Hands-On With Windows 8.1 Preview

adeelarshad82 writes "Microsoft launched the preview version of Windows 8.1 at the company's Build conference in San Francisco and early signs show that Microsoft heard the criticisms, and has responded with improvements. The new OS includes a number of changes starting with the return of the Start button and the ability to boot directly to the desktop. However, Microsoft hasn't given up on making the new-style tile and full-screen more usable for all users. If anything, the tile-based Start screen has gotten more flexible, with new smaller and larger tile options. Windows 8.1 also drastically improves built-in search, SkyDrive cloud syncing, mail and Microsoft Music." Microsoft also released a preview of Visual Studio 2013 and .NET 4.5.1, and there's a program that will give developers early access to the PC version of the Kinect sensor. Other tidbits: Windows 8.1 will use a standard driver model for 3-D printers, and it's getting better support for both high-res displays and using multiple displays with different resolutions.

Comments

the return of the Start button

[Anonymous Coward]

That's the phrase everyone has wanted to hear, including myself. Microsoft may have backpedaled, but that was the right thing to do.

Re:the return of the Start button

[Anonymous Coward]

Windows 8.1, or Windows 180?

Re:the return of the Start button

[Entropy98]

That's the phrase everyone has wanted to hear, including myself. Microsoft may have backpedaled, but that was the right thing to do.

What good is a start button without a start menu?

Re:the return of the Start button

[Anonymous Coward]

What good is a start button without a start menu?

Works great in my car.

So by analogy, it'll work great in a computer.

Re:the return of the Start button

[SoCalChris]

Except that they totally missed the point of what everyone wanted.

Yes, there is a start button there now. But all it does is bring up the start screen, the same as pressing the Windows key. The start menu, which is what most people really want back, is still missing from the OS.

Re:the return of the Start button

[Vanderhoth]

I was going to say, the start button isn't what people wanted, they wanted the start menu. METRO sucks on the desktop, I don't want it and I don't want to see it. Tablet or phone sure it makes sense.

Now we're probably going to have to sit through hundreds of posts for "I've been using windows 8.1 for 10 years and it's just so awesome with the new start button, just what everyone wanted. MS is such a great company that listens to their customers."

Re:the return of the Start button

[tripleevenfall]

It'll be a real improvement (a 180) if there's something as simple as a checkbox that says "Suppress Metro interface".

I still don't think MSFT gets it. No one wants to see Metro, ever.

Re:the return of the Start button

[tripleevenfall]

MS is such a great company that listens to their customers... after their market share erodes, after they miserably fail in mobile and tablet spaces, and after they face the prospect of another Vista-like iteration of an OS that business customers will skip altogether.

Re:the return of the Start button

[tripleevenfall]

I was actually waiting on 8.1 to see if I would stick with Windows 8 on a laptop I bought. I was hoping for the start menu and an option to suppress metro totally.

Since it looks like MSFT isn't going to let you do those things, I'll be formatting and going back to Windows 7

Re:the return of the Start button

[Anonymous Coward]

I don't need a new way to get to the metro screen.
This new start button is just taking up space.

Re:the return of the Start button

[Anonymous Coward]

All it does is pull up the "start screen" The perfectly designed start menu from Win 7 is gone for good.

Microsoft: Fuck you

Re:the return of the Start button

[vux984]

Yes, there is a start button there now. But all it does is bring up the start screen, the same as pressing the Windows key. The start menu, which is what most people really want back, is still missing from the OS.

I disagree. Most people were just confused by the lack of a physical button to click on to do anything.

A MUCH smaller subset actually wanted the old start menu back. I know I don't. There are elements of the old start menu that I liked, but most of it was a bad idea. Start -> All Programs was a complete disaster -- lets put a hierarchy of everything installed on your computer in a small non-resizable popup menu. Sorry that was just awful. For anything you need the start MENU for, the start screen is a LOT better.

Pinned aps on the start menu? Use a toolbar if you want a popup menu for those on the taskbar.

The only real loss is the search box that many power users use as a quick launcher - the start screen works for this, and is better if you are actually doing any sort of real search. But a desktop widget would be more appropriate for the "quick launch task of things we already know about."

But this is a power user function / feature not something "most users" do. Personally I'm looking for good 3rd party options, that just address this small shortcoming, rather than try to recreate the disaster that the old start menu was.

Re:the return of the Start button

[Anonymous Coward]

Too bad it wasn't in Windows 8.0

<pedanticdickweed>

How do you know? Are you from the future?

"Windows 8" is just a marketing name for Windows (NT) 6.2. "Windows 8.1" is a marketing name for "Windows 8" SP1, which is likely to share the 6.2 version number. Since 4.0 came out in 1996, and 6.0 (Vista) came out in 2007, that means it can take 11 years to go two full version releases. A simple extrapolation would estimate Windows 8.0 to be released around 2018. A more thorough analysis would note that the length of time between the releases of 4.0 and 5.0 is less than that between the releases of 6.0 and 6.2, thus it will likely take much longer to reach 8.0.

</pedanticdickweed>

Re:the return of the Start button

[rot26]

This is not the start button you were looking for.

Re:the return of the Start button

[Anonymous Coward]

Personally I have no idea why people would want the old start menu back. On a large monitor it was a pain to use, while the new start screen has all of the same features and then some with a much larger and easier-to-use area for icons. If someone could accurately describe all of the legitimate downsides (not "it looks like a tablet, therefore it sucks"), I would appreciate that a lot because all I hear is "they changed it therefore it sucks"-type whining.

Re:the return of the Start button

[spire3661]

I dont want METRO forced into the system. The way Apple handles their equivalent feature (Launchpad) on OSX is how it should work. Its there is you want it, never if you dont.

Re:the return of the Start button

[Luthair]

Because we don't need an entire screen when searching for one application? I frequently will continue reading/looking at something while using the start menu to open a command prompt or similar.

Re:the return of the Start button

[Anonymous Coward]

Why don't you just install one of the many pieces Start Menu replacements?

If you install all the software that you would have installed on 7 (with a handful of exceptions), Metro / Metro Apps would never start.

(Replacing start menu, MAYBE a media player, and a desktop PDF reader will get you all the efficiency improvements in Win8 without any of the metro.)

Re:the return of the Start button

[Anonymous Coward]

Now we're probably going to have to sit through hundreds of posts for "I've been using windows 8.1 for 10 years and it's just so awesome with the new start button, just what everyone wanted. MS is such a great company that listens to their customers."

The fun part will be cross-referencing those people with the ones who claimed they had been using Windows 8 for 10 years and it's just so awesome that the start button was gone, and that MS will bravely stick to their guns rather than listen to a few disgruntled users.

Re:the return of the Start button

[PopeRatzo]

lets put a hierarchy of everything installed on your computer in a small non-resizable popup menu.

That's funny. I kind of like that Start ->All Programs menu. There are a lot of programs that I don't use every day that I don't need anywhere near a first level.

I want them in that menu.

Re:the return of the Start button

[Vanderhoth]

You shouldn't have posted AC, that's a pretty insightful comment. I think it might actually be kind of fun to use that to hashout shills.

Re:the return of the Start button

[andrewa]

I haven't really used the start menu in Windows 7 in a long time. My typical workflow is to hit the Windows key then type the first few letters of the application I want to start, and then hit enter. As long as Windows 8 allows that easily now with booting to desktop and a start button, then it works for me at least. Admittedly I haven't really played with Windows 8 much.

Re:the return of the Start button

[rahvin112]

I wouldn't mind metro if they'd let me put them in a fucking desktop window, then you could have separate interfaces (as god intended) and STILL leverage metro into phones/tablets.

Re:the return of the Start button

[prelelat]

Why not just give windows 8.1 a try. While it doesn't suppress the metro screen completely I see no reason why you would have to use it now if you didn't want to. You can boot directly to the desktop which is basically windows 7. Plus you get all the new feature that windows 8 offers. Also the new Metro screen looks quite nice actually, though the metro apps don't seem to get any love with this update so blah.

If I were you and still rocking windows 8 I would check out 8.1 it looks pretty nice. I've been using window 8 as well for awhile and I must say outside of the metro stuff it's very nice. But that's personal preference so all the power to you.

Re:the return of the Start button

[WaffleMonster]

That's the phrase everyone has wanted to hear, including myself. Microsoft may have backpedaled, but that was the right thing to do.

This is so disingenuous that it qualifies as an outright lie.

Re:the return of the Start button

[SoCalChris]

A MUCH smaller subset actually wanted the old start menu back. I know I don't. There are elements of the old start menu that I liked, but most of it was a bad idea. Start -> All Programs was a complete disaster -- lets put a hierarchy of everything installed on your computer in a small non-resizable popup menu.

Most users don't use the heirarchal menu very often. They usually either type the first few characters to search, or use one of the recent programs listed. But if you're in one of the instances where you're trying to access a program that you don't use very often, and don't remember the exact name of it, the hierarchical menu is light years beyond the start screen.

For example, take a look at what my Windows 8 start screen looks like. It's an absolute mess, and nearly unusable in my opinion. The Start8 menu that I installed is much easier, quicker, and far more intuitive to use. I suspect that many users feel the same way as I do.

Re:the return of the Start button

[KatchooNJ]

Windows 180 would be a good title... to go along with their XBOX ONE EIGHTY! They spun quick on that DRM crap after the Internet bit their face off.

Re:the return of the Start button

[jones_supa]

I still don't think MSFT gets it. No one wants to see Metro, ever.

Agreed, the interest does not seem too high. I've noticed how on Slashdot a lot of the discussion focuses on the problems surrounding the Start screen, but no one even mentions the Metro apps, which for Microsoft is actual big thing with Windows 8.

Re:the return of the Start button

[Anonymous Coward]

Almost every Customer I have wants the windows 7 start menu. I usually install classic start menu for them. Only 1 out of over 100 customers has preferred the windows 8 tile system.

Re:the return of the Start button

[jones_supa]

Windows 7 allows you to do the same thing.

Re:the return of the Start button

[atlasdropperofworlds]

I'm not a fan of the metro screen, but I don't hate it enough to go back to 7. All I care about is a flat search, which I guess is back in, a less jarring transition from desktop, and booting to desktop. All those issues are addressed. For those with touchscreens, Win8 is far better than 7. I have an HP touchsmart thats a few years old now. It's touchscreen wasn't very usable with 7's interface, it's fine with 8. I do like the concept of a single OS on all devices, and hence you get all the apps and content you buy in all locations automatically. However, MS is still falling short on that vision.

Re:the return of the Start button

[CCarrot]

Start -> All Programs was a complete disaster -- lets put a hierarchy of everything installed on your computer in a small non-resizable popup menu. Sorry that was just awful. For anything you need the start MENU for, the start screen is a LOT better.

Certainly, instead of a tidy, hierarchical, collapsible interface that only takes up (maybe) a third of the screen, let's make it a mandatory full-screen, scrollable (and scrollable and scrollable) interface instead, with gigantic, cryptic, space-wasting, two-tone icons instead! Brilliant!

You're one of those people who prefer to keep all their filing in a nice big pile right on their desktop, aren't you? Sure, you have to reach around the pile every time you want to use the phone, or grab your stapler, but hey, all your papers are 'at your fingertips'! No more need to open those pesky filing cabinets, or flip through individual folders!

What I *especially* love about the start screen is how it pretty much makes my family wallpapers useless. On Windows 7, I put the shortcuts around the edges of the desktop, then I can see the wallpaper subject (and smile) every time I go back to the desktop. With Windows 8...well, I don't have many photos of my family where the important parts (faces) are pressed right against the top, bottom or either edge of the shot. Yes, I could put a photo widget in the start screen...then be constantly annoyed at the need to scroll past it to get to my shortcuts.

No, ClassicStart and Start8 have pretty much saved Microsoft's ass on this release. If I were them, I'd be asking for a reward or something...

Re:the return of the Start button

[CCarrot]

No, ClassicStart and Start8 have pretty much saved Microsoft's ass on this release. If I were them, I'd be asking for a reward or something...

D'oh, ClassicShell , not ClassicStart. My bad.

Re:the return of the Start button

[Anonymous Coward]

Start -> All Programs was a complete disaster -- lets put a hierarchy of everything installed on your computer in a small non-resizable popup menu.

To be fair, though, a LOT of that problem stems from companies making installers that seem to "helpfully" assume that you FIRST want to sort your applications by company name rather than, say, "Games", "Internet", "Graphics", "System", etc, and then the application or a company name under THAT. Did you just install four games, three graphics programs, and two system tools, each by different companies? Guess what? You've now got nine brand new top-level folders, each containing one program icon, one to three readmes, and maybe an uninstaller! Because that makes sense, right? Now keep going until you've got sixty or seventy top-level programs.

It wasn't so much that All Programs was a disaster, it was companies using it as secondary advertising space on your desktop.

Re:the return of the Start button

[Anonymous Coward]

Because all they did is add a button?

It is fundamentally the same broken OS; but now instead of a magical hotspot (that the guy had already figured out) it now has a button that leads to his useless home screen.

Seriously; the fullscreen interface is shit; and it isn't the fact it is fullscreen (though that doesn't help) its the fact that the entire interface is shit. The search bar is shit. The lack of hint that you can just type is shit. The way it filters everything is shit. I have on many occasions half-typed a phrase, and gotten a single result (the wrong one) completed the phrase and gotten the proper result.
Why wasn't my actual target of my search in the first (half completed) result list?

The search is fucking useless. I can't easily get to my downloads folder on the desktop without pinning shit everywhere and having a forest of icons on my desktop. I guess I could have a button on the horrible new interface (that scrolls sideways - because that's ergonomic for my scroll wheel mouse - which way does a down-scroll swipe? - Does it change for people that read LTR?)

Searching within an app? Windows key F? nope. Windows key Q *ofcourse!*.

Metro is faulty. Bring back the start menu and we can start talking. (and I've tried classic shell and fucking hate it - it is the worst attempt at copying the start menu I have ever seen).

Re:the return of the Start button

[vux984]

There are a lot of programs that I don't use every day that I don't need anywhere near a first level.

Gotcha. So your horrendously offended by the start screen as way to access applications that you use infrequently? That seems like much ado about nothing.

What if its been long enough that you can't quite remember what the application or program group is called? Does a scrollable hierarchical popup window really sound like the best way of finding it?

Re:the return of the Start button

[roman_mir]

Trust me on this: I don't want to see Windows 7 or Vista either, in fact for a number of years now I am happy enough with GNU/Linux based desktop (even though some think it's not ready or whatever).

Re:the return of the Start button

[lgw]

I just love this from TFA:

The tile-based Start screen (which is actually where that new Start button leads to), has gotten more flexible, with new smaller and larger tile options. And more than two modern apps can now share the new interface's screen. No longer are you restricted to a large window and one slender side panel, but two apps can each take of half the screen, or, depending on what the app's developer has allowed, any portion you choose

Exciting times we live in, when I can have 2 apps running at the same time, side by side on my desktop, and even resize them! C'mon, this is ground-breaking. Though I guess it's not entirely novel, since I could do this with EMACS (and presumably VI), but it's pretty cool to see in a GUI.

Re:the return of the Start button

[Aaden42]

Plus you get all the new feature that windows 8 offers.

Those being?... Serious question.

Other than Metro, what does Win8 offer that Win7+updates doesn't, assuming you're not a movie company that wants even moar DRM locked into the operating system?

Re:the return of the Start button

[rock_climbing_guy]

^----------

100 times this.

There is obviously some reason that they don't do it. The question is, "What is it?"

Re:the return of the Start button

[andrewa]

@jones_supa: That's what I'm saying. I do this on Windows 7 rather than navigating the menu that pops up from hitting the start button. It works for anything that's in the start menu hierarchy. I always found winding my way through the start menu frustrating.

Re:the return of the Start button

[X.25]

Personally I have no idea why people would want the old start menu back. On a large monitor it was a pain to use, while the new start screen has all of the same features and then some with a much larger and easier-to-use area for icons. If someone could accurately describe all of the legitimate downsides (not "it looks like a tablet, therefore it sucks"), I would appreciate that a lot because all I hear is "they changed it therefore it sucks"-type whining.

Oh dear, just look at all those anonymous cowards who don't see any anyone would want Start menu back.

Re:the return of the Start button

[interkin3tic]

Microsoft may have backpedaled, but that was the right thing to do.

As a consumer, why would you care if it's backpedaling? No one in the world suffers under the illusion that MS' word is infallible.

Re:the return of the Start button

[cyber-vandal]

still rocking windows 8

What does that mean? Using?

Re:the return of the Start button

[140Mandak262Jamuna]

That is a good start. Now learn to type it from a shell window, and memorize some more obscure strings of letters and discover the amazing things they do. Like ls grep awk diff less more cut join find etc. Then learn about even more obscure symbols like ! & > >> | Then someday you will understand why the unix hacks are so happy and are not so easily impressed by some of the bells and whistles and eye candy of the GUI.

Re:the return of the Start button

[Maxx169]

Exciting times we live in, when I can have 2 apps running at the same time, side by side on my desktop, and even resize them! C'mon, this is ground-breaking. Though I guess it's not entirely novel, since I could do this with EMACS (and presumably VI), but it's pretty cool to see in a GUI.

True, that said - EMACS is still pretty much the most advanced OS on the planet.

Re:the return of the Start button

[andrewa]

Umm.... actually, the O/S I work 90% of my time on is CentOS, and typically the minimal install (what is this shell "window" of which you speak???), so I'm fairly familiar with these mystical and obscure symbols that you mention.... lol... I use Windows 7 in a VM for pretty much my work Exchange account, Office, and Visio. Not quite sure why you are jumping to these conclusions merely because I actually use Windows.

Re:the return of the Start button

[andrewa]

Actually, talking about obscure symbols, why don't you go ahead and type my sig into your favourite shell window....?

Re:the return of the Start button

[vux984]

You're one of those people who prefer to keep all their filing in a nice big pile right on their desktop, aren't you? Sure, you have to reach around the pile every time you want to use the phone, or grab your stapler, but hey, all your papers are 'at your fingertips'! No more need to open those pesky filing cabinets, or flip through individual folders!

Except they aren't on my desktop. That person would be someone who has a desktop full of icons. The start screen comes and goes away as needed.

But still its a good metaphor, and I'll extend it. The existing start menu is like taking all your papers, documents, and everything you own and stuffing them into that little pencil drawer on your desk. Everything is just crammed into it and its really much too small and awkward for the task of being a filing system for everything you have.

What I *especially* love about the start screen is how it pretty much makes my family wallpapers useless.

On Windows 7, I put the shortcuts around the edges of the desktop, then I can see the wallpaper subject (and smile) every time I go back to the desktop.

a) You do realize you can do that with windows 8 too. This has nothing to do with the start menu vs start screen at all.

b) Oh... so you ARE one of those peoples who has shortcuts all over their desktop.

No, ClassicStart and Start8 have pretty much saved Microsoft's ass on this release. If I were them, I'd be asking for a reward or something...

Agreed. There's no question MS really botched the desktop on Win 8. I'm not saying otherwise; the start screen is FAR from perfect, but the start menu is a disaster too; everything and the kitchen sink in a non-resizable popup? That NEEDED to be fixed.

Re:the return of the Start button

[CohibaVancouver]

No one wants to see Metro, ever.

I sure as heck want to see it on my Samsung x86 tablet. If I just want to check my email, open CNN headlines, play a game or watch a video Modern UI (formerly Metro) is perfect.

The desktop is perfect when I dock it and use a keyboard and mouse.

Re:the return of the Start button

[Hal_Porter]

He's jiggling it back and forth, muttering 'work you fucking stupid bastard' under his breath.

Re:the return of the Start button

[jxander]

A MUCH smaller subset actually wanted the old start menu back. I know I don't. There are elements of the old start menu that I liked, but most of it was a bad idea. Start -> All Programs was a complete disaster -- lets put a hierarchy of everything installed on your computer in a small non-resizable popup menu. Sorry that was just awful. For anything you need the start MENU for, the start screen is a LOT better.

Maybe I'm in that smaller subset, but the small hierarchical popup menu in alphabetical order was the perfect place for the majority of rarely-used programs, or groups of several versions of the same program, perhaps with slightly different switches. I suppose being able to resize them would have been a nice touch, but they were a pretty good size by default. Turning each of those options into a 2x4 block on the desktop is ungainly at best.

The fact that I have to download some 3rd party app just to make those grid squares is fundamentally broken. If the tiles were just shortcuts, and you could easily "Right-click > New Tile" and point to whatever, that would upgrade it back to just ungainly. But last I checked (admittedly, it's been 6 months since I banged my head against that particular wall), there was no easy path to create your own custom tiles.

Re:the return of the Start button

[MTEK]

Now we're probably going to have to sit through hundreds of posts for "I've been using windows 8.1 for 10 years and it's just so awesome with the new start button, just what everyone wanted. MS is such a great company that listens to their customers."

You know that spam where some idiot says his friend's mom makes $$$$ every month working from home? It's probably true. Judging from the comment sections under most Windows 8 articles, it seems Microsoft (or some social media ad agency) is paying stay at home moms to promote the product and counter any criticism.

Re:the return of the Start button

[Hal_Porter]

Here's a novel idea. How about have tablets default to Start Screen and Metro mode and desktops and notebooks defaulting to looking just like Windows 7 - i.e. Start Menu and desktop mode? And having a user option to override that default.

