyhow another thing I almost demand from Windows 8 is the ability to push metro apps to the desktop, I have no idea how or why that feature isn't there.
2 Days AGO http://www.ghacks.net/2012/03/06/stardocks-start8-brings-back-the-windows-8-start-menu/ MArch 02 2012 6 days ago !!! http://www.ghacks.net/2012/03/02/vistart-restores-start-menu-disables-metro-ui-in-windows-8/ Guys try to keep up OK I am being realoly hard, and I apologize, but I just can not understand not linking to previous articles from days ago .
I'm not sure I find it funny or what when I see all these tech guys who are supposed to be good at abstracting problems not able to grasp the idea of metaphors. When you say "A Hammer is a hammer is a hammer," I get you. People can look at the shape of it and grasp immediately what it does and don't have to ask many questions if they need to use it for the most ubiquitous of reasons around, driving in a nail. Whether it be a ball peen hammer, claw hammer, framing hammer, whatever. Even if they might not know the ball on the ball peen hammer is for rivets. Not sure why others who are supposed to understand 'abstract' can't figure it out.
-- I ignore anonymous replies to my comments and postings.
IIRC, GP's claim comes from the fact that Stardock had to crack one of the Windows XP .dll files in order to get it to recognize third-party theme packs.
Windows XP only allowed installation and use of themes that were produced and digitally signed by Microsoft. If you replaced the .dll with the cracked version that didn't check the digital signature of themes, XP would recognize and install unsigned themes produced by Stardock or anyone else.
Wait until you see the Windows 8 assistant: Tribby. So cute! So furry!
Seems Microsoft went and cloned another Linux concept. Anyone who has used kde4 should quickly notice that the screenshot there looks virtually identical. They did the same thing with widgets and just named them gadgets instead. Typical.
Has anyone with extensive experience with W7 (and who is not a shill for M$) test driven W8? Is there any reason for a PC owner running W7x64 Ultimate to switch to any version of W8? Or should we... W8... for W9? Hahahahhah....
The short answer is, no. No reason at all, unless of course you want to have to learn a whole new computing paradigm that sacrifices functionality and easy of use for a uniform experience across all of your devices, which is what Windows 8 is all about.
It's about replicating your smart phone interface on your PC, simply scaling it up to a larger size and requiring the same kind of touch input in order to use effectively.
MS tried for years to scale the desktop down to the size of a 1.5" x 2.5" screen, and utterly failed. So, now they're just trying it the other way by scaling the 2.5x3.5" smart phone interface up to monitor size, and again, utterly failing.
Another thing they are trying to accomplish with Windows 8 is locking down the user experience with the "app store" model. There will be no software on Windows 8 that is not approved by Microsoft. You will similarly not be allowed to write your own programs without becoming a "licensed" Windows developer at significant cost.
Essentially, by using Windows 8, you are giving your computer to Microsoft, and then licensing back functionality they think you should have.
If their TPM 2.0 approach is adopted, you will also not even be able to install an alternative O/S, because the bootloader will be locked just like a phone, and you won't have root access without hacking it.
It's just awful all around, and I hope it falls flat on its face (but I think people have become too stupid to say no).
1. If you like it and use it, they'll change it.
2. If they change it, you'll learn to use it, but perhaps not like it.
3. If you still don't like it, you'll kludge to get it back.
Usually minor details, and 10 minutes of work to do so, if it's that important to you. I know Photoshop previews were a bitch for me when I lost them in Win 7 Explorer... so I got them back. Happy now. ;-)
When the going gets weird, the weird turn pro. ~~ Hunter S. Thompson
Dear sweet baby jeebus, I know that by nature human's are resistant to change, but this is stupid. People really think the Windows 7 start menu was confusing? It confuses me how anyone could be confused by such a simple interface. And whining about a huge field of icons on the Start screen in Windows 8... really? Organize them you morons, it's not difficult, check out my desktop: http://i182.photobucket.com/albums/x26/Blessedben/Desktop2.jpg I press the Windows key, click on one icon, and my program launches. It doesn't get any simpler than that. Evolve, learn, adapt, or die. If you're not moving forward, you're moving backwards. I think that's enough clichés for you to get my point.
I still use XP, and W2k on one old laptop.
Right-click Taskbar, select Properties
Select "Start Menu" tab
Select "Classic Start menu" and click Customize
scroll down and check "Scroll Programs"
click OK
click OK
Now when you click Start and Programs, you get one scrolling list.
Right click the list and select "SORT by Name"
now you have an explorer-style sorted list of folders then shortcuts.
It's almost as good as Win3.1
--
You may vacate my lawn at your convenience. Right NOW.