Then the 0.001% of users who exclusively use Metro apps on their tablet would be happy and the rest of us could just ignore it completely. The only reason they're pushing Metro down everyone's throat is so that people write and use Metro apps and the Microsoft store has something to do.

As it is they've got the boat anchor that is Metro dragging down Windows 8 because people who like Windows 7 hate it. It's dragging down Windows RT too because no compelling Metro apps means that Windows RT is screwed. It's dragging down the Windows Store because no one actually wants Metro.

They've got one very unpopular product - Metro and a number of very popular ones - most notably Windows itself. They've tried to force the people that like and use Windows to use Metro. And probably the reason for that is because if Metro apps take off then so will Windows Phone. Which right now is tanking too.

However instead of this strategy making Metro and Windows Phone more popular they've actually managed to make desktop Windows less popular. PC sales are down and they've made Windows run much less well on non touchscreen machines but the tablets people are buying instead are running Android and iOS, not Windows.

Re:the return of the Start button

[CronoCloud]

and now for the Obligatory:

"All Emacs needs now is a good text editor."

Re:the return of the Start button

[PopeRatzo]

Gotcha. So your horrendously offended by the start screen as way to access applications that you use infrequently?

"Offended?" I just said I liked the Start menu.

What if its been long enough that you can't quite remember what the application or program group is called? Does a scrollable hierarchical popup window really sound like the best way of finding it?

Thanks to the little box at the bottom that says, "Search programs and files", yes.

Re:the return of the Start button

[EvanED]

But if you're in one of the instances where you're trying to access a program that you don't use very often, and don't remember the exact name of it, the hierarchical menu is light years beyond the start screen.

The Win8 start screen -- IMO that's essentially unusable. (You could make it usable if you put in a bunch of effort to arrange tiles the way you want, but it'd take a while.)

But: there's an "all apps" view or something in Windows 8 that basically gives you a flat presentation of the start menu, including grouping icons by what folder they're in (in the start menu) and showing the name of that folder.

I don't know which is better -- start menu or all apps -- as I basically never use either. In fact, I forget how to open the all apps screen. But I suspect that about the worst you could say about Win8 is that it's reasonably competitive there. I'm with vux984: the Windows Vista/7 start menu is really bad at just navigating through. It's too short, it's too narrow, if you open the wrong folder you have to click it again to re-collapse it, etc.

Re:the return of the Start button

[Zaelath]

Task Manager is greatly improved, imo.

But yeah, it's not worth the frustration of clicking on a photo and having a full screen metro application grind away for ages to open it while it faffs about doing something "in the cloud" that you didn't want.

Still passing.

Re:the return of the Start button

[garyoa1]

What am I missing here? Always could have multiple apps since at least win2k. I usually have 3 or 4 at least.

As far as the start button... not really. Just a button that says start. Doesn't do anything the old start button did. But the free add-ons you can D/L do a decent job.

Re:the return of the Start button

[oji-sama]

I bought ModernMix from Stardock that allows this. This is the approach they should have gone with (on desktop). I guess this wouldn't be very usable with touch only, but an option for desktop would have been nice. I still don't really use anything else than Netflix as a metro-app, but I'm pretty happy about having it in its own window outside the browser.

Re:the return of the Start button

[Missing.Matter]

Windows 8.1 has an "All Apps" menu which is sortable by most used, date installed, name, or category. Much more versatile than the start menu imo.

Re:the return of the Start button

[Anonymous Coward]

The file copying is much better now

I'm intrigued - how can anyone screw up something as fundamental as copying a file so badly that some 28 years later it can still be made "much better?"

Re:the return of the Start button

[Missing.Matter]

You don't need to open the start screen to search for an application. http://i.imgur.com/04NB7Nh.jpg

Re:the return of the Start button

[Missing.Matter]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Features_new_to_Windows_8

The entirety of metro is just one item in that list. The rest is for everyone.

Re:the return of the Start button

[Missing.Matter]

The very first time you open a photo in windows 8 it asks you if you want to open it in the desktop photo viewer or the metro one.

Re:the return of the Start button

[Darinbob]

But they did not actually return the start button, though it does pop up something that looks like one if your mouse is in the right place. They absolutely do not return the start menu, which was what customers were really asking for.

This is essentially an insult in many ways. They're saying "we heard loud and clear that you wanted a .1 added to the product version, so here you go".

Re:the return of the Start button

[Darinbob]

Either that or he's had one too many user experiences.

Re:the return of the Start button

[Darinbob]

What is wrong with you people? Microsoft has said that Metro is great, so you're being treasonous to suggest otherwise. Please report for reeducation and recertification.

Re:the return of the Start button

[Darinbob]

"For those with touchscreens", which I suspect is the smallest fraction of their customer base.

Re:the return of the Start button

[Darinbob]

Wait. You mean on the same monitor? Woooaah...

Re:the return of the Start button

[Darinbob]

I like the start menu. It is not clumsy, it comes up collapsed and small by default, and I can scroll through "all programs" it much more quickly and intuitively than the side scrolling "all apps".

Re:the return of the Start button

[readingaccount]

Am I the only one on the planet who uses the "Recent Items" bit of the Start menu? It's great for loading files you've used recently, such documents or videos you've half-watched. That feature is gone completely in the Start Screen in Windows 8. There's a hack that allows you to create a shortcut to the folder which contains all the recent items, but it's not as simple and easy as one that expands from the Windows 7 Start menu.

There are many, many uses for the existing (mature) Start menu which don't map well to the Start screen. I suppose I could just install a third-party tool, but it seems easier (and cheaper) just to keep using Windows 7 until I've completed my transition to Linux.

Re:the return of the Start button

[Darinbob]

Yes, but with Metro it's even worse. Now you've got to use "all apps" to see everything (extra mouse movement and clicks already), and everything is expanded by default so you have to scroll through it all. With start menu it is not expanded by default, you just see each top level directory and then can click on one to see what's inside.

Re:the return of the Start button

[PopeRatzo]

Ah, well, if your not offended by it, why make a fuss about the start screen then?

I didn't say anything about the Start screen. No fuss, no nothing. I haven't anything against the Start screen.

I just like the box that pops up when I click the Windows 7 Start button, whether the Start menu, which I find useful, or the search widget, which I didn't know until right now was called a "search widget".

I'm not complaining about any new functionality that Microsoft has added to Windows 8, as long as I can pick the parts I like and turn off the parts I don't.

I do not like being told how to work. I have never found evidence that the GUI designers at Microsoft, or Apple for that matter, are so smart about these things that I should just accept what they care to give.

And what do you have against kitchen sinks? I do tons of stuff in my kitchen sink, from chopping vegetables to grinding coffee to washing dishes and handwashing my delicates. Your suggestion that the Smart menu kitchen sink is "obsolete" tells me that you are assuming what is best for me. Thanks for your concern, but no.

Re:the return of the Start button

[Darinbob]

Personally, I have no idea why someone would want to remove it even if they don't use it. Do they hate all the users who want it, are they misanthropes, have they drunk the MS koolaid?

This is not whining due to change. These are valid complaints about unnecessary change that is impacting people. Sure you personally may know all the shortcuts about how to do things differently, but the majority of Windows users are getting confused about it, they don't know keyboard shortcuts, and they're wasting time relearning how to use their OS.

If Microsoft honestly thinks Metro is a better way to go then they could have provide that as an option. There was no need to actively disable the start menu, there was no need to forcibly make sure people boot to desktop (and take the extra step of removing the registry entry for it once preview users discovered it), and there was no need to tie default applications of icons used on the desktop to go to metro apps. This was a concerted effort by Microsoft to deprecate the desktop.

Re:the return of the Start button

[terrab0t]

Done. Emacs is now supreme.

Re:the return of the Start button

[Darinbob]

Never see the launch pad unless I activate it. Never. I really don't see many differences at all between OS X Lion and OS X Leopard because the new features aren't being shoved in my face.

I don't use the store though, and until I read your post I thought no one actually used it. Just like the Microsoft store, I refuse to create an alternate ID to log in to a store so that I can be tracked.

Re:the return of the Start button

[soundguy]

How the fuck is it "much better"? Try copying 100,000 files over a LAN from an XP box to a Win8 drive. The OS will shit itself and lock up entirely. Not even a blue screen, completely unresponsive DOA requiring pulling the plug. How about the "full line select" bullshit in file manager windows that makes it a huge pain in the ass to select files with a mouse?

All the review talks about is a bunch of stupid top-layer eye-candy bullshit that NO ONE CARES ABOUT. The goddamned OS should not be an "experience". That's what programs are for. The OS should shut the fuck up, do exactly what I tell it to do WHEN I tell it to do it, and generally stay the hell out of my way and out of my sight. Vista, 7, and 8 are abject failures that can't even correctly perform the minimal basic I/O tasks that are the exact reason we even HAVE operating systems rather than writing directly to the hardware.

Microsoft, you absolutely DON'T GET IT! You keep trying to pander to the idiot teenager mobile device crowd and people too stupid to even OWN a powerful computing device and you are pissing in the faces of everyone who actually uses your shitty OS to do REAL WORK and put food on their tables (mainly because the applications they use won't run on a REAL OS). Quit fucking around and DO YOUR GODDAMN JOBS OVER THERE. Fire the stupid assholes responsible for the abomination that is Win8 and put out an OS that at least does the bare minimum. Window dressing and eye candy is for children. Try aiming at the grownup market for a change!

Re:the return of the Start button

[symbolset]

So you didn't try Vista?

Re:the return of the Start button

[armanox]

Fine by me. Oh wait, my system is hardened against that as a normal user....

Re:the return of the Start button

[gman003]

That's not how car analogies work, and you know it.

Re:the return of the Start button

[Billly Gates]

METRO (for me as opinions are subjective) issues are because you can't use the Windows 7 style features of managing more than one file and app multitasking together are due to the fact you can't have:
1. More than one applet on the screen
2. No taskbar for multiple apps
3. a Cell phone UI and desktop trying to co-exist
4. inferior instant search. Windows 8 apologist laugh at Windows 7 users saying they can now search for files by hitting the Windows Key!! Well duh. I have been doing that since Windows Vista folks. Trust me you used 7 like XP beforehand is the problem :-)
5. Crappy browser.

Windows 8.1 addresses more than one Window open Yeah
Windows 8.1 addresses the crappy browser issue. IE 11 tells Apache to send Firefox (gecko) versions of docs as webmasters who hate IE assume everyone must use IE 6 still! So they feed broken HTML to modern versions of IE UGH. Idiots some of us are at work and do not have a choice, yet have left IE 6 in 2011. Even IE 8 is old now.

Windows 8.1 tries to bridge the gap between desktop and metro furhter. -EG. When you click the start button the same background pops up.

So, Windows 8.1 is an improvement.

My take is for me to leave WIndows 7 I must have better instant search and have the task bar and AERO enabled for me to stack apps. Yes, I will upgrade afterwards if this is met. I know cutting edge 32-bit graphics are out of style according to the fanbois at www.neowin.net and how EGA 4 color is the new in that is modern now, but if Windows 9 fixes this I will switch.

Folks Windows Mobile wont take over at 4% marketshare. We need a non webit browser for the phone and is worth the switch to me. I will not stikc with old because I hate change, rather the old is mature and works compared to the new.

Metro can work if more apps worked and if we had a gui with a taskbar for Mobile apps with Aero (yes good graphics are not obsolete while EGA 1989 graphics are in) it can be used with desktop and a mouse.

Re:the return of the Start button

[real-modo]

1) Now try typing a few letters of what you are searching for. Much better.

Hmmm...lessee. I want to reduce the size of this here video, to play it on my phone. What the heck was that app called, again? Maybe something like "transcoder"? (types) ... Hmmm..... Nope. Doesn't look right.

Types: <backspace><backspace> (&c) .... Ok, how about "video"? (types) ... Hmmm, nope, that's not it. I don't think so, anyway.

(Types: <backspace><backspace>...<backspace>) Okay, um, "resize"? (types) ...nope.

*clicks around in menu* .... Oh, yeah. Handbrake. Typing transcode did work, but I couldn't tell.

The search interface works really well.

Re:the return of the Start button

[gman003]

A MUCH smaller subset actually wanted the old start menu back. I know I don't. There are elements of the old start menu that I liked, but most of it was a bad idea. Start -> All Programs was a complete disaster -- lets put a hierarchy of everything installed on your computer in a small non-resizable popup menu. Sorry that was just awful. For anything you need the start MENU for, the start screen is a LOT better.

Pinned aps on the start menu? Use a toolbar if you want a popup menu for those on the taskbar.

The only real loss is the search box that many power users use as a quick launcher - the start screen works for this, and is better if you are actually doing any sort of real search. But a desktop widget would be more appropriate for the "quick launch task of things we already know about."

But this is a power user function / feature not something "most users" do. Personally I'm looking for good 3rd party options, that just address this small shortcoming, rather than try to recreate the disaster that the old start menu was.

I have Windows 8 on my desktop. I tried using the Start Screen. I gave it a chance. I hated it. So I installed Classic Start Menu, and basically configured it exactly like I configured Windows 7, but with a few small tweaks.

I never use the "All Programs" menu. That *is* clunky. But I frequently use the Search box, which I have configured to search only programs and control menu items, not documents. It's basically a Run dialog that uses program names instead of executable filenames.

I also pin programs to the start menu, *distinctly* from pinning to the taskbar. I have numerous programs pinned to the start menu which I do not need particularly often, but I want to take advantage of the "frequently opened items" feature (so I can immediately open things with the program - a lifesaver with PuTTY, where I have a dozen connections I commonly use). Stuff on the taskbar is stuff that I have open 99% of the time anyways, and stuff that I can treat as "there" even if it's not running (like WMP).

The reason I don't like the start screen is that it's inefficient. It takes up the whole screen, but provides relatively little functionality over a start menu that takes up 5% of the screen. The icons are massive - my 1440p screen still holds only 72 icons, which makes me suspect they do no scaling between screen sizes. Since there is not a *single* Metro app I use, every "pane" is just a grey square holding an icon that is far too small for it, making it ugly. And it doesn't seem to play well with multiple monitors.

The start screen is a specific instance of a general problem with Windows 8 - every "Metro" program has a "classic" program that works better . The start menu works better than the start screen. Alt+Tab/Win+Tab/the taskbar works better than whatever they call that left-side "swipe" menu. Windows Media Player works better than the Music or Video apps. Preview works better than the Photos app. Internet fucking Explorer works better than most of the Apps that just access specific web data. I think the only thing that actually was an improvement is the Reader app, and that's because they didn't have *any* PDF viewer before.

Re:the return of the Start button

[real-modo]

And when XP arrived almost every customer I had wanted the "Classic Start Menu" from windows 2000. People don't like to learn new things regardless of whether they are better or worse than what they had before.

This is broken on at least two levels.

I was there, and I don't recall any such push-back against the XP menu. There were a few comments about it looking a bit colorful, and feeling slower, but nothing like the reaction to 8's UI. (Of course compared to 98SE or ME, XP was like dawn after a dark night in terms of stability. People loved that.)

Secondly, and more importantly, the first rule of UIs is: don't change it unless it's badly broken.

It's true that most people don't like to learn new things, especially to do with computers. Guess what? Your stupid computer program isn't the most important thing in their lives—or even the fiftieth most important thing. They're not waiting with bated breath for the next "wonderful surprise" you're about to inflict on them. And: you can't change anyone besides yourself. People won't like change, no matter how hard you try to "fix" them. If you want to change the UI, you'd better provide strong, compelling, immediate reasons for that.

There's no evidence that (for anyone outside the executive suites in Microsoft Towers) Windows 8's way of locating and starting applications led to greater productivity and/or better employee morale. There's considerable evidence that the change has caused exactly the opposite.

(The UI mess is sad. Under the covers, 8 is a great improvement over 7. A tight OS.)

Re:the return of the Start button

[hammyhew]

The XP start menu is fucking garbage, just like the welcome screen. The only reason I use XP instead of 2000 is compatibility with newer software.

Re:the return of the Start button

[smash]

it's the start SCREEN that pisses me off, not the lack of a button.

Re:the return of the Start button

[smash]

That. I'm going to be forced into 8.1 to support Windows server stuff eventually, but I'm not going to like it.

Re:the return of the Start button

[TheLink]

Yeah, what would be nice is if Microsoft allowed us to easily open/reopen a file we are/was working with in a different application. Why should we need to find it again with a file browser? The GUI/OS should know where it is so that we can open/reopen it with another app.

The Recent Items thing could work for that but you still have to right click while holding down shift and copy as path if you want to open it with a different app (unless you already have the app in your "sendto" - which was a great UI feature by the true geniuses who made Windows 9x ).

In the old days augmenting humans was a higher priority than today. Nowadays dumbing things down appears to be a high priority.

Re:the return of the Start button

[djdanlib]

You know... you actually have a point, now that I think about it that way... But it's always been like that.

Back in Win 3 Program Manager days, I'd make groups for each type of application, and move the icons appropriately. Sometimes I'd do folders on the desktop in Win95, but I gave up on that entirely in Win98 days and you're totally right - it got crapped up really bad by WinXP days. Then they ruined All Programs even more in Vista onwards by fixing the size and not letting it breathe horizontally at all, so the exercise of finding a program was even more painful. You might have several products by Super Longname Company Software Products, and you'd never know which one was Foobar 1.2 without hunting through all of them...

It's interesting that what's old is sorta new again. Remember, Program Manager was based on providing a tiled grid of icons with one level of folders. Android and iOS are doing EXACTLY THAT, and it's only a matter of time in my opinion before the Start Screen lets you do folders.

Re:the return of the Start button

[smash]

Well said. However Windows 8 isn't about giving us what we want. It's about making Windows on mobile devices relevant. The mobile market is the big one moving forward and microsoft was doing whatever they can to get a foot in the door. If that means pissing off their desktop users, then so be it. It's a joke.

Re:the return of the Start button

[smash]

The touch interface isn't usable in 8 either, unless all you do with your computer is play with the metro applets. For doing real work with real programs (which are all NOT metro) you're fucked as the widgets are too small, and you CAN'T ZOOM.

Re:the return of the Start button

[smash]

The Linux desktop is good enoguh. The lack of MS office is the problem. And don't make me laugh by suggesting OpenOffice or LibreOffice, because although they're reasonable in their own right, they don't work 100% with everybody's existing document library.

Re:the return of the Start button

[smash]

Because then Windows developers will just target desktop mode and Metro will remain irrelevant - killing Microsoft's mobile aspirations.

Re:the return of the Start button

[TheLink]

And for the "All Apps" menu do you still need to tell users that they should go to the start screen then right click to get the All Apps menu? How were "normal users" supposed to figure that one out? And how do you logout now?

Discoverability in Windows 8 is way lower than older versions of Windows.

Re:the return of the Start button

[smash]

Are they paying you to be a case study/whitepaper?

Re:the return of the Start button

[smash]

Microsoft's "argument has been defeated" by the defeaning lack of demand for Windows 8. The fact that for example, HP advertise Windows 7 as a feature on current systems should be the writing on the wall.

Re:the return of the Start button

[smash]

Windows 7 allows you to do the same thing WHILE HAVING SOMETHING ELSE ON SCREEN (like for example, maybe the documentation you are reading from or whatever).

Re:the return of the Start button

[smash]

No hierachy.

Re:the return of the Start button

[smash]

Whilst i was a hater initially, it is sometimes useful if you are using a trackpad from full-screen and can't be bothered hitting spotlight and typing.

Re:the return of the Start button

[Hadlock]

The Win8 start screen is a tectonic shift, it's not even a menu, it's dual booting in to Windows RT world. People doing real work don't want their workflow interrupted by going to another screen just to open a new instance of notepad or the command line, they want a menu they can access, preferably without looking at.
 
The difference between the w2k and xp start menu is minimal in comparison.

Re:the return of the Start button

[batkiwi]

Things that have improved:
-the dialog has an expanded mode which shows a real time copy speed graph
-the time estimates are based on total transfer history as opposed to instantanious speed
-conflicts have more/better/safer options (replace all, replace if newer, etc)
-copies to the same destination are grouped together even if you drag and drop a few different times

That's all from the top of my head.

Re:the return of the Start button

[ibluescreen]

Somehow your statement doesn't seem logical. How does pissing off the desktop users encourage them to want to buy windows mobile devices? I'm with soundguy, some heads should roll.

Re:the return of the Start button

[andrewa]

Good for you! 140Mandak262Jamuna might want to watch out though, as he's clearly a power user with his wizardish use of those powerful !&>|>> symbols....

Re:the return of the Start button

[ibluescreen]

From what I understand windows store apps run on desktop and tablets. Windows phone has it's own app store. Developers have to write apps differently for the two platforms. Which means you may not be able to find your favorite tablet app for your phone or vice versa. It will depend on how many hoops the developer is willing to jump thru.

Re:the return of the Start button

[davester666]

Obviously, this is a feature to enable Windows 8 to have a competitive advantage over iOS. Because Microsoft can see the headlights in the rear view mirror.

Re:the return of the Start button

[teh dave]

No, it hasn't. Well, in the economic sense it might turn out that way, but not in the philosophical. The fact that the majority of users are avoiding Windows 8 doesn't disprove anything I have said, nor any of the results of Microsoft's usability and productivity studies, because the current avoidance of Windows 8 might be caused by something that isn't the fault of (caused directly by) the changes themselves. Such as resistance to change, as I already mentioned.

Yes, I am insinuating that at the very least, some of the resistance to Windows 8 is purely because people don't like change, even when it's for the better. A range of cognitive biases cause us to indiscriminately resist change, though sometimes that is a good thing (such as in the case of change purely for the sake of change itself). They want to continue with the Old Way (and I'll admit that I was at first against Windows 8). In this case however, the article I linked you to shows that the new way is the better one, and highlighting the fact that both opinion and sales of Win8 are low doesn't do anything to disprove it unless the only thing that counts is Microsoft's bank account.

All that aside, Microsoft should have done a much better job at managing this release and the changes it brought. This could have been marketing it better, educating users on how to use it better, toning down the changes, providing an option to switch back to the old interface or any combination of the above, but even though I like the change I agree that Microsoft did a less than stellar job with them.

Re:the return of the Start button

[dchinu]

you are fucking naive to believe that "Microsoft brought Metro to add functionalities to desktop"

Re:the return of the Start button

[Omestes]

That's the phrase everyone has wanted to hear, including myself. Microsoft may have backpedaled, but that was the right thing to do.

Can I turn it off? I haven't missed it, past the first couple of hours running Win8. I barely used it since XP, since the Windows key is easier to hit than having to mouse around, and I generally access most programs by using the Win key and typing the first few letters of the program.

The only thing I'm excited about is smaller metro icons. If there was news about making the general features more coherent (and killing the damn "charms bar" idea, I'd be happy. I'd also be happy if I could run the very few metro apps I have in desktop mode, or at least let me dock them to the desktop in a smaller slice. Consolidating alt-tab, and the mostly annoying right top hot corner would be nice, as well. The "change PC settings" crap, has to die as well. And let me sleep with two mouse clicks again, please.

I don't care about the "start button", or classic menus I'm one of the few people who like Metro. I just wish that Win 8 didn't feel so tacked together and kludgy.

Re:the return of the Start button

[Omestes]

Or use Picasa, and its preview app instead?

Taskman is nice, as is the fact that it mostly behaves with network and SD card transfers now, which 7 sometimes completely choked on. These issues was my main reason for switching from 7, to be honest. Transferring 5gb from my high speed SD 16gb SD card could sometimes take close to an hour on Win 7. And sometimes my networks, didn't. No permissions, bad user names, and when it worked, I'd be transferring data at dial-up speeds, unless I accessed my Win7 PC from my Linux/OS X/or old Vista Box, in which case it worked fine.

Re:the return of the Start button

[Luckyo]

But they want a slice of the "idiot teenage mobile device crowd" market, and the only way to get it is to leverage their desktop monopoly.

So desktop needs to start looking similar enough to mobile.

Essentially, it's likely that the only way for MS to drop metro from desktop is to drop windows phone entirely in its current form.

Re:the return of the Start button

[DrXym]

I think it's more complex than that. Windows 7 is actually a very good desktop OS and most enterprises are happy to stick with it. So they used Windows 8 a bit like they did Vista, to introduce radical changes knowing they'd enjoy another OS revision to lock it down into an enterprise friendly condition.

So Microsoft used Windows 8 to make a beeline for tablet land. Can't blame them for that. What I can blame them for is that even for desktop users, i.e. those who don't need enterprise solutions for backup/patching/admin have suffered an inferior desktop experience which could have been better than what was delivered. Metro has lots of stupid usability problems with a keyboard / mouse which have easy remedies and Windows 8 shouldn't have shipped without fixing them.

What I've read of 8.1 suggests it's little more than a band aid. Stuff like 1/2 size tiles is useful for cutting metro bloat, but why aren't there expanding folders? Why can't I ctrl+wheel to zoom in and out to show more stuff? Why isn't there a mini-metro attached to the start button? And so on.

All that said, most of the problems in Windows 8 are cosmetic and centred around franken-metro-desktop. In use the OS is extremely responsive and stable. It's just the front end which is the problem.

Re:the return of the Start button

[Luckyo]

Any attempt to "bridge the gap between metro and desktop" on desktop mean downgrading desktop environment towards shitty tablet environment.

So yeah, it's an upgrade from win8, in the same sense that working cleaning the toilets in a nightclub with your tungue is an upgrade from cleaning the sewers with your tongue. Of course, windows 7 in that analogy is a nice clean office job.

Re:the return of the Start button

[DrXym]

That surprised me too. Metro apps are really slow to fire up and so gimped in terms of functionality that unless I was walking around in tablet mode I wouldn't see any point in most of them at all. The most frustrating thing is that if you flip away from an app then more often than not it doesn't restore to the state where it was left. I might understand this behaviour in a 512MB RAM phone, but not in an 4GB+swap laptop. It's stupid behaviour.

Also, the left edge of the screen only shows running apps+desktop, not programs running on the desktop. So I can quickly switch to some retarded metro weather app but Microsoft in their infinite wisdom won't let me switch to Firefox or Eclipse running on the desktop. I must switch to the desktop and activate the app. It's just bad design.

About the only metro app I like is the Netflix app whose simplicity suits the service and which is vastly more attractive that the Android client. Most of the other apps are barely worth the time of day.

Re:the return of the Start button

[roman_mir]

Well, I moved a medium sized retailer (13 stores) to a Linux based solution as well, including the move to LibreOffice in the last 3 years, so it's not just the desktop that I consider to be ready.

Re:the return of the Start button

[Inda]

"Text on the title bar of every window and dialog box is centered, just like in Windows 3.11, Windows NT 3.51, and earlier editions."

I'm sold. Sod it, sell me ten copies. I really, really need this feature back. Oh how I've missed 3.11.

Re:the return of the Start button

[Waccoon]

Just a note: when people say "workflow", they aren't necessarily programmers, developers, or even office drones. Some of us are visual artists, musicians, gamers, home theater enthusiasts, etc.

Yes, knowing shell commands can help you make quick work of dull tasks, like mass renaming of files, but I find it pretty awkward to use things like grep, especially since there's no preview or undo. Personally, I wish UNIX hacks would work on some better GUI management tools rather than constantly celebrate the use of a rather dangerous shell prompt. GUIs are not evil if they are done well.

I cut my teeth on the Amiga, so I'm comfortable switching between the shell and the GUI seamlessly. It's a shame Windows and UNIX people still seem to want to choose only one side.

Re:the return of the Start button

[citizenr]

Do you realize clicking that "Start button" does SAME THING as clicking Win key on your keyboard? Its just cosmetics. Its them saying FUCK YOU to the users.
Its not Start menu, its Metro menu.

Re:the return of the Start button

[XcepticZP]

If you don't know what app/application you want to open, then you have no business opening the start_menu/metro_interface. Finish your work, decide what you need to open, and then proceed. Unless you're one of those people that uses the start_menu/metro_interface to search through your documents AND you are still deciding what document you want to open while you search. Seriously, this is such a contrived and odd scenario. Honestly, it sounds pretty darn desperate Anti-MS criticism. Perhaps you should instead stick to the low hanging fruit like the rest of the anti-MS people on this thread are doing. Good day.

Re:the return of the Start button

[MouseAT]

No, the Start Screen is not more efficient in all cases. Especially for me. I've been actively trying to use it for a week or so, and it's just not up to scratch. It removes functionality that was previously front and centre. It hides functionality. It includes loads of junk by default. It's difficult to arrange things logically. It's difficult to scan effectively as the applications list is essentially two dimensional, rather than a simple list. You can make it usable, but it requires a lot of work to do so. Even then, it involves bigger mouse movements and a context switch every time you open it. It's almost like Microsoft looked at OS X, realized "hey we have a dock, Apple seem to be doing OK with their launchpad thing, let's copy that". What they missed is that Mac users also have a lot of quick access to stuff like System Preferences or Shut Down via. the Apple menu at the top of the screen, and Microsoft haven't replicated that functionality in a way that's easily accessible on a desktop.

Re:the return of the Start button

[L4t3r4lu5]

That's a problem with the application name, not with search. How about Firefox? Do you type "Internet" or "Google"?

Purposely facetious.

Re:the return of the Start button

[jones_supa]

The file copying is much better now, and boot times seem better. That's mainly it though.

Both of those are just fine in Windows 7 too.

Re:the return of the Start button

[dinfinity]

Try copying 100,000 files over a LAN from an XP box to a Win8 drive

I wouldn't even consider using explorer.exe for that. For anything even remotely more complex than a simple move or copy of one file I immediately go to Total Commander.

It's kind of sad, really. After all these years, Microsoft hasn't been able to or has refused to copy one of the most useful ways of managing files on a file system.

Then again, Total Commander is pretty keyboard oriented and who the hell wants to use the keyboard anymore? Keyboards are for nerds. We just want to grunt and point at big colorful pictures.

Re:the return of the Start button

[nhat11]

Meh, after a day of using win8, I gotten use to the Metro interface. It's basically the start menu on big tiles but everything else is the same but with more shortcuts.

Re:the return of the Start button

[teh dave]

Sigh.

I fully expected to be downmodded for this comment, but had hopes that moderators would be able to critically examine their own position to perhaps consider the merit of my opposing viewpoint and judge my comment for that, rather than just giving in to the knee-jerk urge downmod just because they disagree. Remember, Disagree != downmod...

Disappointing, Slashdot. Expected, but still disappointing.

Re:the return of the Start button

[AmiMoJo]

Having watched a few people using older versions of Windows and Windows 8 I think it does actually make sense, it was just badly implemented. Allow me to explain.

Many people don't really use the start menu much it seems. They have all their apps on their desktop, a huge wall of icons. They know where everything is via spacial memory rather than looking at lists of text on a menu. Seems counter-intuitive to us geeks but actually this kind of emergent "it's a mess but I know where everything is" organization appears to be popular and surprisingly usable.

Metro tried to extend that by allowing the icons to do more than just start the app. It also tried to give people an easy way to access the icons without minimizing all their windows. It's modelled on the way people actually use their computers.

There is a lot of quite justified hate for Metro, but it's primarily down to two things. Firstly they got rid of the Start Menu completely and didn't offer any alternative. At least on 8.1 you can boot directly to the desktop, but people still miss it. Secondly they broke the search system which a lot of people liked, and again it seems that 8.1 fixes it.

Naturally being Microsoft they were unable to communicate all of this in a coherent way. People complained about it being hard to get to the shutdown option, when MS intended for people to use the physical off button on their computer. They didn't bother telling anyone that though.

Re:the return of the Start button

[teh dave]

Oh no, don't get me wrong. I'm not under the illusion that Metro was designed with the traditional desktop users like us (desktop/laptop) first in mind. I don't believe that for a second. I don't think anybody has claimed that.

Whether traditional desktop use was equal in importance to tablet use when they designed Metro or it took a back seat I'm not sure. I suspect that desktop/laptop users like us were practically ignored when designing the Metro apps, but the MSDN article I linked in my original post above suggests the Start Screen itself was certainly designed while keeping traditional desktop use in mind.

Re:the return of the Start button

[AmiMoJo]

Certainly, instead of a tidy, hierarchical, collapsible interface that only takes up (maybe) a third of the screen, let's make it a mandatory full-screen, scrollable (and scrollable and scrollable) interface instead, with gigantic, cryptic, space-wasting, two-tone icons instead! Brilliant!

Can you outline a situation when it would be better not to use the entire screen for finding and starting an app? I understand fully why having multiple apps on the screen is a good thing, but when you want to start one why not immediately use the entire screen so you don't have to navigate through submenus?

Ever noticed how most users click the icons on their desktop to start applications? They know where they are by spacial memory or looking for icons, not by reading the labels. I know it annoys people who obsessively keep their desktop clear of icons and arrange their start menu meticulously like I do, but it seems to work quite well for a lot of people. The start screen is just an advanced version of that.

Re:the return of the Start button

[140Mandak262Jamuna]

Touche'. Serves me right for not counting the number of digits in your slashdot id.

Re:the return of the Start button

[Kielistic]

That's exactly the problem. If the user can't remember the name of the program (humans are known for their forgetfulness) then without a menu / list to remind them they are boned.

Re:the return of the Start button

[teh dave]

I'll start by assuming that your last sentence suggests you're not happy with the way you access functions like the shut down menu in Windows 8.

If that's the case, I wholeheartedly agree with you there - the Settings charm is an absolutely atrocious place to locate the shutdown/reboot/sleep menu, it makes no sense at all and is very difficult to find unless you already know where it is. I have no idea what MS was thinking in order to decide to put such a vital function in an odd place. But in my opinion that is not an important issue for users like us: yes it's stupid but we know where to find it, and if you are shutting down or rebooting so frequently that it's an issue that it takes a couple of seconds longer to do, then perhaps you should put a shortcut to shutdown.exe on your desktop. I get that it's dumb, but the issue I'm debating is the Start Screen, not the Charms.

The primary way you find things in the main page of the Start Screen isn't by scanning it up and down with your eyes to find what you're looking for. It's the same way you know where that pinned app on the taskbar is, or that shortcut on the desktop, or the order of the icons on your Mac Dock - it's because you put them there; they are your most frequently used apps, the ones you use regularly. Most people generally don't specifically remember the pictures depicted by icons - they generally find it easier to remember the position of the icons (this is well documented, see here for an example). The Start Screen relies on this and is why it works well when used the way it was designed.

The All Programs view, I'll admit, I think worked better with the Start Menu than it does in the Start Screen. The reason is because as you say - it's easier to scroll through a one dimensional list than a two dimentional grid, especially when you don't know exactly where that thing you're looking for is located. However, I discourage this use of the Start Screen that way, because there are better ways to find what you're looking for. Just start typing to search for things - generally you can remember part of the name; the search function will find that for you. In the remaining case where you still can't remember exactly what it was that you wanted, the old Start Menu's 'All Programs' view might be better than the new two-dimensional grid (I think it was). However, that functionality is rarely used by the vast majority of people, so the other improvements that the Start Screen brings outweigh the drawbacks of going with a worse approach for that particular use case.

Re:the return of the Start button

[bkr1_2k]

100K+ isn't much profit, unless you're a lemonade stand.

Re:the return of the Start button

[Alioth]

Unfortunately all it does is flip you over to the Metro interface. It doesn't give you a menu.

Re:the return of the Start button

[Alioth]

It's not really that.

1. The Start menu might not be used a lot but that's not the point. The point is that it's discoverable. It's easy to find something new, like a new desktop program that's been installed. The user can then make a shortcut if they want. It leaves the user feeling in control.
2. Metro and desktop are jarringly different. The primary golden rule of Shneiderman's 8 Golden Rules of user interface design is "strive for consistency". In the past Microsoft have done this, but now they've done the diametric opposite and made an inconsistent interface where half of it works one way, and the other half works another way, and you often suddenly get launched into a completely different user interface.

Re:the return of the Start button

[MouseAT]

The Win8 start screen -- IMO that's essentially unusable. (You could make it usable if you put in a bunch of effort to arrange tiles the way you want, but it'd take a while.)

You can re-arrange the Start screen to make it better, but it's still less efficient than the Start menu that it replaced. I've tried. No matter how you slice it, it's still a step backwards

Re:the return of the Start button

[Missing.Matter]

Except there is a full list of installed apps in Windows 8. Its even sortable, unlike the start menu. So what's the problem?

Re:the return of the Start button

[MouseAT]

No, it DOESN't have all of the same features. All the quick links from the right hand side of the start menu are gone. I have to manually tweak the content that shows up to make it usable, rather than it doing so automatically based on what I'm running at any one time. I lose the hierarchy, so actually navigating to items is a lot slower and less efficient. I have to move the mouse over bigger distances. I have to scan a grid, rather than a list when I'm looking for something. The context switch of changing UI makes me have to stop and think "hang on, what am I doing here" every time I open it.

In short, it commits the biggest sin an application launcher can do. It gets in my way.

Re:the return of the Start button

[Missing.Matter]

And for the "All Apps" menu do you still need to tell users that they should go to the start screen then right click to get the All Apps menu?

No, there is a little down arrow on the start screen that will take you there. You can even set the start button to go there by default in an easy to find setting.

Re:the return of the Start button

[Missing.Matter]

There is a hierarchy, it's just flattened. IMO this is much more usable than the start menu, where it's just a list of folders, with identical icons, in alphabetical order. Often the folders are named by the company or publisher instead of the actual application name. How does hierarchy help when you don't even know where to look? In Windows 8 the icons are all laid out so if you don't know the publisher, you can at least spot the icon without searching through a dozen folders and sub folders.

Re:the return of the Start button

[jez9999]

It's like saying that because a car is good at driving along roads, it would be good at crossing the ocean.

Re:the return of the Start button

[hackertourist]

That works for frequently-used applications. I've got several hundred applications installed, many of which I'll use once or twice a year. I can usually remember that "I have something to solve X", and also that I filed it somewhere in the "audio" folder in my Start menu, but the names of most are long forgotten.

Re:the return of the Start button

[Vanderhoth]

You raise some good points about how people use their desktops and metro makes sense in that context, but people don't choose to create a wall of icons, it happens by accident out of convenience for a quick spot to put an launcher. Of the people I've seen do this when I ask them they say it just happened, install a onetime application here, quickly bookmark a web page there and months later the desktop is cluttered an ugly and they can't find anything. The start menu is invaluable when you're trying to find an application you seldom use, don't necessarily know the name of, or if you're not one of those wall of icons people and prefer to keep your desktop clean. I have have quick launch folders on the taskbar for most of the stuff I commonly access, but I still use the start menu to find stuff I don't use daily.

As Alioth points out Windows breaks a lot of human computer interaction and design rules. I'm also finding that Metro tiles are too flashy, it's like surfing the web back in the early 90's where most sites could induce seizures because of all the flashing, blinking and dancing babies. I'm also seeing tiles being used for advertising, which is the last thing I want to see when I'm trying to find an application to get something done. Windows 8 is a failure.

I'm betting by the end of next year MS will be announcing Windows 9, which will be the regular desktop with a start menu for desktops/laptops and a separate Metro interface for mobile devices, which is how it should have been in the first place.

There are a lot of reason they tried to cram metro down our throats, all business strategy and profit related. Better for the customer isn't one of them. It's just the excuse. They're trying to get in on the ground level of the mobile market and create the iCulture desktop-mobile integration so they can lock users into windows devices for everything they do. Instead the opposite is happening, Windows 8 is so poorly designed for desktop that MS is starting to losing that market instead of picking up the mobile market. Now they're trying to save face by saying, "look we put the start button back in, that's what you wanted right? ... right?" Sorry, too little too late.

Windows 9 will probably be what windows 8 should have been. I'm sure MS has enough money to tide them over till then, but if I was on their board of directors, I'd be calling for Ballmer's head.

Re:the return of the Start button

[jbolden]

You might want to try expressing yourself without profanity.

As for the rest Microsoft sells products for high power machines doing complex work: Windows Server 2012.

As for the OS to the bare minimum Microsoft has never claimed to offer that.

Re:the return of the Start button

[jbolden]

The idea is ubiquitous computing, that applications move freely from mobile to desktop (not just data). That means creating an interface which scales to different devices.

The desktop interface doesn't do that. It is a legacy interface designed for the legacy "desktop only" software. In theory Microsoft should have been moving it to guest OS status around Windows 9 or 10.

Re:the return of the Start button

[jbolden]

But that's going to change if they have their way. One of the things they should have done is made touchscreen mandatory for Windows 8.

Re:the return of the Start button

[jbolden]

Well yeah. Legacy apps aren't designed for touch (capacitive). Resistive touchscreen with s stylus works pretty well though. Asking for all screens to be capacitive / resistive is a bit much cost wise.

Re:the return of the Start button

[jbolden]

The only reason they're pushing Metro down everyone's throat is so that people write and use Metro apps

Well yes. They want to migrate away from the legacy desktop. Yes. That's why they are doing it.

However instead of this strategy making Metro and Windows Phone more popular they've actually managed to make desktop Windows less popular. PC sales are down and they've made Windows run much less well on non touchscreen machines but the tablets people are buying instead are running Android and iOS, not Windows.

There is no evidence of substantial drop offs in sales after Windows 8 that weren't happening before Windows 8. PC sales were slowing and they have continued to slow at the same pace. There was no surge in buying Windows 7 machines when both are available. There is simply no evidence to support the idea that Windows 8 has had any meaningful impact on sales. Now that's really bad. Windows 8 at this point should have been driving people towards touchscreens and expensive hinges on their laptops.

As for the tables running iOS and Android. That was true before and it is true now. Microsoft is very worried about it and justifiably so.

Re:the return of the Start button

[jbolden]

This change does not erase that fact that M$ really does believe in its "heart of hearts" that they know what we need and what is best for us.

Yep. That's called being a leader. Microsoft used to manage their platform and pick direction. Since Windows XP they have been floating. I've been thrilled to see then strap on and start acting being a leader for x86.

Re:the return of the Start button

[jbolden]

I don't think they back down then. I don't think it matters if no one buys Windows 8. If they lose consumer by 2020 they lose enterprise by 2030. It is simply too important to them to make this migration happen. They may fumble a bit but they will not cave.

Re:the return of the Start button

[jbolden]

Any attempt to "bridge the gap between metro and desktop" on desktop mean downgrading desktop environment towards shitty tablet environment.

Yes it does. That's why Apple is opposed to ubiquitous computing. They believe in sharing data not applications. Microsoft conversely believes that applications can adopt to new form factors and having applications move from device to device will be worth the costs. Consumers are going to face a real choice of philosophy with plusses and minus of both.

Re:the return of the Start button

[jbolden]

Metro is not the other half. Longer term the direction is towards desktop being a foreign guest OS on the Metro operating system.

Re:the return of the Start button

[CCarrot]

Can you outline a situation when it would be better not to use the entire screen for finding and starting an app? I understand fully why having multiple apps on the screen is a good thing, but when you want to start one why not immediately use the entire screen so you don't have to navigate through submenus?

Ever noticed how most users click the icons on their desktop to start applications? They know where they are by spacial memory or looking for icons, not by reading the labels. I know it annoys people who obsessively keep their desktop clear of icons and arrange their start menu meticulously like I do, but it seems to work quite well for a lot of people. The start screen is just an advanced version of that.

I *like* submenus. It lets me group my programs however I want, and any single group is accessible right from the top level (unlike the Win8 philosophy). I don't have to choose whether my computer will primarily be used for image/video, socializing, office work, gaming, development, etc. etc. and then try to arrange my program groups so that the top 30 or so programs fit onto the first page (really fun on a netbook). With the start menu, I have access to any and all of these capabilities in a maximum of four clicks (actually, 'hover' opens subfolders, so basically two clicks - start button -> application)

In my opinion, it simply breaks the flow of work to have the frigging application launch tool, an important but ultimately minor component of any useful graphical operating system, suddenly *BAM!* take up the entire screen every time you want to launch a new program. Not to mention the mandatory full screen philosophy, (and therefore the loss of the quick switchability of the taskbar, and the standard close/minimize/maximize options) for core 'apps'...I know, I know, you still have the taskbar on the 'desktop app', but that's the thing: they're trying to force their users away from all of the most useful and productive features of their core system! I pretty much yanked all of the native apps as soon as I tried them, since none of them offer any better functionality than their desktop versions, and they are just too dumbed down to be useful.

By making it so damn difficult to stay within the desktop environment , by flashing this damnably annoying no way to get rid of it natively full screen nonsense (that's not dismissable, by the way, unless you choose something on it), they are basically rickrolling their users every time (they accidentally or not) hit the Start button. Should YouTube videos default to open in full screen mode all the time, with no user choice in the matter? If you are opening a document in Word or Excel, should the file selection dialog default to full screen, thumbnail view only (oh, and with a sidescrolling grid instead of a vertical one, so that, while it will still 'work', the scroll wheel on the mouse is much less intuitive for navigation)? And you couldn't change that behavior?? How crazy would that make you? Yet that's the same thinking: if I'm selecting or viewing *something*, I might as well use the whole screen to do it...no. Just no.

Re:the return of the Start button

[jbolden]

I'm betting by the end of next year MS will be announcing Windows 9, which will be the regular desktop with a start menu for desktops/laptops and a separate Metro interface for mobile devices, which is how it should have been in the first place. There are a lot of reason they tried to cram metro down our throats, all business strategy and profit related. Better for the customer isn't one of them.

I disagree. I think that Microsoft genuinely really believes ubiquitous computing is better for the customer. I think they really genuinely believe their customer base should undergo a rapid transition. It think the business strategy is what is holding them back from being much more aggressive.

And no they are not going to back down. What is their future if they back down. On home and small business PC sales have been falling for 5 years. People are buying less powerful machines, less often and now with mobile less per household. Meanwhile mobile devices are exploding, being replaced more than once ever 2 years at higher and higher cost. They are getting more capable and better software. They have interfaces that young people like better. Over the 2010s they will be driven mostly out of home / small business. And then from there Android (or whatever) that owns the small business market will via BYOD do to them on business what they did to DEC, Unisys and IBM.

Their is a cliff behind them. They cannot retreat.

Re:the return of the Start button

[MouseAT]

There's more to the missing functionality than just the missing shut down button though. I can recreate that with a bit of JavaScript and a shortcut, even if it's more of a pain than it should be.

No, the problem is what else I'm missing compared with the old Start menu. Quick access to the Control Panel when I want to change something. Quick access to my Documents, Downloads, Pictures and Music folders. Quick access to printers and print queues when something isn't quite working right. Yes, I can recreate them, but that takes time and effort. The default is a gigantic step backwards, and even once the items are recreated it's less efficient than the old menu was.

Once you put a Start menu on Windows 8, it's actually not that bad. Metro tends to get out of your way more than I expected to be honest. The Start screen is not an adequate Start menu replacement for everyone though, and it's high time Microsoft acknowledged that.

Re:the return of the Start button

[dave420]

A few comments? People were exploding with rage across the internet that Windows now looked "Fisher Price"-y and that Windows XP would bomb and Microsoft would be out of business in 5 years because of it.

People complain when Microsoft changes things, and they complain even louder when the changes are either visually drastic, or if they simply change the way people do things.

We've heard this all before.

Re:the return of the Start button

[MouseAT]

You know what, sod it. I'm going to risk Slashdotting my site because it's relevant. I decided to give Windows 8 a go about two weeks ago because I wanted to A) See whether it was really as bad as everyone makes out, especially as I hated fighting with it on the few occasions I'd been asked to fix a Windows 8 laptop or tablet, and B) have a play with client Hyper-V. Whilst I was at it, I decided to document my experiences. If you want to see my more in-depth opinions, take a look at http://mouseat.co.uk/category/tech/

In short, I've actually spent some time working with this, and trying to figure out what works and what doesn't. I'm not saying that there isn't a better solution than just bringing back the old Start menu. I AM saying that the Start screen as it is now is not a suitable replacement for what we had before on a desktop PC with a keyboard and mouse.

That said, fair play to Microsoft, they certainly have thought through the interface and how it's going to work on a touch screen. The various swipe gestures actually make quite a lot of sense there.

Re:the return of the Start button

[jbolden]

They're the only company I can think of that actually makes products where most of their major changes are changes that they as a company want more than the end-users.

You should spend more time around: Apple, IBM, HP, SAP....

Re:the return of the Start button

[jbolden]

Secondly, and more importantly, the first rule of UIs is: don't change it unless it's badly broken.

The entire Win32 interface is badly broken. It lacks critical features and thus is being replaced. Desktop is being moved from the primary GUI towards a secondary GUI and then likely into something like a guest OS. Now you have gotten the memo.

Re:the return of the Start button

[ImprovOmega]

That's great for you. I don't use Windows like that and the lack of a start menu is a major annoyance for my workflow. Judging by market penetration I would estimate that I'm a part of at least a large minority of users. I suppose I would be singing a different tune if it was replaced with something more functional, but it wasn't. At best I'm back to a Windows 3.1 Program Manager and well, there's a reason I stopped using Win3.1.

Re:the return of the Start button

[jbolden]

The issue is that when a hierarchy is too confusing for something like 85% of computer users. Once you allow folders more than one deep they don't get it. They don't really understand they are being asked a "where" question when looking.

Stupid as that may be, folders inside folders is going to need to be an advanced feature for power users.

Re:the return of the Start button

[CCarrot]

The existing start menu is like taking all your papers, documents, and everything you own and stuffing them into that little pencil drawer on your desk. Everything is just crammed into it and its really much too small and awkward for the task of being a filing system for everything you have.

What I *especially* love about the start screen is how it pretty much makes my family wallpapers useless.

On Windows 7, I put the shortcuts around the edges of the desktop, then I can see the wallpaper subject (and smile) every time I go back to the desktop.

a) You do realize you can do that with windows 8 too. This has nothing to do with the start menu vs start screen at all.

b) Oh... so you ARE one of those peoples who has shortcuts all over their desktop.

Actually, the start menu is more like a bag of holding: it's exactly as big as you need it to be, and (if you spend some minimal amount of time on organization) everything is right there at your fingertips :) You don't have to stick your entire head in the bag to see what's in there. It's true, MS could have added some better customization options for sizing: some people might actually want to have the Start menu take up half, or even all of their viewing space instead of a discreet strip on the side. *shrug*, I've never been one of those people, I guess, I've always found the Start menu to be pretty much the ideal size for me.

BTW, how do you make the center area of the Start screen visible? Curious here, since I have never seen anyone mention a way to shift that big, blocky thick band of ugly icons out to the edges of the screen. If you meant that we can still do this within our desktop app, well...yes, that's kind of the point. That's (part of) why I prefer to use the desktop: the Start screen is just so much uglier and non-customizable in any useful manner. Who cares what the background wallpaper is if you can only ever see the outer edges, or strips between garish, eye-watering blocks? If Windows had their way, you would never see your wallpaper at all, since all of their 'apps' are full screen only, and their start screen covers over the majority of the interesting bits, leaving you with a view of sky, or grass around the edges.

As for icons on the desktop: well, my work computer is a bit crowded, but that's thanks (mostly) to my IT dept. My home computers have, maybe, an average of ten desktop icons each. They all have many more aftermarket (i.e., non-core-windows) programs installed on them, but other than a few everyday use ones, they are all accessed via the Start menu, with two or three essentials pinned right to the taskbar (Firefox and FreeCommander, typically, maybe Task Manager for a slower computer).

Re:the return of the Start button

[ImprovOmega]

I'm offended by the fact that Microsoft basically is saying "fuck you use our new interface". I'm not offended by the start screen as an option as such, I'm offended by the fact that it's forced on us and there's no way within the base OS (no third party add-ons) to get the original functionality back that I'm used to having.

Re:the return of the Start button

[jbolden]

That's not the equivalent change. The equivalent change was how Apple handled the migration from OS9 to OSX. First they introduced new libraries to make porting applications to Carbon easy. That allowed people to create OS9/Rhapsody (OSX) applications. They created the classic environment so you could run OS9 apps inside of OSX and could reboot back and forth. Then after a few years classic wasn't installed by default. Then after a few years you couldn't reboot. Then OS9 apps didn't work at all.

Microsoft needs to do the same thing with WIn32.

Re:the return of the Start button

[ImprovOmega]

The problem is that Microsoft took functionality away and replaced it with something that, at best, requires retraining. It would have been very simple to include the start screen but have an option where users could switch it off and use the start menu instead. Rather than let users choose, Microsoft flipped the bird to all of its users (especially those in enterprise environments) and dictated that their new interface be used. Of course all this did was cause a cottage industry to spring up of vendors offering start-menu replacements that shouldn't have been needed in the first place .

Re:the return of the Start button

[ImprovOmega]

That's great, I still want the option to use a start menu. You know, the familiar interface that everyone has been using since ~1995? Let people transition on their own. Don't make pronouncements from on high about how this is better and trust me you'll like it eventually.

Re:the return of the Start button

[ImprovOmega]

The new task manager is bad ass actually. It even breaks down percent utilization of disk I/O capacity. I wish it was available in 7, but it's not enough to get me to move and put up with Win8's other "quirks".

Re:the return of the Start button

[jbolden]

This is not whining due to change. These are valid complaints about unnecessary change that is impacting people. Sure you personally may know all the shortcuts about how to do things differently, but the majority of Windows users are getting confused about it, they don't know keyboard shortcuts, and they're wasting time relearning how to use their OS.

They aren't relearning they are learning. And they aren't wasting time they are spending their time acquiring skills that will be needed in the future. Finally the change is necessary. One of the objectives for the Metro interface is to start shattering the idea that ties applications to a small number of binaries on the local machine. Remote applications need to be part of this. It is entirely possible that a decade from now you might have 1m plus applications you have access to via. the web that load through on demand.

In theory that wouldn't present too much of a problem for a hierarchical menu. But most people don't understand hierarchy more than 2 levels deep either.

Re:the return of the Start button

[Aaden42]

Assuming they're not using the same algorithms they've classically used to estimate remaining time to copy files to determine disk I/O capacity, that does indeed sound like a nifty feature.

Re:the return of the Start button

[Vanderhoth]

Although I agree with a lot of what you said, especially with the growth of the mobile market. I think they will back down it'll just be backing down a little at a time to make it look like they're pushing forward, they're already starting to. They put the start "button" back in and claimed it was a step forward. I'm betting if adoption of Win 8.1 is as bad as Win 8 they will try adding the start menu back. The problem is Windows 8 is useless for large business applications, which is MS bread and butter. If they don't back down organizations will start looking to Apple or Linux for solutions to get work done. MS held onto the business world this long because they were really the first to figure out how to get vendor lock in, but if the whole systems changing anyway and you're going to have to retrain your staff to use something completely different it might as well be cheap like Linux or have good supported software like Apple

People still have a need for desktops/laptops for work and personal purposes, but it's getting to a point where if you have a need for number crunching and don't need to use applications like Photoshop you could have a Linux box. Most of the tools I use in MS office are available in Libre Office, I've rarely met anyone that requires the really advance MS office functions. As a developer (some web, some application) I can use GIMP for most of what I do, that's not to say GIMP will work for everyone, but for anyone not doing exclusive professional video, graphic design or photo manipulation there are open source applications will work. Most of the people I know that are professional video, graphics and photo people use Macs anyway and have well supported software for their trade.

I think either way, MS hit it's prime and has already fallen off the cliff, the question is how long the dead tree they're clinging to will hold out. There's a chance they could climb back up, but I have my doubts.

Re:the return of the Start button

[bingoUV]

Categories. Lack of.

Re:the return of the Start button

[CCarrot]

They will much rather minimise every Window (manually - no one has noticed Windows 7's show desktop button) to open a program if it's on the desktop, only using the start menu if it's absent from desktop.

To be fair, they didn't exactly advertise the 'show desktop' shortcut for Windows 7 or Vista - they made it a blank square at the far right of the taskbar, instead of an easily identifiable icon beside the Start button. Many people thought they just took away that feature.

Don't get me wrong though, there are places for the Start Menu. I In a school I used to work at there were 100s of programs to choose from, which were put into Start Menu folders named as categories e.g. Core Programs, Graphics & Design, Maths and Science - you know, similar to the original start menu concept rather than the current one-folder-per-program-(and-you'd-better-remember-if-it-begins-with-the-company-name-or-not) jumble? This worked brilliantly, no one ever seemed to have trouble finding a program.

And I bet there were IT guys that set up that arrangement for you: just like you could do for yourself at home using drag and drop :)

But back to places where there aren't 100s of programs, and there aren't IT overlords neatly putting your programs into sensible categories, most find desktop the king for whatever reason. Microsoft gradually caught onto this, and thus (a) In XP (or was it an update for 9x?) they introduced the Quick Launch to reduce number of clicks for your commonly used programs, (b) In Windows 7 they introduced the new taskbar in an attempt to improve upon Quick Launch, and (b) in Windows 8 they introduced the Start Screen for programs you don't want to pin (or people who don't like pinning to the taskbar), which intends to improve upon the Desktop. Indeed it has faults which hopefully Windows 8.1 will fix, but the core concept agrees with usage of the desktop.

That still doesn't explain the mandatory full screen 'apps', and the decision that people don't really need an always-accessible taskbar to switch between open apps: instead they will patiently learn a multitude of non-intuitive, cryptic keyboard shortcuts and/or 'gestures' to do the same thing that a simple click at the bottom of the screen used to do.

Re:the return of the Start button

[AmiMoJo]

I *like* submenus. It lets me group my programs however I want, and any single group is accessible right from the top level (unlike the Win8 philosophy).

Have you actually used Windows 8? You can group programs however you want on the start screen, and unlike the start menu they are all accessible right from the top level without having to open submenus. At most you scroll left/right, which can be done with the mouse wheel or two fingers on the touchpad.

I think that is one of the reasons why people like having icons on their desktop so much. No going through menus, it's all laid out in one place.

suddenly *BAM!* take up the entire screen every time you want to launch a new program.

When you open the start menu if you then click on anything else it closes again. Therefore you can only interact with the start menu, the same as the start screen. Is there something on the rest of the desktop you need to see when using the start menu? I'm trying to get to the bottom of why you want it to take up less screen space.

Not to mention the mandatory full screen philosophy, (and therefore the loss of the quick switchability of the taskbar, and the standard close/minimize/maximize options) for core 'apps'

All the core apps support desktop mode as well. Internet Explorer, the email client, settings, RDP, Explorer... What core apps are you referring to that don't?

By making it so damn difficult to stay within the desktop environment

You find it hard to avoid moving the mouse into the bottom left corner of the screen and clicking?

by flashing this damnably annoying no way to get rid of it natively full screen nonsense (that's not dismissable, by the way, unless you choose something on it)

Top left corner takes you straight to the desktop without choosing anything. It tells you this when you first set up your user account. How long have you actually tried Windows 8 for?

Should YouTube videos default to open in full screen mode all the time, with no user choice in the matter?

I have no idea what you are talking about. I tried opening YouTube videos in IE and Chrome and neither went fullscreen automatically. I could in fact toggle that setting at will. Even in Metro mode you can collapse the full screen video to use part of the screen (80% or 20%, but strangely not 50%).

I think you tried Windows 8 for about 5 minutes and decided you hated it. I'm not saying there's nothing wrong with it or that parts are not annoying, but you clearly made no effort to even try and understand it.

Re:the return of the Start button

[Missing.Matter]

Rather than let users choose, Microsoft flipped the bird to all of its users (especially those in enterprise environments) and dictated that their new interface be used.

Isn't that kind of what Windows has been since inception? It ships with one UI and only one UI and if you want a different one, it's up to you. Windows 8 is no different except you don't like the one that shipped. There's nothing stopping you from installing whatever shell you prefer. This is your choice.

Re:the return of the Start button

[Missing.Matter]

That's great, I still want the option to use a start menu.

What's stopping you then? Don't transition to Windows 8, or if you do, install a launcher that you prefer.

Re:the return of the Start button

[justthinkit]

By moving away from the command line. With the command line there can be dozens of switches for each use case. With the Windows GUI it has been the "copy all until you collide on one, at which point quit copying all the rest" abortion. Standard dumbing down of the interface problem. Like the ribbon downgrade.
.

Once I found out, in an early version of Windows (probably 98 but I forget, shoot me) that selecting all files to copy did not in fact copy all files (for # of files > several thousand), I returned to the cmd prompt and have used xcopy ever since.

Re:the return of the Start button

[justthinkit]

"full line select"
.

Not sure exactly what is meant here, but I do know that I've used Windows Media Player as my file manager for probably a dozen years now. Always found it easier to select files with it. In XP, by default anyway, Explorer gives a vertical list (what I take you to mean by "full line select") of files. WMP gives what it calls a "list" but it is like "dir /w" and makes file selection very easy. The only thing I miss ever since Vista is that it is now more difficult to use WMP (and other Windows programs) from the keyboard -- z-order damage and generally bizarre behavior.

Re:the return of the Start button

[Darinbob]

Mandatory? So Windows 8 would be utterly useless for the majority of Windows users? Touchscreen in a stupid idea on a desktop.

Re:the return of the Start button

[CCarrot]

suddenly *BAM!* take up the entire screen every time you want to launch a new program.

When you open the start menu if you then click on anything else it closes again. Therefore you can only interact with the start menu, the same as the start screen. Is there something on the rest of the desktop you need to see when using the start menu? I'm trying to get to the bottom of why you want it to take up less screen space.

Actually, ESC dismisses an accidental popup of the start menu: how do I dismiss the start screen? Click - gesture - gesture again because the first one didn't work - curse - click

Not to mention the mandatory full screen philosophy, (and therefore the loss of the quick switchability of the taskbar, and the standard close/minimize/maximize options) for core 'apps'

All the core apps support desktop mode as well. Internet Explorer, the email client, settings, RDP, Explorer... What core apps are you referring to that don't?

Perhaps most of them do (does the Image viewer have a desktop version? I couldn't find it, but I use XNView anyway): but they all default to the full-screen versions.

By making it so damn difficult to stay within the desktop environment

You find it hard to avoid moving the mouse into the bottom left corner of the screen and clicking?

by flashing this damnably annoying no way to get rid of it natively full screen nonsense (that's not dismissable, by the way, unless you choose something on it)

Top left corner takes you straight to the desktop without choosing anything. It tells you this when you first set up your user account. How long have you actually tried Windows 8 for?

Haha so which is it, bottom left or top left? And which one lets me stay in Desktop, even if I want to run a new program?

Should YouTube videos default to open in full screen mode all the time, with no user choice in the matter?

I have no idea what you are talking about. I tried opening YouTube videos in IE and Chrome and neither went fullscreen automatically. I could in fact toggle that setting at will. Even in Metro mode you can collapse the full screen video to use part of the screen (80% or 20%, but strangely not 50%).

I think you may have deliberately missed my point here: what would your reaction be if YouTube were to decide that the only way you can view their videos (on any platform, with any browser, etc.) is full screen? Would that be, perhaps, a bit annoying? Right now you have a choice in the matter, as you damn well should. Never mind the fact that most people immediately full-screen most of their videos anyway: do you want that 'feature' forced on you, with no option to disable it?

Welcome to the Windows 8 philosophy.

I think you tried Windows 8 for about 5 minutes and decided you hated it. I'm not saying there's nothing wrong with it or that parts are not annoying, but you clearly made no effort to even try and understand it.

Close. I gave it roughly a week before I pulled the plug on Metro and installed ClassicShell. And yes, I hated it.

Re:the return of the Start button

[Darinbob]

This is change for the sake of change. You may hae the opinion that cloud based remote apps are the wave of the future, but that should be the decision of the consumers and should not be dictated from above. Right now there are 1M plus apps available to me online with phones, and I want to use maybe two of them. I don't know how many Windows 8 apps there are at the moment, but I do know that I want to use zero of them.

Almost all of the Windows 8 apps that come pre-installed can be done better inside a web browser anyway. Even web based Bing is better than Windows 8 app Bing.

Maybe most people don't understand the hierarchical menu, but why does that mean it must be removed from everyone including those who want it? Can't it just be left on the desktop where the new batch of users will never see it?

Re:the return of the Start button

[cundare]

I don't know why we can't all be more intellectually honest and just admit that the REAL problems with Windows are that:

i) Windows is not, never has been, and never will be as innovative, well-designed, or coherent as the Mac OS; and

ii) Microsoft has failed to innovate, simply copying so many features of the Mac OS into Windows that the two have become indistinguishable.

(I hope I don't have to remind people to think before they hit "Reply.")

Re:the return of the Start button

[andrewa]

Understood... That's why I said it works for me. I rarely use Windows, and when doing so it's only for a few apps for the company I work for - typically Microsoft Office/Visio/Visual Studio stuff. Beyond that my primary OS is CentOS for my server-based stuff and Mint for GUI stuff.

Re:the return of the Start button

[andrewa]

:-) No worries!

Re:the return of the Start button

[jbolden]

I think either way, MS hit it's prime and has already fallen off the cliff, the question is how long the dead tree they're clinging to will hold out

They agree with you. They think the tree holds out on consumer / small business till about 2020 and on enterprise till about 2030. That's why they must move their platform.

I think either way, MS hit it's prime and has already fallen off the cliff, the question is how long the dead tree they're clinging to will hold out

How so? The vision statement that's been driving the shift originated with the Office team: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=a6cNdhOKwi0
There is no reason at all that productivity won't be much higher with ubiquitous computing.

t if the whole systems changing anyway and you're going to have to retrain your staff to use something completely different it might as well be cheap like Linux or have good supported software like Apple

You are forgetting the server infrastructure still in place: SQL Server, Lync, Dynamics, Exchange...

Re:the return of the Start button

[jbolden]

Yes. Windows 7 should be the OS for traditional desktops and laptops. That sends a clear message that non-touch is legacy hardware.

Re:the return of the Start button

[jbolden]

You may hae the opinion that cloud based remote apps are the wave of the future, but that should be the decision of the consumers and should not be dictated from above

Everything is dictated from above. Either you choose to have scalable OS elements or you choose the features and speed of bitmaps. Whichever way the OS goes is choosing for consumers. There is no neutral here. The way consumers choose is by choosing a platform.

Besides consumers have chosen. They have been increasing their use of web applications by 30% annually for almost 20 years running. Conversely they've done far less investment in more complex desktop applications.

. Right now there are 1M plus apps available to me online with phones, and I want to use maybe two of them.

I understand. And you also understand that this is atypical behavior. Most people, especially iOS users have many apps and spend quite a bit to get applications with a rate of phone application growth in the 40-+% range.

Maybe most people don't understand the hierarchical menu, but why does that mean it must be removed from everyone including those who want it? Can't it just be left on the desktop where the new batch of users will never see it?

First off not really because they need to break the paradigm of applications being "installed". But shorter term, Microsoft has an adjustable GUI. They did do that. Powerusers can add these things back in. They can do what they want. Microsoft isn't stopping you from reconfiguring your GUI they are just changing the default. Stardock, etc... are still there.

Re:the return of the Start button

[Luckyo]

I don't think this is about "microsoft believes". Microsoft has traditionally been a very pragmatic company, which is what its success is based upon.

In this case, they know that they're massively late for the mobile party, and their only real chance to succeed is to leverage their desktop monopoly. That requires pushing desktop into tablet-like looks.

Apple on the other hand made it on time and has enough presence not to need such a push (nor could it do it in the first place).

Re:the return of the Start button

[Darinbob]

That's fine with me, as long as you don't define legacy as "old stuff for old people".

Re:the return of the Start button

[andrewa]

I take it all back. So, I finally got around to downloading 8.1 and installing it. It's easy enough to set it up to boot to desktop, but the start button really just brings up the metro interface as far as I can tell, which makes it next to worthless based on all the complaints about it. Not sure if there's an easy way to just hit the Windows key and start typing the name of your app. Like I said... "it works for me at least" - I realise that we all have different preferences and requirements...

Re:the return of the Start button

[vux984]

And what do you have against kitchen sinks?

Nothing. Its reference to the common english language idiom. As in "they threw in everything and the kitchen sink".

I do not like being told how to work.

You don't like being told to CHANGE how you work. There are all sorts of limitations to the win 7 start menu. Its position is limited. Its size is fixed. What was in it and where it was positioned within it was limited. You knew how to work within its limitations.

Your suggestion that the Smart menu kitchen sink is "obsolete" tells me that you are assuming what is best for me.

That is the nature of design. Whoever designed original start menu made all kinds of assumptions about what is best for you. Whoever augmented it over the years did the same.

In fact, when they added the search widget there was MUCH gnashing of teeth and wailing because now when you start typing it automatically goes into the search and starts searching, whereas before it would select various items on the menu that started with those letters and there were all kinds of people who didn't want to change how they worked who had gotten used to that old behaviour and were livid at the new one.

But now, a few years later, that search widget is considered indispensible by most. It was worth making the change.

With win8... meh... there's a lot to like about the start screen; and the 8.1 updates are welcome set of fixes. Search on the start screen really is better when you actually need to "search" - the extra real estate is good. But yeah for quicklaunch of stuff you already know about its not as good, and I miss the win7 widget for that function. But that's really about it. Win8 really just needs a good text entry quick-launcher, a la OSX spotlight.

For a lot of the other "complaints" most are addressed with a toolbar. Hell, if you REALLY like the heirarchical part of the startmenu and want it back, just create a taskbar toolbar pointing at the startmenu folder under c:\users - voila. But personally I can't imagine wanting that; but its there nonetheless for those who must have it.

Re:the return of the Start button

[vux984]

What the heck was that app called, again? Maybe something like "transcoder"? (types) ... Hmmm..... Nope. Doesn't look right.[...] *clicks around in menu* .... Oh, yeah. Handbrake. Typing transcode did work, but I couldn't tell.

Ah, so you have no idea what the name of the program is, and you are reduced to "scanning a list of everything installed on your computer hoping to recognize it or its icon."

So, what's better? a large full screen interface that lists everything installed on your computer, with large icons, for easy scanning and recognizing.

Or... you can peer at a small non-resizable popup window in the corner of your screen with tiny icons, and as you expand things, it starts to pan around horizontally too although there are no controls to actually control the horizontal panning.

If you are reduced to actually searching by scanning everything on your computer, then the start menu is the worst solution going.

Re:the return of the Start button

[vux984]

I never use the "All Programs" menu. That *is* clunky.

And fundamentally. That *is* the start menu. It draws on the users and public "start menu" folders. Its been the basis of the start menu since Windows 95 and yes, its terrible. It had to go.

But I frequently use the Search box, which I have configured to search only programs and control menu items, not documents. It's basically a Run dialog that uses program names instead of executable filenames.

Yes, its truly the only thing really missing from windows 8. This is a truly useful powerusers tool. The start screen still does it, but its overkill as a quick launch utility. You have my agreement here.

I also pin programs to the start menu, *distinctly* from pinning to the taskbar.

I understand that. That is a unction of toolbars introduced in windows 95? 98 for sure. In XP they crammed that functionality into the start menu, but toolbars are still around in windows 8.

Create a toolbar, stick whatever you want in it, you've got a popup menu of your favorite apps on your taskbar. You can even add folders and make it heirarachical for lesser used apps, or by task or whatever to your hearts content. And yes, the "frequently used items" or "jump lists" are supported on them too as i recall.

The reason I don't like the start screen is that it's inefficient. It takes up the whole screen, but provides relatively little functionality over a start menu that takes up 5% of the screen.

The start screen is better than start-all programs. And if you don't know the name of the program and are reduced to searching for it via scan and recognize. Its not perfect, but Win 8.1 is improving it further, and we'll hopefully see it get better with time.

Windows Media Player works better than the Music or Video apps. Preview works better than the Photos app.

See, for the most part i agree. And on my main desktop I have changed all the defaults to the desktop apps. Microsoft goofed when they tried having us switch to to Photos from the desktop.

However, I also have an HTPC, and honestly metro is great there. We use the metro app for netflix. We use the metro photoviewer to show people pictures, etc. Because full screen apps with large friendly text makes a lot of sense there. Its also good on windows phone and tablets.

But yah, its a goof to make them the default on a desktop.

Re:the return of the Start button

[jbolden]

Well I'd define legacy as being maintained for compatibility. Windows 7 exists to run on hardware designed the way Windows hardware was up until 2011 running the Win32 code. Windows 8 exists for hardware with high end touchpads, touchscreen, movable hinges... primarily runs Metro apps but can still use legacy Win32 code... Etc...

Very similar to what Gnome did with Mate. People understand that Gnome Foundation isn't going to be updating Mate much.

Re:the return of the Start button

[vux984]

BTW, how do you make the center area of the Start screen visible?

I'm not sure I follow. Your comment about the desktop background refers to the desktop. You can't see your family photo when you pull up the start menu in windows 7, and you can't see it on the start screen. I don't see the issue you are referring too?

If you were to Win-D to see the desktop and activate a carefully placed short on the desktop in win7 and look at your family photo... well then that still works in win8.

Re:the return of the Start button

[CCarrot]

And I bet there were IT guys that set up that arrangement for you: just like you could do for yourself at home using drag and drop :)

I was one of the IT guys who maintained it. I know I could do it at home, but I have so few apps to make it worthwhile, indeed it'd add more pointless clicks. On the start screen I can rely on memory for where each icon is, something you can't rely upon as much for the start menu (there's a limit on how much you can pin really).

That still doesn't explain the mandatory full screen 'apps', and the decision that people don't really need an always-accessible taskbar to switch between open apps: instead they will patiently learn a multitude of non-intuitive, cryptic keyboard shortcuts and/or 'gestures' to do the same thing that a simple click at the bottom of the screen used to do.

We weren't talking about full screen apps, it's not got much to do with the start screen's suitability a start menu/desktop replacement. Asides from the Remote Desktop app and Netflix I don't particularly care for or use any. Unlike the start screen they really are optional and I can pretty much ignore it, asides from a couple of Metro settings only in the Metro control panel, and the annoyance of the Metro photo viewer being default.

I certainly don't think Windows 8 or the start screen is perfect as it stands though, I just see it as the right way forward for most (not all) users/scenarios.

Fair enough. It does seem to be the direction the industry is trending, however I do not see it as a productivity increase in any way. Basically MS is saying: "we've noticed lots of you are doing this, so lets make this mandatory, in as bulky and unattractive a format as we can manage..." I know the size of the icons on the start screen is intended to accommodate touch interfaces...but they are just plain annoying on non-touch interfaces (like probably 99% of the installed customer base)

Re:the return of the Start button

[CCarrot]

Actually, ESC dismisses an accidental popup of the start menu: how do I dismiss the start screen? Click - gesture - gesture again because the first one didn't work - curse - click

The Windows key swaps between Start Menu and Desktop, and left clicking in the bottom left corner ALSO swaps between Start Menu and Desktop.

No, at least it didn't for me. Clicking in the bottom left corner on the desktop switches to the start screen, to go back to the desktop you have to hunt for and find the desktop icon on the start screen. I did forget that the Win key would switch to the desktop while in the start screen, though. Woo hoo, still can't run anything without using the start screen...or papering my desktop full of shortcuts.

Perhaps most of them do (does the Image viewer have a desktop version? I couldn't find it, but I use XNView anyway): but they all default to the full-screen versions.

The Start screen versions do yes. The Desktop versions don't. You can even pin a desktop version to the start screen, and it will still open in the Desktop.

Begging the question: why two versions for every app? How long before they start yanking the desktop versions? I really hope they take a look at their install base first, and see how many people are using one or the other (or have uninstalled the metro app version, to prevent accidentally opening it)...

Haha so which is it, bottom left or top left? And which one lets me stay in Desktop, even if I want to run a new program?

Both. Bottom left is a straight swap between Start and Desktop. Top left gives you a list of all open apps (like a left-bar version of Alt+Tab), and Desktop defaults to the top of the list. And you can stay in Desktop by running new programs that you didn't download from the store. Because there's also nothing forcing you to use the store to install new programs.

As I said, it don't remember it quite working like that for me. It was easy to get into the start menu, (okay, only slightly) less easy to leave it.

And yes, I never used the 'Store'. I browsed through it a time or two, saw a lot of puff and giggle, and bade it farewell.

I think you may have deliberately missed my point here: what would your reaction be if YouTube were to decide that the only way you can view their videos (on any platform, with any browser, etc.) is full screen? Would that be, perhaps, a bit annoying? Right now you have a choice in the matter, as you damn well should. Never mind the fact that most people immediately full-screen most of their videos anyway: do you want that 'feature' forced on you, with no option to disable it?

Welcome to the Windows 8 philosophy.

Yes, it is annoying. That's why you have the option to either use the Desktop, or on an actual tablet where no Desktop option is available you can still dock two apps side-by-side. In 8.1 you'll be able to do have four or more (I still need to download the preview and they weren't clear about it in their keynote yesterday). There's no question, some of their design decisions really do suck balls. However, that's not a defense for ignorance.

Ahh..here's the rub: how do I launch my programs from the desktop (without involving the start menu at all)? By polluting my desktop with icons for every single program I install, which I have never preferred to do (although I acknowledge that many do)? Not to mention icons for all the built-in windows features, control panel, windows explorer, services manager, etc, etc. So it's icons one way...or icons the other way? C'mon now...

Yes, I know you can just 'start typing' and the magic internal search function will find and run it (if you don't have too similar a program names that is), but that is simply not how I prefer to open my programs. Type to run just feels

Re:the return of the Start button

[AmiMoJo]

Actually, ESC dismisses an accidental popup of the start menu: how do I dismiss the start screen? Click - gesture - gesture again because the first one didn't work - curse - click

I just tried it and ESC closes the start screen as well. You really have no idea what you are talking about, do you?

Haha so which is it, bottom left or top left? And which one lets me stay in Desktop, even if I want to run a new program?

Reading comprehension failure. Top left goes directly to the desktop. Bottom left goes directly to the start screen. Both of these are explained when you create a new account.

Re:the return of the Start button

[Zaelath]

Fairly sure there's others that are "default metro" in 8.0 if my example is errant.

That said; does it say which is which? Does it give you a "just once" option to check if that's what you really want or does it just take that default and stuff it in a configuration setting that novices have trouble finding? Is there even *any reason at all* to offer you that choice on a laptop/desktop machine given the metro version is always a gimped up version of the desktop app?

Re:the return of the Start button

[teh dave]

You can get quick access to these by other methods, though, which are either direct replacements for the Start Menu way of doing things and require the exact same amount of effort and clicks, or are better.

To get quick access to your Documents, Music, Downloads etc, pin them to Explorer. Now you have two-click access to them, same as before. One benefit of this way as opposed to the Start Menu shortcuts is that you can put lots of other places there, and all shortcuts to folders can go in the same place rather than some being in the Start Menu and others being elsewhere.

To get quick access to settings such as Control Panel, Administrative Tools, Event Viewer, Computer Management (my favourite), run cmd as Admin, and a few other useful tools, use the new Admin menu. To get to it, press Win+X, or move your mouse to the lower left corner so the Start Screen preview comes up and then right click on it. If you open it with Win+X, it will highlight the mnemonic keys (the underlined letters), so then you can for example access Computer Management by pressing Win+X then G.

None of these are as obvious as the Start Menu, and that isn't right and is something Microsoft did wrong. However, once you know about them, they work fine and in some cases, better.

Re:the return of the Start button

[smash]

Even if it is better on a tablet, you are excluding the far larger Windows desktop market. Windows desktop app will run on both platforms (desktop vs. metro), including Windows 7 and possibly XP. Surface pro, in fact, Windows 8 on tablet in general is NOT selling at least where I am. The only ones I have seen actually in use, running WIndows 8 are the evaluation units I have in my office right now. In terms of number of units shipped vs. Android or iPad, they're a drop in the ocean.

Re:the return of the Start button

[smash]

Mobile is not necessarily the same market. There are plenty of people (more in fact, as demonstrated by the mobile/tablet market's success) who don't give a crap about desktop PCs any more. The majority of end users can in fact get by without a computer at all for the typical stuff home users do - movies, video chat, email, internet banking and social media.

If MS force developers into metro on the desktop (and users are largely trapped on the Windows platform due to previous application purchases) then those apps will also be available on the tablet.

I'm not saying I agree with the strategy or that it will be successful, it's merely what I believe they are attempting to do.

That said, with the recent announcements of Office support on iPad and Microsoft releasing iOS games, perhaps they've decided they lost the battle and are going to focus more on application development rather than try and win the mobile OS war.

Re:the return of the Start button

[smash]

Metro doesn't do that either. It doesn't scale to the desktop.

Re:the return of the Start button

[man_of_mr_e]

The mobile market is expected to dwarf the desktop market in the next couple of years. And by dwarf I mean by at least 2 orders of magnitude.

The idea that desktops are where it's at is antiquated.

Re:the return of the Start button

[man_of_mr_e]

Yeah, cause it's it's totally unreasonable to think that a substantial number of people don't have the same opinion as you.

That's Unpossible!

Re:the return of the Start button

[man_of_mr_e]

Dude, you haven't noticed that you can group icons into columns, just like a newspaper?

http://www.askvg.com/tip-organize-windows-8-start-screen-tiles-in-groups-and-name-these-groups/

And you can shrink them down with a keystroke:

http://blogs.computerworld.com/sites/default/themes/cw_blogs/cache/files/u98/Win_8_groups.jpg

Organize your stuff.

Also, yes, you can get stuff out the start screen to the desktop. Easiest way is to pin it to the taskbar, then drag it wherever you want.

Re:the return of the Start button

[man_of_mr_e]

Dude. How difficult is it to tap the windows key, type "Cont" and hit enter? Ok, want it quick access? Type "Cont" and right click on the Control Panel icon and choose Pin to Start Menu, then drag it to where you want it.

Seriously, it amazes me how people think futzing around with XFCE is so easy, yet become totally fucking stupid when there's a Windows Logo on something.

Want quick access to your documents? Open explorer, right click on Documents, and choose "Pin to start". How fucking difficult is that?

Re:the return of the Start button

[man_of_mr_e]

They aren't included in the search results, but you can still type them and they will run. Try it.

Re:the return of the Start button

[man_of_mr_e]

Go to all apps, everything is listed under their categories. You can "Zoom out" and just see the category names, just like expanding a menu.

Re:the return of the Start button

[strikethree]

Your rant is incredibly insightful; however, you seem to not understand that Microsoft has a rock solid monopoly. Their motivation is purely monetary and they are already guaranteed your money for the basic operating system. That means there is no incentive to actually care about that portion of it.

In other words, the only thing that they have any incentive to care about as far as their operating system goes is how to use it to monetize other products. Of course, this will interfere with basic usage of the OS, but why should they even care? You WILL buy it (for now).

Re:the return of the Start button

[CCarrot]

Actually, ESC dismisses an accidental popup of the start menu: how do I dismiss the start screen? Click - gesture - gesture again because the first one didn't work - curse - click

I just tried it and ESC closes the start screen as well. You really have no idea what you are talking about, do you?

Haha so which is it, bottom left or top left? And which one lets me stay in Desktop, even if I want to run a new program?

Reading comprehension failure. Top left goes directly to the desktop. Bottom left goes directly to the start screen. Both of these are explained when you create a new account.

Yeah yeah yeah...I did misremember that 'escape' one, I'll give you that. Sorry, I didn't actually have a Win 8 box in front of me at the time, so couldn't verify my (sometimes spotty) memory, and I was going by what I thought I remembered from six months ago...*sigh*, it sucks getting older.

Now that I checked again, it must have been the fact that there was no escape from those damn 'apps' that was so frustrating at the time (I'm sorry, alt-F4 to close just isn't intuitive at all). And I can't verify your claims on the top and bottom left hot corners, since it looks like when Classic Shell disables them, it doesn't like to give them back again (a known bug, apparently) *shrug*, I found them annoying anyways, always popping open when I didn't want them to, so I'll certainly not fight to get them back.

Re:the return of the Start button

[cavebison]

-conflicts have more/better/safer options (replace all, replace if newer, etc)

The stupid thing is, DOS had better file copy options than Windows up to now.

Copy you copied a bunch of files in DOS and there was a conflict, you'd get "Abort, Retry, Ignore". Simple options. It wouldn't screw the entire copy operation due to one problem, as Windows has done for the past decade. Just... stunning.

Thank god for TeraCopy and such. After all this time, MS finally starts to get how file copying should work in Windows. Stunning. Simply stunning for a multi-billion dollar company.

Re:the return of the Start button

[cavebison]

That's a problem with the application name, not with search.

Ha. You would never have heard Jobs say such a thing, which is why Apple products are so popular. There is ALWAYS a way of making shit work, or as a product designer you're not worth your title.

Re:the return of the Start button

[cavebison]

What the heck was that app called, again?

Absolutely. I often had this problem. I want to capture the screen. What was the app called again? "screen" no.. "snap" no.. "capture" no... seriously, how the hell am I supposed to know it's "snipping tool"? Totally messed up. The simple solution is to allow *search keywords* to be assigned to shortcuts, so it DOESN'T MATTER WHAT THE APP NAME IS.

MS clearly doesn't have a lot of imagination when it comes to user interface design. They need to fire everyone in the UI dept and start again. From Metro to Visual Studio, they currently suck like few other companies do at UI. Amazing.

Re:the return of the Start button

[N0Man74]

It's not really that.

1. The Start menu might not be used a lot but that's not the point. The point is that it's discoverable. It's easy to find something new, like a new desktop program that's been installed. The user can then make a shortcut if they want. It leaves the user feeling in control.

Discover apps on the Start Menu? You mean the cluttered mess that gets so long that you often have to scroll through it?

Also, right click on Windows 8's Start Screen to bring up the "All Apps" button, which allows you to discover installed apps.

There are a lot of dumb changes to Windows 8, and things that I hate... but the Win 8 Start screen is the most overly vilified feature. It actually is not bad. The "All Apps" works like the Start Menu used to, and the Start Screen works a lot like how people used their Desktop (but better). I think that the Start Screen works great for a frequently used apps menu. I unpin all the apps that I don't care about so it doesn't get cluttered. When I need something less frequently use, I either look for it in the "All Apps", or just hit the Win key and start typing in the name.

I honestly think that this issue is people being too resistant to change. It actually works quite well if you are willing to adjust.

2. Metro and desktop are jarringly different. The primary golden rule of Shneiderman's 8 Golden Rules of user interface design is "strive for consistency". In the past Microsoft have done this, but now they've done the diametric opposite and made an inconsistent interface where half of it works one way, and the other half works another way, and you often suddenly get launched into a completely different user interface.

On this, you have my complete agreement. There are some rather frustrating inconsistencies, and some needless departures from established conventions.

It seems like there are many areas where they just said "screw decades of muscle memory, we are going to change what hotkeys people do stuff with".

I get part of the changes though... The terrible sales of the original Windows tablets years ago was partly attributed to the fact that they wanted the tablets to still feel like Windows, but the desktop interface just didn't work on a tablet interface. So now they are trying to make a unified "Windows" UI style that they want to work in both.... and they run into the opposite problem. It works better on tablet than on Desktop.

Re:the return of the Start button

[toddestan]

You can get back the Windows 2000 style start menu in XP. Funny thing is, you can also get the Windows 2000 style start menu back in Vista/7, but not the XP one which is unique to XP.

Re:the return of the Start button

[hazydave]

Metro itself isn't really a GUI anymore. The point of a GUI is that everything you can do ought to be either intuitive or suggested by some other element of the UI. Metro has severely broken that. Obviously, anyone used to the quirks of a text shell (much less the dozen plus I've used) won't have a problem learning these quirks... but there's also the "why bother" aspect. The main way Metro is broken is the app model -- all full screen, all the time. Ok, sure, you can panel 2 or 3 in Windows 8.1. But advanced users are using dozens of windows on multiple screens. Metro is a tablet/phone UI and it shows... full screen is generally the right answer for "consumption only" computing. Same reason you can't do native "For Metro on Metro" development... these are special powers reserved to Microsoft on a pure Metro machine.

And after all, Metro is just a design scheme, the Start Screen and all that is just a [semi-]graphical shell. There's no reason on earth Microsoft needed to torture desktop users with this mess. They didn't need to eliminate "Aero" themes, etc. They could easily have kept Metro apps, but had them come up in Windows on the desktop. They could have shipped Windows 8 with a desktop users shell, an improved Windows 7 shell.. or even just the Windows 7 shell, made this a user choice, and avoided nearly all the flack. But they seem convinced that forcing all the tablet stuff down the desktop user's throat will endear Windows RT or Phone devices to said user. I can't see that ever happening, but that's apparently the theory.

It'll be interesting to see what becomes of professional software, if Microsoft really does keep marginalizing the desktop user into oblivion. Most professional tools don't have any business as Metro apps; some can't even run as Metro apps -- no compilers.

And of course, there are two factors pushing this. Both are money. One is simply Microsoft once again wanting to follow Apple. Metro apps can only be sold through Microsoft's store, MS gets the same walled garden, the same 30% per app or whatever, that Apple's getting today. If Windows really goes this way, that's big bucks to Microsoft.

The other, of course, is the failing of PC sales against cheaper tablets. Perhaps some of that's even due to Windows 8, but even before that, it's significant. Android devices outshipped Windows devices in 2012. The last time any PC or OS outshipped Microsoft versions, the early 80s I think. This year, it's likely that Android outships Windows 3:1 or nearly so. iOS might even outship Windows in the next year or two. I think Microsoft brought most of this on themselves, but they're clearly being reactionary.

And that's the usual Microsoft thing. They missed the internet in the 80s, so Windows 98 didn't just ship with Internet Explorer, the whole Windows UI had to look like bad web pages. But at least you could switch that off. Microsoft's "all-in" approach is often in the right direction, but always a stupid overreaction. Like the bad fit of DRM throughout Vista, reacting to the idea of computing devices becoming media devices. And now everything looks like a tablet. That's bound to fail -- in many ways it already has, though the Vista failure was a worse one -- it taught Industry that MS upgrades are totally optional. And hurt Microsoft, cash-wise... in the XP heyday, they had been the most valuable tech company, worth even more, inflation-adjusted, than Apple at their peak.

We'll see. In short, Microsoft isn't wrong to want to extend Windows to work well on tablets... they just need to not force that option on every keyboard, mouse, and/or desktop user. Touch screens are a huge fail on the desktop, just as they were in the 80s (CAD industry, not mainstream). Windows 7 was Vista re-designed for the user, and it did well. If Microsoft does that again -- concentrates on what's important to users (CHOICE, for one) and not what's advancing MS's agenda by brute force, they might just fix this problem with Windows 9. And on the way, Microsoft: hire some actual GUI designers with real cognitive psych backgrounds. Metro is just so wrong... even on a tablet.

Re:the return of the Start button

[hazydave]

Thing is, Microsoft isn't sharing applications -- not really. They're sharing a UI. The UI is the same between Windows 8 and Windows RT, similar on Windows Phone and X-Box. But Windows 8 applications don't run on Windows RT. Windows RT applications don't run on Windows Phone. Windows Phone applications don't run on X-Box.

And that's actually less useful than the other guys. Apple broke app compatibility between desktop and tablet, so they could make each of these optimal for those environments. Desktop apps don't run on the tablet. Tablet apps don't run on the phone, but the phone apps do run on the tablet, albeit with a letter/window box.

Android has actually done it best of all. There's just one Android, tablet or phone. Identical apps on each, but the UI adjusts to the device in question. Sure, this has let a few developers get sloppy, leaving tablet users with only an expended phone app. Then again, that's often all the app really needed to do. Android also did the integration right... data syncing automatically, just happens. The device is a first-class thing, not needed a tether to a PC. Apple's found that to be the same solution, years later.

And there's a good reason for this: it's an inherent compromise to make a useful computer that fits in your pocket or in the space of a book. Touch is a compromise, full screen apps are a compromise, etc. Dandy for when mobility is the number one priority, stupid when things get more involved and there's no need for mobility.

Re:the return of the Start button

[jbolden]

Microsoft's direction is to share applications. You are right that right now they aren't quite there yet. But they goal is to pull this all towards one set of applications that adjust to form factor of the device: http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=a6cNdhOKwi0

Everyone else is just going for data sharing. If Microsoft is right about ubiquitous computing it will be a huge push in their direction. If they are wrong then likely it will harm both platforms. Or it may be that some customers like and others don't.

Windows Sucks!

[Anonymous Coward]

I bought a Windows Vista 5 years ago. The first one exploded to blew my hand off. The next one killed my dog. It wouldn't support my joystick from 1986. The wifi screwed up and sterilized my nuts.

Overall I was left with a really bad feeling about all Microsoft products, which obviously must all have similar defects. Anecdotes by unverifiable semi-anonymous internet posters prove that to be true.

Re:Windows Sucks!

[crutchy]

as much as the op is pretty funny (from a linux user's perspective), i bet microsofties wouldn't laugh at a similar joke about anecdotes by certain microsoft executives

However

[Anonymous Coward]

It is still not enough to convince Windows XP/7 users to upgrade. If they hope that the improvements are going to cause the OS to become a sellout, or even compare to 7, they are fooling themselves.

Re:However

[jfdavis668]

No, I am going to test it out again. Spent nearly a year with the 8 preview, and dropped it. To many tasks took too many steps. Will try this again to see if it is ready for prime time.

Re:However

[ljw1004]

Out of curiosity, which tasks took too many steps as compared to Windows 7?

I found that once I installed StartIsBack, there was only one single task I did which took longer, and that was launching a control panel thing (it took one extra keystroke now than it did in Windows 7)

Re:However

[cbhacking]

Ironically, launching Control Panel on Win8 is actually faster than on Win7 (by default). Right-click the Start button (yes it exists; it was just hidden by default) or hit Win+X, and select "Control Panel" from the menu that appears. Easy and straightforward.

My biggest gripe with Win8 is the Start search segregation. I don't want to need to use different keystrokes when searching for a "Setting" instead of an "App". Aside from the BS about which is which ("Disk Management" or "Create and format hard disk partitions" is under Settings, but if you type "diskmgmt.msc" it shows under Apps even though it's exactly the same thing), I just don't want to have to deal with switching result pools. This is fixed in 8.1, which is a big enough improvement to make me happy, personally.

Re:However

[jones_supa]

Ironically, launching Control Panel on Win8 is actually faster than on Win7 (by default). Right-click the Start button (yes it exists; it was just hidden by default) or hit Win+X, and select "Control Panel" from the menu that appears. Easy and straightforward.

Straightforward?! The Win+X menu is a horrible hack and not discoverable at all.

What I see is happening here is that Win8 has just learned people to use various keyboard shortcuts more effectively because in the new GUI many things have been placed in awkward positions.

Re:However

[jfdavis668]

At work I still use XP. I don't limit myself to what is work standard, or I would be way behind the power curve.

Re:However

[jfdavis668]

Good. It is always nice to make someone's day.

Re:However

[cbhacking]

Right-clicking the Start button has *always* done something on Windows. It just used to be something less convenient (better for specific purposes, but definitely less convenient).

Win+X is not inherently discoverable, but there are lots of lists of Windows shortcuts out there on the Internet, including some from Microsoft, or at least their employees, which were published even prior to Win8 RTM.

Re:However

[smash]

Exactly. If your shiny new GUI has forced people into using keyboard shortcuts because the new way of doing things is such a clusterfuck compared to the old way, it is a failure.

Re:However

[smash]

Thid party hacks to restore core functionality lost in a paid upgrade is not a solution that will fly with many people. Fact is: Windows XP is "good enough" to do the things that the vast majority of business users want. Even Windows 98 was, if we're honest. Forcing them to pay to upgrade, then lose functionality and be forced to install third party software that either has no/limited support (freeware) or they do not have a vendor account with (payware) and may be crippled/broken at any time by Microsoft in a service pack is just NOT a solution.

Re:However

[jones_supa]

The problem here is that the Win+X advanced user shortcut is increasingly becoming the standard answer to the question "how can I get to the Control Panel".

Re:However

[jones_supa]

Pressing a keyboard shortcut which brings a context menu out of nowhere to the corner of the screen filled with random administration tasks is nothing but an ugly hack.

Re:However

[geggo98]

Ironically, launching Control Panel on Win8 is actually faster than on Win7 (by default). Right-click the Start button (yes it exists; it was just hidden by default) or hit Win+X, and select "Control Panel" from the menu that appears. Easy and straightforward.

Should't Win+X bring up the mobility center? Or where is the mobility center then on Win 8?

Re:However

[Kielistic]

Ironically, launching Control Panel on Win8 is actually faster than on Win7 (by default). Right-click the Start button (yes it exists; it was just hidden by default) or hit Win+X, and select "Control Panel" from the menu that appears. Easy and straightforward.

Start -> Control Panel

I can do that with two mouse clicks, one keyboard press + one mouse click, or a couple other keyboard presses if i don't want to take my hands off it.

Please explain how Win8 is "actually" faster than that.

Re:However

[jbolden]

Fact is: Windows XP is "good enough" to do the things that the vast majority of business users want. Even Windows 98 was, if we're honest.

Windows98 didn't have lots of Lan features and security features that business wanted. That being said why should Microsoft care about customers who want to spend almost nothing and that infrequently. OK so they leave and go use another OS like Android or Linux. So what?

Re:However

[error_logic]

That is an advanced user shortcut, and it bundles a lot of advanced options in one place. Someone should have mentioned this earlier, but for the specific example of getting to the control panel from the Desktop: Charms menu->Settings->Control Panel.

And of course if you're on the Start page, you can just start typing and get it within a few keystrokes.

Good Changes All Around

[Secret Agent Man]

The biggest thing is the fact that you can search all sections (Apps, Settings, Files) with a single search bar now. No more having to type, mouse-move, click, and then find the option I want! Plus, you can disable the "also search Bing" nonsense, thankfully.

I already run using 0 Metro apps, and live mostly in the Desktop space (truth be told, due to my Windows Key + type letters + hit 'enter' style of start menu usage, the start screen doesn't bother me). I'm glad I'll be able to boot straight to desktop, which will further distance myself from the Metro experience.

Re:Good Changes All Around

[g0bshiTe]

I have all that too it's called Windows 7.

Re:Good Changes All Around

[EvanED]

The biggest thing is the fact that you can search all sections (Apps, Settings, Files) with a single search bar now. No more having to type, mouse-move, click, and then find the option I want!

For a while that was actually my biggest complaint about metro actually, and then I learned about Win-W, which will open the search interface set to settings (like if you pressed Win then clicked settings). Presumably there's one for files too but I never use that anyway so don't know what it is.

It's still kinda annoying and I'm glad to see that they're going back, but it's a lot better than having to mouse.

Re:Good Changes All Around

[JDG1980]

Plus, you can disable the "also search Bing" nonsense, thankfully.

Good, I was concerned this would be a gaping privacy hole. On the original Windows 8.1 post on the Windows Blog, I asked the Microsoft rep several times whether this would be optional and he said he didn't know yet and that an answer would be forthcoming. (Not usually an encouraging sign.) Having *local* searches automatically send a http request to Bing (and, presumably, the NSA) isn't something that I think most Windows users want.

Re:Good Changes All Around

[Secret Agent Man]

Agreed, taking steps backwards is never a good thing. I still really can't recommend anyone do an upgrade to Windows 8. However, when getting a new machine and planning to put a Windows OS on it? I'd say 8 (the performance and under-the-hood buffs are nothing to sneeze at, in my experience).

Re:Good Changes All Around

[JDG1980]

Interestingly, apparently Canonical thinks it's something that most Ubuntu users want.

And most of us on Slashdot thought it was a bad idea there, as well.

Re:Good Changes All Around

[The Raven]

True. But us Windows 8 users have some nice things, like the much improved copy file dialog and the improved task manager. I still prefer Windows 7 (I use Win8 because I do technical support, and I have to be able to support users with 8), but to dismiss everything new as bad is to be a luddite. Even Windows ME had some... um... maybe I won't go that far.

Re:Good Changes All Around

[game kid]

Fortunately, there are even more choices.

Re:Good Changes All Around

[cbhacking]

Win+F for files (that one's actually legacy, going back at least as far as Vista).

Just because it was possible doesn't mean it wasn't a total hassle. You could actually move between search result pools by keyboard, but it was a total pain. Now I won't have to do it again... thank goodness.

Re:Good Changes All Around

[DrGamez]

The Task Manager and File Transfer dialogues are much, much nicer, but they feel like things that can be hammered out in a week, not really even a bullet point to put on the back of your box. These kind of improvements are usually the stuff you see the blogs pick up on: "5 Cool Things You Might Have Missed!".

Car analogy: it's like getting really nice stick shift and "check engine" lights, when the engine itself hasn't changed from the same crud you were using.

Re:Good Changes All Around

[Parker Lewis]

I miss the old search UI, last present on XP only in the advanced mode. Press F3, type some letters, hit enter. And, you can search by name, date, file size, etc. All without use a index service consuming resources.

Re:Good Changes All Around

[Secret Agent Man]

I dunno if I agree, necessarily. After all, we are talking about an operating system here. Dealing with files and what processes are running are supposed to be the bread-and-butter of an OS, to make our lives easier. They're not whiz-bang eye-catching features that marketing teams like to advertise, but boy do the improve the user experience.

Re:Good Changes All Around

[Anonymous Coward]

I can't think of a situation that I didn't know whether I was searching for an app, a setting, or a file, nor can I easily think of one where having all three show up in the search results would help.

Re:Good Changes All Around

[Anonymous Coward]

Unfortunately, I'm a software developer, so I probably have about 50 different applications that I use every week. There's simply no way I would ever remember how to spell the names of all the applications I use, so the "hit a meta-key and type the app name" kludge is useless to me.

I suppose if I was just a content consumer like you are I wouldn't have any problems. But maybe you should just get an iPad or something. It probably does most of the stuff you need.

Re:Good Changes All Around

[Darinbob]

Taking a step backwards is a very very good think if you're about to plummet over a cliff.

Too many idiots out there think that change is good. Change is not always good people, only good change is good change!

I used to think people were sheep in this regard. That's wrong though because sheep are nice to each other, even if some sheep aren't following. People are more like wolves who will snarl at or attack those in the pack who aren't doing what is expected. And given the responses I've seen to people who say they want the start menu back or that they find windows 8 confusing definitely feel like they're coming from wolves and not sheep.

Re:Good Changes All Around

[smash]

Having run both Windows 7 and Windows 8 on the same hardware, i was pretty underwhelmed by the performance improvements on Win8 to be honest. Oh sure, there are a few tweaks but nothing that is worth the horrendous brain damage that comes with the new platform. Spend the money you would have spent on Windows 8 on more RAM for your Windows 7 box and you'll be happier.

Re:Good Changes All Around

[smash]

Not everything new in Win8 is bad. Its simply that the new things that are good are so incredibly minor and inconsequential vs. the horrendously brain damged design decisions and functionality removal that are bundled with them.

Do I like the new task manager, powershell improvements and file copy dialog? Sure. Will I take metro with it? Hell no.

Re:Good Changes All Around

[smash]

Given that Windows 8 betas were around long before canonical vomited out unity, I'd say the copying was on the Linux side.

Re:Good Changes All Around

[rseuhs]

It's a matter of degree:

Canonical is not an US-company and (supposedly) has no agreement with the NSA - Microsoft was the first company that made a deal with the NSA and is one of the most willing providers for the NSA.

So while some search on Windows 8 probably won't land you in Guantanamo, it may very well lead to some "extra" IRS audit or some other harrassment if the Obama-administration doesn't like it.

Re:Good Changes All Around

[0ld_d0g]

Metro only sucks because Microsoft made it suck. It didn't have to be that way. Think of it this way... would you like to have your iOS apps usable on both your Mac and iPad? I would. For e.g. I usually play a word/puzze game or two on my iphone when I'm waiting around. I'd love to get back home and continue that session on my mac in the background while I do other things. However, MS should not have forced it on desktop users by default. It should have been just a thing you launch like any other program and people would have been fine with it.

What MS wanted to do was encourage developers to develop apps for it by making it defauit (a business decision.. not a technical/design one). So developers look at it and go.. hey, my application could be right on the first screen the user sees and so I'm going to make this new app - that was the ideal scenario. From the user perspective.. they look at it and go.. what the fuck is this shit.. How do I turn it off.

Re:Good Changes All Around

[jbolden]

They aren't wolves they just disagree with you. They want features and progress and believe (quite rightly) that the conservatism in the Windows community is holding that progress back.

Re:Good Changes All Around

[Darinbob]

And just when has the business model of ignoring the customer ever worked?

Re:Good Changes All Around

[jbolden]

Many many times. The consumer's interests and the business interests often conflict. In Microsoft's particular case their consumer base has been:

a) reducing their frequency of upgrades for over a decade
b) reducing the ratio of Windows computers to people rapidly as smartphones and tablets move in
c) reducing their spend on the computers they do buy
d) using more free software on the web

Consumers presumably like all 4 of those trends. And Microsoft needs to undermine all 4 of those trends. The consumers are perfectly happy driving Microsoft into the ground selling the same old OS forever at lower and lower prices less and less frequently. Why would Microsoft be interested in helping them achieve that vision?

Re:Good Changes All Around

[g0bshiTe]

Just saw this, new is in no way bad, but taking a powerful desktop or laptop machine and shackling it down to little more than a glorified phone looking OS is not progress.

No Aero then?

[Twinbee]

I was hoping for Aero, or at least the option of Aero. I dislike the 'flatland' look for clarity reasons (distinguishing elements from one another).

Re:No Aero then?

[jones_supa]

It's odd that they removed Aero as it worked fine and looked good for the most part. Just the right amount of eye candy and good performance. I guess they had to create something to match the ugly look of Start screen and Modern UI. :P

Re:No Aero then?

[jader3rd]

I was hoping for Aero, or at least the option of Aero. I dislike the 'flatland' look for clarity reasons (distinguishing elements from one another).

I'm going to have to disagree with your reason there. The flatland brings a lot more distinguishing one element from another than what Aero did with skinnier, translucent/blurry boarders.

Re:No Aero then?

[Dracos]

Aero looked nice at a glance, but it really had no design philosophy beyond "shiny", which hearkens back to XP's default Fisher Price blue plastic. Plus, it was implemented in the least accessible way possible for customizing. Embedding the skin images in a binary? Please. If you set the window border to a reasonable size (1-3 pixels instead of the default... 8?) you'll notice the corners look distorted. And $diety help anyone who wants a color scheme that lacks huge areas of blinding #ffffff white.

Re:No Aero then?

[Billly Gates]

Aero has snap and aero peak.

I use it everyday at work and like to use my GPU for seeing all the dozens of apps opened without switching to take a peak

Re:No Aero then?

[Billly Gates]

Do you have any idea how fast a modern computer is?

I have a nice gpu not utilizing and aero is nice because it frees the cpu and speeds the cpu up as the GPU can take care of its tasks. This is not 1993 anymore

Re:No Aero then?

[readingaccount]

There appears to be some confusion about Aero.

Aero is the composting layer of Windows. That STILL EXISTS in Windows 8 and is what's responsible for the GPU doing all the rendering work. What's removed in the Windows 8 version of Aero is the "glassy" visual characteristic of it. Even though some of the glass and transparency has been removed, I'm certain it's still graphically accelerated underneath to avoid things like tearing that you'd see in say, XP.

Having said that, I agree that Windows 8 looks too flat for its own good. The flat look works fairly well in Android I must admit, but I've gotten accustomed to Windows Vista/7's signature look and don't expect it to be replicated elsewhere, so when that look disappeared in Win 8 it seemed more lifeless than it would have otherwise.

Re:No Aero then?

[jones_supa]

Do you have any idea how fast a modern computer is?

I have a nice gpu not utilizing and aero is nice because it frees the cpu and speeds the cpu up as the GPU can take care of its tasks. This is not 1993 anymore

I wasn't stating otherwise. I agree with you.

Re:No Aero then?

[jones_supa]

Aero is the composting layer of Windows. That STILL EXISTS in Windows 8 and is what's responsible for the GPU doing all the rendering work.

Even this is not completely accurate. Aero is just a theme. The compositing layer is called Desktop Window Manager.

Re:No Aero then?

[readingaccount]

Yup, looks like you're correct. Appreciate the clarification!

Don't be fooled

[Anonymous Coward]

This release is actually just a re-branding of Windows 98 SE. If you previously purchased Windows 98 SE I strongly suggest you use that.

Grid layouts

[Reapy]

I really hate them. It is some modern UI koolaid everyone has been drinking apparently. The multsized grids are really hard for me to locate information. The only thing they seem to be good at is forcing me to scan over advertisements before I find what I want to get to, which might be the point, and the reason I hate them.

Speaking as someone...

[Anonymous Coward]

...who views Microsoft as a corporation with disgust due to all the immoral, illegal and downright reprehensible acts they have committed over the years to maintain their monopoly position, I'd just like to thank them for Windows 8.x, which will probably do more to damage them than the toothless DoJ ever could.

Re:Speaking as someone...

[jones_supa]

I still cringe a bit how they made a really good product with Windows 7 and immediately after that started to go downhill with the next Windows.

Re:Speaking as someone...

[jbolden]

It was a good product. And immediately customers responded by many staying on Windows XP and others drastically cutting their upgrade frequency of desktops. They then started using their phones and tablets as their primary computing devices.

So that Microsoft's reward.

Why would anyone want Windows 8.1?

[kawabago]

Why do people 'want' to be abused by a monopoly that does everything to make your computer cost you more? Where is the value proposition for windows 8.1? There is so much software available for so many different platforms, that Microsoft having 'the' platform no longer matters. Developers no longer need Microsoft. Better open source tools are available. Anyone buying into Windows 8.1 is buying into a niche product. Why would anyone do that?

Re:Why would anyone want Windows 8.1?

[atlasdropperofworlds]

They want it because they can use things like office or the creative suite. They want it because it allows for far cheaper systems than their one main competitor (the other greedy, immoral company), they want it because games are written for it and it runs without issue on their gaming rigs.

Re:Why would anyone want Windows 8.1?

[Anonymous Coward]

You had a few typo's in your post. Here are the corrections:

Windows hardly works.

Windows isn't cheap.

Windows used to have the largest collection of software available for it.

Re:Why would anyone want Windows 8.1?

[EvanED]

As someone who uses Windows at home, there are two main reasons:

1.) Games
2.) I use Linux at work, and it's nice to have my OS piss me off in different ways depending on where I am

Re:Why would anyone want Windows 8.1?

[Spy Handler]

Outside of N. America, most people pirate Windows so yes, it's cheap. (just go to anywhere in Asia or Africa and try to find a computer running a legit copy of Windows)

Re:Why would anyone want Windows 8.1?

[DogDude]

It's also cheap to use. No need for an expensive Unix person to maintain.

Re:Why would anyone want Windows 8.1?

[stanlyb]

Windows still has the largest collection of software. Oh, you mean "apps" (whatever that means)? Man, naming one feature as a "app" does not count as a program, you know it, right?

Re:Why would anyone want Windows 8.1?

[JDG1980]

Better open source tools are available.

No, they aren't. Really. Stop drinking the Kool-Aid. I *wish* that what you were saying is true, but it isn't.

As long as the FOSS movement keeps lying to itself by pretending that GIMP is as good as Photoshop and LibreOffice is as good as MS Office, we won't get applications that really are competitive. And as long as the Linux desktop movement is dominated by CLI-loving misanthropes and X11 "network transparency" obsessives, Linux on the desktop will continue to be a joke.

GIMP is not even close to being competitive with Photoshop and it probably never will be. A decent Photoshop competitor would have to be written from scratch; there's nothing in GIMP worth saving. LibreOffice isn't as good as MS Office, if only because it can't run the collections of hacked-together VBA scripts that 90% of the workplaces in America depend upon. And no Linux desktop has font rendering worth a damn.

Re:Why would anyone want Windows 8.1?

[jones_supa]

Microsoft Office is certainly the biggest thing. I mean, you can game on consoles now and various games are coming to Linux through Steam. But Office is required very often at the workplace and the education world and, products like LibreOffice do still not offer good enough real-world compatibility. Even the official Mac version of Office is not as punchy as the real McCoy. You can do many of the traditional tasks even on cheap Android tablets these days, but Office is the last big island which still keeps people quite nicely glued to Windows.

Re:Why would anyone want Windows 8.1?

[DrGamez]

Did you know that if you steal most things, they are free?

Re:Why would anyone want Windows 8.1?

[Vanderhoth]

Sure, instead we have dozens of cheap incompetent low level IT staff, that cost tipple one expensive Unix person, that think because they've used windows since they were born in the early 90's they're experts, but can't fix anything.

Re:Why would anyone want Windows 8.1?

[atlasdropperofworlds]

Perhaps you're not aware, but there is a large PC gaming market that is not interested in consoles, the main reason being something akin to "Mouse and keyboard pwn controllers". Also, these people can use their PC as their hotrod, and build and configure it to suit their desires or needs, while being able to upgrade it later. Consoles are closed-down, underpowered, highly limited gaming platforms. As for the games coming out for linux, so far that's very limited. However, if (hopefully) on day all games are running on Linux, watch as the PC gaming community just stops buying those OEM copies of windows. They'll love that because it saves money on one item that for them is just a system component, and it could make up the difference between a mid and high-end GPU.

Re:Why would anyone want Windows 8.1?

[DogDude]

Sounds like your company has some serious problems. It shouldn't take dozens of Windows people to administer the same number of computers that one Unix guy can administer.

Re:Why would anyone want Windows 8.1?

[Dracos]

LibreOffice is just as good as Office for 90% of tasks. GIMP, on the other hand, is still a dystopian nightmare compared to Photoshop, for one main reason: separate windows for everything.

Re:Why would anyone want Windows 8.1?

[SoCalChris]

Windows is cheap. The myriad of other servers, and their licenses that businesses require aren't cheap.

Re:Why would anyone want Windows 8.1?

[smash]

Office 2010 and 2013 still run (and will run) on Windows 7.

Re:Why would anyone want Windows 8.1?

[smash]

Win32 works. Win32 is cheap. Win32 has the largest collection of software available for it. Metro does not.

Re:Why would anyone want Windows 8.1?

[smash]

Even if you pay, it is relatively cheap when you consider the TCO involved with centralised authentication, software availability, support availability, etc.

Even a relatively green guy can set up a multiple site, single sign on Windows domain. Linux? Lol. There is a lot more to the OS "cost" than the per copy licensing fee. And I say that as a unix guy - there are environments where I use and love unix. Corporate desktop, for end users is not one of those places.

Re:Why would anyone want Windows 8.1?

[smash]

That. We have 650 desktops spread over 40-50 sites and get by with a couple of helpdesk guys. Windows 7 clients.

Re:Why would anyone want Windows 8.1?

[jbolden]

Open / Libre office is pretty close to taking the bottom 20%. The top 50% needs stuff like Documentum and Dynamics integration and they aren't even close.

More or less there is no more classic Linux desktop movement. The funding sources have died out. Linux got as far as it is going to go, 3rd place. Where Linux is exciting is Android taking over and moving into desktops.

And thus it ain't gonna be GIMP that replaces photoshop but Instagram's 2025 release.

Can you upgrade from preview to final later?

[jfdavis668]

or do you have to wipe the machine clean to install the actual Windows 8.1?

Re:Can you upgrade from preview to final later?

[cbhacking]

This is almost always something you can override pretty easily (copy the installer to writable media, change a config file that controls accepted upgrade configurations) but then you're even further off into unsupported-land than a normal in-place upgrade (which MS technically supports, but which nobody in the industry including any MS engineer I've ever spoken to really recommends).

Re:Can you upgrade from preview to final later?

[atlasdropperofworlds]

It's not quite that bad. You'll be able to upgrade from RTM to final in-place, but you'll have to reinstall all your apps and desktop applications. If you just wait until the final release, you won't have to reinstall anything. http://www.tomshardware.com/news/Windows-8.1-Windows-RT-Public-Preview-TechED-Michael-Niehaus,22985.html

Re:Can you upgrade from preview to final later?

[wmac1]

This is an "UPDATE" to windows 8. It therefore means you "update" your existing windows 8.

Unless you don't have Windows 8. Then you will install an already updated software (Just like Windows XP SP3 dvd).

Re:Can you upgrade from preview to final later?

[jones_supa]

His actual question in the title was "Can you upgrade from preview to final later?"

So how does it work?

[fuzzyfuzzyfungus]

Can anybody find anything useful on how exactly this 'driver model' works? Microsoft's page could hardly be less informative.

What's the intermediate format that software interacts with to define the print job before sending it off? What interface does the device-specific driver interact with, etc, etc?

Obviously, not having 3d printers be handled entirely by a specific application is a noble goal; but there are, even after years and years of polishing and development, some truly horrible things living in the 2d printing process. What can we expect from the details of the 3d-print path?

Standard Driver for 3D printers

[Guano_Jim]

That's pretty cool. One of the things that needs to happen for 3D printing to become commonplace is to take it out of the realm of specialized software and just make it a mundane action one does with a computer.

Click, print. Heads up Apple, Microsoft is preparing to drink your milkshake on this one.

Re:Standard Driver for 3D printers

[freeze128]

Have you seen this?

Just what we need! Microsoft wedges themselves into the 3D printing chain and then they can start to block certain things from being printed.

Re:Standard Driver for 3D printers

[readingaccount]

What about Linux? Are 3D printers going to avoid having Linux support because it's easier to target an API supplied in Windows? I don't disparage Microsoft for creating the API - I'm just concerned about the flow-on effects.

Still no Start Menu - Pass!

[Chas]

Sorry, but until I'm able to completely deactivate the context-destroying, time and scren real-estate wasting Start Screen altogether, Windows 8 (sans 3rd party Start Menu add-ons), is nothing more than a toy.

Yes, I understand that menus are an creeping problem when adding functionality.
Yes, I understand that they're limited when implementing touch interfaces.

I DON'T GIVE A SHIT!

I don't use touch interfaces on anything larger than my phone, and even then, my current phone has a fallback to a physical keyboard. I have no use for them on a desktop or even a laptop. NONE.
I'm concerned about productivity FULL STOP. A menu system enables me to do more, faster. Especially with keyboard shortcuts (many of which were completely annihilated when they removed menus altogether in 8).
Managing systems remotely with the Win8/Server2012 interface is a complete pain in the balls, as the "hot corner" functionality for pulling up the various charms bars and other crap have a strong tendency to just not work, or work extremely sporadically in remote management situations. Yes yes. I could learn all the goofy new keyboard shortcuts. A menu system would still be more straightforward and functional.

Microsoft is acting like a kid who's been told to clean his room.
They've basically put it off as long as they can.
Now they're just going to kick some stuff under the bed and other general half-assery and hope it's sufficient.

It isn't. Period.

Re:Still no Start Menu - Pass!

[cbhacking]

If you're concerned about productivity "FULL STOP", why the fuck are you opening programs using a mouse anyhow? Win key -> type a few letters of a program name -> Enter, and you can launch anything on the system faster than you can find the item you want even in the Most Commonly Used section of the Start menu. If you have menu animations turned on (which I'm guessing you don't, but most people do) you can be launching a program before the menu finishes drawing itself.

This has existed since Vista. It took a step back in Win8, when "Apps" and "Settings" Start search results were segregated, but it was still usable there. On 8.1 they're integrated again. If you're still launching programs with the mouse and yet claiming you're only concerned about productivity and that's it, you're frankly a liar. You're just whining They Changed It And I Don't Like It like so many other people.

Alternatively, set keyboard shortcuts (possible since at least Windows 2000, still possible on Win8) for the programs you use most (for example, Ctrl+Alt+I to launch your favorite web browser, Alt+Shift+C to launch your development environment, etc. and whatever). That's faster still, once you memorize them, although it won't work on other peoples' computers.

Re:Still no Start Menu - Pass!

[CCarrot]

Sorry, but until I'm able to completely deactivate the context-destroying, time and scren real-estate wasting Start Screen altogether, Windows 8 (sans 3rd party Start Menu add-ons), is nothing more than a toy.

Yes, I understand that menus are an creeping problem when adding functionality.
Yes, I understand that they're limited when implementing touch interfaces.

I DON'T GIVE A SHIT!

I don't use touch interfaces on anything larger than my phone, and even then, my current phone has a fallback to a physical keyboard. I have no use for them on a desktop or even a laptop. NONE.
I'm concerned about productivity FULL STOP. A menu system enables me to do more, faster. Especially with keyboard shortcuts (many of which were completely annihilated when they removed menus altogether in 8).
Managing systems remotely with the Win8/Server2012 interface is a complete pain in the balls, as the "hot corner" functionality for pulling up the various charms bars and other crap have a strong tendency to just not work, or work extremely sporadically in remote management situations. Yes yes. I could learn all the goofy new keyboard shortcuts. A menu system would still be more straightforward and functional.

Microsoft is acting like a kid who's been told to clean his room.
They've basically put it off as long as they can.
Now they're just going to kick some stuff under the bed and other general half-assery and hope it's sufficient.

It isn't. Period.

Oh for some mod points...this this, a million times THIS!

Re:Still no Start Menu - Pass!

[CCarrot]

If you're concerned about productivity "FULL STOP", why the fuck are you opening programs using a mouse anyhow? Win key -> type a few letters of a program name -> Enter, and you can launch anything on the system faster than you can find the item you want even in the Most Commonly Used section of the Start menu. If you have menu animations turned on (which I'm guessing you don't, but most people do) you can be launching a program before the menu finishes drawing itself.

This has existed since Vista. It took a step back in Win8, when "Apps" and "Settings" Start search results were segregated, but it was still usable there. On 8.1 they're integrated again. If you're still launching programs with the mouse and yet claiming you're only concerned about productivity and that's it, you're frankly a liar. You're just whining They Changed It And I Don't Like It like so many other people.

Alternatively, set keyboard shortcuts (possible since at least Windows 2000, still possible on Win8) for the programs you use most (for example, Ctrl+Alt+I to launch your favorite web browser, Alt+Shift+C to launch your development environment, etc. and whatever). That's faster still, once you memorize them, although it won't work on other peoples' computers.

Yes, let's discuss working with other people's computers, shall we?

You know what's installed on your computer. My parents (and some other family members), on the other hand, don't. Trying to provide the obligatory phone support for them with a Windows 8 interface was, shall we say, a wee bit frustrating on both sides of the conversation.

"No, Dad, just drag your finger onto the touchpad from the corner. Nothing? Maybe you were too fast, try again a bit slower...oh, you think you opened something by accident? *sigh* Okay, what does the screen in front of you look like now? Hmm, what color is the background? Okay, lets try that Alt-F4 thing again, but remember, hold down the alt key and only press the F4 key once this time...you did it? You're back at the screen with the boxes now? Yes, you can let the alt key go..." etc., etc., etc... Until I installed ClassicShell on their computer, that is, now they (and I) love it :o)

Re:Still no Start Menu - Pass!

[Nefarious Wheel]

Times a million. Chas just won the entire Internet with that post.

Re:Still no Start Menu - Pass!

[CCarrot]

Times a million. Chas just won the entire Internet with that post.

The internet plus a lifetime supply of coffee, so he can read all of it! Way to go, Chas! :o)

Re:Still no Start Menu - Pass!

[jbolden]

Let me make a suggestion for your tech support needs: http://www.teamviewer.com/en/index.aspx

It has saved me tons of frustration.

Re:Still no Start Menu - Pass!

[CCarrot]

Let me make a suggestion for your tech support needs: http://www.teamviewer.com/en/index.aspx

It has saved me tons of frustration.

Thanks! Not much help when I'm trying to troubleshoot their network connection, however...which, unfortunately, seems to constantly flake out on them.

Re:Still no Start Menu - Pass!

[jbolden]

True. But then you should use the command line and just have them use their phone and/or tell them what to type. The GUI just gets in the way.

Good, bad, and ugly

[JDG1980]

The good:

• The Start button is available again.
• Hot corners can be turned off.
• You can now boot straight to the desktop.
• The context menu for the Start button now has shutdown options.
• High-DPI support is supposed to be better now (though third-party developers will still figure out ways to break this).

The bad:

• The real start menu still isn't back, and the Metro start screen is nowhere near as good – it's more obtrusive and less functional.
• The window titlebar text is still centered, with no supported way to put it back to left-justified. For those of us who have been using Windows for years, this is a very annoying change since it breaks the muscle memory of our eyes. When I've tried Windows 8, I always find myself looking at the wrong place to see a window title.
• There's still no supported way to get back the Aero theme. I understand why people with tablets or low-powered laptops might want an interface that doesn't stress the GPU as much, but why should desktop users have to suffer through something that looks like it's straight out of 1995? The Windows 8 theme is the UI equivalent of brutalism – those ugly bare concrete buildings that architects were putting up in the 1970s.

The ugly:

• Metro. Or, as I call it, the Knots Landing user interface. Seriously, you shouldn't be looking to the theme songs of 1980s soap operas as your inspiration for UI design...

Re:Good, bad, and ugly

[GrBear]

Knots landing.. pft.. you kids these days.

It's The Brady Bunch UI.

Now get off my lawn!

Re:Good, bad, and ugly

[UnknownSoldier]

> High-DPI support is supposed to be better now

Can you _actually_ select a percentage LESS then 100 % now or does Microsoft still not get it ?

Re:Good, bad, and ugly

[monkeyatthekeyboard]

I came up with this powershell bit one day after switching over and finding the center text annoying as well. Hokey as all heck.

$CmdWindowProperties = (Get-Host).UI.RawUI
$CmdWindowProperties.WindowTitle = " Forced left-justified title.".PadRight(1023)

The flat borders suck as well as the default massive thickness of window borders. "Tiny Windows Borders" from WinAero fixes that, for free even.

+1 for the Knots Landing ref.

Re:Good, bad, and ugly

[Myria]

The window titlebar text is still centered, with no supported way to put it back to left-justified. For those of us who have been using Windows for years, this is a very annoying change since it breaks the muscle memory of our eyes. When I've tried Windows 8, I always find myself looking at the wrong place to see a window title.

That depends on how long you've been using Windows. =) Windows 95 was the first Windows version that had window titles on the top left rather than the top center.

It's sad, but the Metro motif is being forced on other unrelated Microsoft software departments that don't actually use Metro. For example, Visual Studio 2012 recolored the 2010 UI to meet the company's internal Metro directive, and it looks fucking horrible. It can be difficult to see where UI elements begin and end. They even made the menu bar's options uppercase for some stupid Metro aesthetic reason.

Re:Good, bad, and ugly

[turp182]

The title bar being centered destroys any concept of muscle memory.

Left justified titles always start in the same location of a window.

Center justified tiles start in various locations based on the name of the application, and even for the same application can vary if the title shows a document name. There can be no muscle memory as each window requires a scan of the title bar to find the beginning of the title.

Terrible. There should at least be an option to left justify window titles. And left justified should be the default, as it has always been.

I used Windows 8 for three weeks on my wife's new laptop, until she asked to be upgraded to Windows 7... I didn't like it either.

Still don't want...

[Bearhouse]

Well, in my usual attempt to stay current despite my greying neckbeard, I was prepared to tryout this regardless of the hatestorm regarding the new UI. Hell, maybe I could work around that in exchange for the alleged increased performance?

Downloaded the "upgrade assistant" which helpfully informed me that my nicely-tuned Windows 7 PCs (both 32 and 64 bit) would require shitloads of work, (some hardware 'might not work' and several screenfuls of software would 'not function' or 'require an upgrade').

Oh yes, and all of this for the modest sum of Euros 250-plus...
Per PC.

So, no thanks...

(I keeping trying to "like" the latest versions of Linux too - Mint is OK- but am sticking with BSD for my severs...maybe I'm not hip enough, or maybe I've finally realised there's more to life than fucking around with stuff when what you have works fine.)

Re:Still don't want...

[JDG1980]

Luckily Windows 7 EOL isn't until 2015.

Windows 7 extended support (i.e. security patches) continues until Jan. 14, 2020. (source)

Re:Still don't want...

[readingaccount]

or maybe I've finally realised there's more to life than fucking around with stuff when what you have works fine

Sometimes it's necessary for people to fuck around with something that works fine, if only because it can be made better. Heck, Windows 7 works fine for me, but I fuck around with Linux because I want to ensure I have a parachute of sorts if/when Microsoft and Windows become too undesirable to deal with anymore. I might not be ready to jump just yet, but I fuck around with it so I know how things work once I'm ready to pull the trigger.

Start8 - saved my parents...

[jzarling]

My parents bought a Win8 AIO monstrosity, it was nightly support calls.
I bought them a copy of Start8 and showed them how to get to the desktop - now all is better.

Re:Start8 - saved my parents...

[jzarling]

bought it before the issues with the Win8 task bar was fixed.

Start button?

[Anonymous Coward]

Does anyone here actually use the start button/start menu still? The new start menu is much better. In my months of using it I have never once thought 'Windows 7 is WAY better.'
Also the 'start button' was never missing. It was just invisible. Can some one explain the difference between 'putting your mouse in the bottom left corner and clicking' and 'putting the mouse in the bottom left corner and clicking?'

Re:Start button?

[Richy_T]

To be fair, the start menu was never that great. It was just better than what came before and went through a couple of improvements (and several worsenings) over its lifetime.

What it was though was better than not having it there at all.

And no, this making the less useful "start button" visual is not much of an improvement (though it will be for some).

Re:Start button?

[EvanED]

To be fair, the start menu was never that great. It was just better than what came before and went through a couple of improvements (and several worsenings) over its lifetime.

Actually I'm one of those people who think that it never went through a worsening, at least until now. There were certain aspects that I don't like about some of the changes (e.g. with Vista & 7 it's harder to browse because of the limited size), but I think each of the changes was a significant plus overall. There haven't even been all that many changes... The most controversial I would guess would be with XP, but I really liked even that because I loved the the automatically-maintaned frequently-used programs list; XP was when I started to back off on keeping my start menu organized sanely, and with Vista I stopped entirely.

What would you consider one of the worsenings? (Other than metro.)

Re:Start button?

[Richy_T]

Mostly the auto-hiding of certain menu items. The frequently used program list was a much better take on that but was honestly only about 50% of what it should have been (though that could be maintained manually to a degree). The other one was removal of Recent Documents. I think that could be reenabled but I don't recall how. None of these are particularly major though.

who needs Windows 8.1?

[amoeba1911]

You don't need Windows 8.1 to fix the problems in Windows 8.
What you need is three programs:

• Start8: Gets rid of the metro start screen, mouse sticking corners, restores a fully functional Windows 7 start menu. http://www.stardock.com/products/start8/
• WindowBlinds: Customize the look of the OS to get rid of the metro styles and brings back rounded corners on windows. http://www.stardock.com/products/windowblinds/
• ModernMix: Allows you to run the "full screen" parts of Windows 8 in windows. http://www.stardock.com/products/modernmix/

I had to get Windows 8 for work and there wasn't much choice. I struggled with it until I found those. I don't need Windows 8.1, Microsoft can go to hell.

Re:who needs Windows 8.1?

[JDG1980]

I've heard lots of good things about Start8. As for WindowBlinds, support for Windows 8 was only added quite recently. What I'd like to know is if it lets you left-justify the window title (as was the case by default in all other versions of Windows going back to Win95). I can live without Aero if I have to, but the centered window titles completely mess me up.

Re:who needs Windows 8.1?

[Pausanias]

Is there a tweak that brings back Aero?

Re:who needs Windows 8.1?

[amoeba1911]

WindowBlinds' support for Windows 8 was added only a few weeks ago, and it's not that great. Most of the existing skins on the download page are broken for the "file copy" window of Windows 8, and some are broken in other ways. There are about 4 skins I found that actually work, but I think all 4 of them are better looking than Windows 8.

Unfortunately the window title stays centered... just like Windows 3.11. I think Windows 8 is supposed to be a throw-back to remind us how crappy Windows 3.11 was, and that we should be lucky Windows 7 doesn't look like that... at least in Windows 3.11 you could actually change title bar text color... Windows 8 you're stuck with black. Argh... stupid Microsoft.

Re:who needs Windows 8.1?

[amoeba1911]

Yes, one of the skins that comes with Windowblinds is Aero. Combined with Start8, you can make Windows 8 look identical to Windows 7 --- except for window title bar text which always stays centered.

Click

[Impy the Impiuos Imp]

It occurs to me the Quicklaunch Bar is kind of like a tiny tile area -- I have about 2 dozen programs and reference documents there, move mouse down to hidden task bar, it pops up, boom.

The problem with tiles is the combination of tiny screens and relatively giant icons aka tiles to press with not a mouse but giant fumble fingers adds a multiplicative effect to ugliness. You are boosting clickee size while shrinking room for arrays of clickies.

Re:Games are Cross platform

[EvanED]

"Increasingly", true, and I do try to support cross-platform games and will do so even more in the future, even if I primarily or only play on Windows. But it's still a looong way off from being the norm unless you're willing to restrict your game choices a lot.

Wine would open up a lot of options, but I don't really feel like messing around with it when I can just run Windows and be done with things, especially considering that some of the games I play aren't even rated all that highly on the appdb.

Mail and music?

[Deep Esophagus]

Seriously? Why on earth would anybody consider those an intrinsic part of the operating system? If I want to access mail from my computer, I either pull up an application that handles mail (for POP3) or a web browser. If I want to play or edit or do whatever with music, I install an application designed to do those things.

How about if my operating system just sticks to the job of system operations?

Re:Mail and music?

[ljw1004]

They're not an intrinsic part. They're just apps that you can uninstall/reinstall from the Store if you want.

Re:Mail and music?

[jbolden]

Seriously? Why on earth would anybody consider those an intrinsic part of the operating system?

Because more or less 100% of the people who choose operating systems do so for the rich ecosystem not just for the kernel & driver support. Operating systems have been getting thicker for decades and the idea of presenting basic core utilities for productive use is fairly standard.

Update description tampered?

[jones_supa]

Have a look at the Windows 8.1 Preview thread at Reddit and over there NormalDefault's comment with the image link "Is THIS normal?" It seems that at some point the description of the update in Windows Store has been modified to look like leetspeak by somebody. Was this a prank by somebody inside the company or was the server cracked, I don't know.

Re:Update description tampered?

[jones_supa]

I got a response there: "It's called pseudoloc! It's what Microsoft uses to test localization. The biggest problem for localization is that sometimes it's hard-coded to be english (and obviously that's hard to detect for english speakers). To check for that, they put everything in pseudoloc (similar to leetspeak, as you say) - the idea being that if you're running in pseudoloc and you find something in plain english, it must be hardcoded and thus, a bug."

So maybe it's legit after all. Freaked me slightly anyway.

I'll wait for 8.11

[WillgasM]

I need my workgroups.

Spoilers

[DrGamez]

It really hasn't changed.

It truly is just a ".1" update. This update is made to get people to sign up with a Microsoft account (it's a pain to set up Windows 8 without one starting with 8.1) to get it via the store.

Microsoft considers desktop applications obsolete

[Myria]

It's pretty clear that Microsoft considers desktop applications - and the accompanying Win32 API - to be obsolete. Windows 8 effectively is telling developers "my way or the highway", but seriously, people generally dislike Metro applications. Could you imagine PhotoShop having to be a Metro application?

Microsoft Windows 8 and 8.1 should have been renamed Microsoft Window.

The Start screen, even in 8.1, is effectively keyboard-based for me. I run programs in 8 by hitting control-escape to bring up the Start screen, then start typing the name of the program I want. To search through the icons is just about impossible.

Re:Games are Cross platform

[spire3661]

I have a gaming rig with swappable SSD bay(i like the 'cartridge' feel of it). I have both Ubuntu Steam Linux and win 7 OS on different SSDs.

The Ubuntu setup is perfect, it installed with no problem from USB, and all hardware works down to on-board bluetooth (Asus P8Z77-I + 570 GTX). I maintain the Linux setup for gaming because i really want it to succeed, but i almost always PLAY on my Win 7 install.

TF2 plays flawlessly, but the mouse is a bit off, which i figure is natural in cross-platform translation, considering how attuned i am to TF2 on Win7.

Lipstick on a Pig

[Luthair]

Unfortunately these are largely cosmetic changes and won't fix what many users (particularly those of us found on slashdot) actually have an issue with. There are a few concessions to regular users who need visual hints like a start button, however for the power user virtually everything wrong with Windows 8 is wrong with Windows 8.1. An OS designed for touch devices shoehorned onto everything in a vain attempt to make users familiar with it so they'll choose Microsoft for the phone and tablet purchases.

Not to mention they're introducing a search behaviour which sends terms out to the Internet, just like Canonical has done with Ubuntu. I'm surprised about the lack of outcry about the privacy implications.

Now that I've angered the Windows-8 fanbase I'll irritate everyone else - unfortunately in my estimation the only desktop alternative is KDE while still clunky it is superior to OSX (design predicated on a stupid user), Unity (OSX clone), Gnome (also predicated on a dumb user) while the remainder are missing modern features.

Re:Lipstick on a Pig

[Secret Agent Man]

I dunno if this is possible in Canoical, but in Windows 8.1 you can disable the Internet-searching quite easily. This could be a potential explanation for the lack of outcry.

Re:Lipstick on a Pig

[wonkey_monkey]

Now that I've angered the Windows-8 fanbase

I wouldn't worry about him.

Icon jungle

[jones_supa]

I hate this trend with Windows 8 and Unity where instead of having your apps and files nicely organized in their respective folders, you have this chaotic jumble of icons which you have to be searching through all the time.

Re:Requirements

[DrGamez]

If you have a network connection, you MUST connect your log-in with a Microsoft account. There is no option to avoid doing this short of unplugging your landline or refusing to connect to a wifi point during setup.

I can imagine the "net required" aspect is coming in Windows Red.

Why announce it

[andrewa]

if it's not yet available to the general public? I got a message stating that the ISOs are not yet available when just going to the MSDN site. I have an MSDN subscription for OS & Dev tools, and was able to download it. Seems like a strange thing to make a public announcement and then be told it's not *actually* ready for public download yet.

Re:Why announce it

[Just Some Guy]

Because Apple just announced Mavericks and iOS 7. Microsoft is having their regularly scheduled "me too!" moment.

Windows 8.1 is a nice attempt..

[GrBear]

Windows 8.1 is a nice attempt to polish a turd, but it's going to take more than hanging an air freshener off this corpse to make it live once again.

Re:Windows 8.1 is a nice attempt..

[MTEK]

8.1 is like eating glitter and taking a laxative. A quick release with questionable improvements.

Re:Windows 8.1 is a nice attempt..

[GrBear]

He already did.. he has an iMac on his desk now and he couldn't be happier.

app store only = antitrust issues

[Joe_Dragon]

app store only = antitrust issues

MS better have built in side loading of metro apps in 8.1 with an easy on / off switch.

Re:But still

[crutchy]

the start menu wouldn't have saved Windows 8... it was always still infected out-of-the-box by the W64/Microsoft virus

Re:Still dont care.

[DrGamez]

This is why I am so saddened over Windows 8.
I use it (8.1) at work (full disclosure: Microsoft), and I use Windows 7 at home.

There is literally nothing in Windows 8 that improves my Windows/OS experience in any way.

Perhaps literally is too strong, I enjoy the new Task Manager and File Transfer dialogues. Nothing improves my workflow, and while faster boot times are nice, a SSD managed to do the same thing without trying to lock my OS into a Microsoft account.

Re:Requirements

[Anonymous Coward]

If you have a network connection, you MUST connect your log-in with a Microsoft account. There is no option to avoid doing this short of unplugging your landline or refusing to connect to a wifi point during setup.

I can imagine the "net required" aspect is coming in Windows Red.

Quote from MS website for anyone who cares:

"In order to use Windows 8.1 Preview you must sign in to your PC with a Microsoft account. The option to create a local account will be made available at the final release of Windows 8.1. "

Let me guess

[flimflammer]

Visual Studio 2013 won't work on Windows 7. Calling it right now.

What didn't changed

[gmuslera]

Same company behind. Fixing bugs will be expressely delayed until even the NSA actively exploits them. But i suppose that the world need an updated version of the russian roulette for this century.

not ready yet

[a2wflc]

Hosed my machine. The usb system restore I made before I started won't work (boots but can't recover). Resinstalling now. 20+ years installing from NT to Windows 8 and this is the first time I remember that I haven't been able to recover from a command prompt (which I can get now) or the restore media (which I have) or a live cd. I have a small SSD for c: with junction points to other drives for some of the bigger directories (users, program files, etc) Maybe it didn't like that.

Calling people Fanboys

[tuppe666]

tries to tell people like me that GIMP is just as good as PhotoShop, LibreOffice is just as good as MS Office

Sorry sweetness not sure of relevance Gimp is better than Photoshop http://www.adobe.com/products/catalog/software._sl_id-contentfilter_sl_catalog_sl_software_sl_photoshopcc.html which now costs $20 a month for its creative cloud version, Gimp is free...for me Gimp is a no brainer. I began using it as a consultant because I could install it on companies Desktop machines without License issues 15 years ago. I now run it from a pen drive.

LibreOffice is better than Office because the version I think I want is http://office.microsoft.com/en-us/business/office-365-small-business-premium-office-online-FX103037625.aspx which costs me $12.50 a month Its a little cheaper if I didn't need access.

What is frightening is both these companies(Adobe and Microsoft) are pushing me towards cloud(sic) versions of their products. Personally I these have no advantages but have a $32.50 Disadvantage...and have to use a always on-online DRM version.(ironically both should work on android in future or be avoided if they don't). think I'm the only one...Office launched on ios with a $100 a year fee for crippled version...nobody cared. its like its not happened.

This argument is nothing to do with Metro...which is shift in the Desktop interface to tablet one by Microsoft, in an poor attempt to convert its Desktop Monopoly into a Mobile one (say it with me ecosystem..cringe), and its a massive failure...they are installing it alongside Android now see what the article is about. This is nothing to do with comparing open source programs with Adobe and Microsoft equivalent those who have learnt to use them experience massive cost savings and smugness, although thanks for the Nostalgia.

GUI vs CLI

[tuppe666]

If I want to launch the notepad, it's Start button, type 'Cal' and hit return. Boom. Why do I need a hierarchical menu to do that?

Folders suck.

If I want an editor I just type vi. Boom. Why do I even need a mouse?

I never thought I would see the day when Microsoft Apologists were advocating the GUI over the CLI, but Metro...a touch...no a Desklet interface...would finally push then to this madness.

wrong wrong wrong again

[slashmydots]

I couldn't give less of a crap about the stupid start button. What I want is the start menu. That, they did not add.

Gimp Has Single Window Interface

[tuppe666]

LibreOffice is just as good as Office for 90% of tasks. GIMP, on the other hand, is still a dystopian nightmare compared to Photoshop, for one main reason: separate windows for everything.

Except Gimp has had a single window mode since 2.8 introduces an optional single-window mode these are the release notes http://www.gimp.org/release-notes/gimp-2.8.html here is ars reviewing it http://arstechnica.com/business/2012/05/hands-on-testing-the-gimp-28-and-its-new-single-window-interface/ the latest version of Gimp was released on Just a week ago and is 2.8.6 http://www.gimp.org/.

Although Multiple windows not that big a deal...was never a problem for me on the Mac version of photoshop.

Still no Start Menu

[Trogre]

So they've put the Start button back, but with no menu behind it. Is this actually what any of their users asked for?

Also, have they brought back the ability to select a logon domain via drop-down box instead of the god-awful DOMAIN/USERNAME combination that currently needs to be TYPED into the username box. How about the option to confirm on Shutdown/Reboot? Sure us uber-geeks who never mis-click won't need it but the vast majority of users are, almost by definition, not uber-geeks.

It's nonsense like this that makes me think MS really have given up on the enterprise.

Don't forget IE11 with WebGL

[elabs]

There were many more things announced today at BUILD than just those. IE11 was one of the most impressive revelations. Not only does it support WebGL and streaming video, it does that both in a browser and in an app. Very cool

You no speaka da engrish

[Taantric]

So apparently according to Microsoft English-speaking world consists only of those who choose en-US as their system language, anyone else does not matter. Sigh...

I have to say this about Microsoft - they have amazing capacity to piss off their customers. Not just piss off but at a deep visceral level of hate.

MS shills are pretty much a known fact

[Camael]

Its pretty much a known fact that MS employs shills to hawk their products online. Only, they don't call it shilling, they call it Technology Evangelism.

Fascinating read.

Re:MS shills are pretty much a known fact

[rtb61]

However M$ should have realised the 'desktop' and notebook market is becoming pretty much what is 10 to 15 years ago. The 'majority' of computer users, just are not using a desktop at anywhere near it's design power or flexability, they will be content on big screen TV shininess, mobile phone flashiness and of course tablet media and game consumption.

Those desktop users, now a technical minority in the computer market, still represent the same number of users that defined the bulk of the market 10 to 15 years ago, that set the pace for software and hardware choices. Ignore them to chase the cheetos crowd at your peril, the cheetos crowd was never ever really destined to use desktops, except in that interim stage over the last decade, as consumer level computer 'appliances' took the lead.

Some nice improvements in the preview

[Virtucon]

I installed it today and there were a few annoyances/pleasant surprises even after reading the warnings:

1) It wipes out and replaces your driver profiles back to OEM after upgrading. You'll need to re-install any OEM video drivers etc. In my case my Dual SLI configuration didn't work very well until after I had re-installed/restored my configuration prior to the upgrade.
2) The upgrade is an endless series of "almost ready" and "getting ready" and "... we're doing this... " and ... If you plan on installing this go get some coffee or a few twinkies because it'll be awhile.
3) All of the new features promised are there, the tile layout is a bit more friendly but I'm sure I'll hit on a few of the other things.
4) A/V software gets kicked to the curb. Working with my A/V vendor now on the nice new dialog that pops up complaining about incompatible software, that you can't get around even with the Compatibility Assistant.
5) The Fish is back. I'm not sure if I like the "Mr. Limpett" fish all that much. I'm eradicating it after this post.
6) Classic Shell still works, so I have my start button context menu.

It's really simple...

[dell623]

In Windows 7, I press the start button on the keyboard, type printers, and get a link to devices and printers and a list of printers. In Windows 8 it brings me to the goddam metro view and doesn't give the same results. Similarly, in 7, I want disk management, I type it and it shows up in results. Windows 8 search doesn't work the same way, and it shows results in the horrible Metro UI that suddenly covers the whole screen. I can't think of any explanation for why the type and find anything search doesn't work the same way in Windows 8 and it's a pain to find the right place to change any setting.

They improved all the things I dont use!

[citizenr]

>tile-based Start screen has gotten more flexible, with new smaller and larger tile options. Windows 8.1 also drastically improves built-in search, SkyDrive cloud
>syncing, mail and Microsoft Music.

Incidentally those are all the things I disabled/deleted/replaced 2 minutes after installing Win8.

Is there any way to desactivate the start buttom?

[boldsoon]

Seriously, I don't want a buttom. Why would I want a buttom that does what the same place does when you click it, just without a buttom?

Microsoft Account

[sirber]

During the install, you have no choice but to log in with a microsoft account. FAIL

Re:Windows 8 is for the future, not for today

[neminem]

I dunno why you can't... I "consume and browse" just freaking fine on my Win7 desktop with no Metro. Why would I "need two different devices"??

I really hope in 1-2 years I won't have a touch screen. If touch screens are the future, that's a pretty crappy future.

The new start menu was enough for me to flush...

[herojig]

The new start menu was enough for me to flush Classic Shell, and be "trained" into the new way, the metro way. All it means is that you are now farther away from a bigger start menu, if you just boot straight to the desktop, as you do. I run it on an iMac with dual monitors, and it's blazing fast as a VMWare image. The only thing is that some frameworks are not supported yet, so apps like Mindjet 2012 won't install. Besides that, a nice update. love it.

Re:Microsoft considers desktop applications obsole

[jbolden]

Could you imagine PhotoShop having to be a Metro application?

Why not? You have a light photo editing program that uses the touch metro interface and works on your phone. That scales up to a more serious applications for a tablet. On a full fledged interface it starts to demand things like a drawing pad and a large screen presenting complex menus and utilizing all sorts of gestures + multiple input devices. That sounds like a huge improvement over today's photoshop.

And I should mention kinda the direction that Apple has been moving in with iPhoto and Aperture.

Re:Search

[jbolden]

Why do we need so blasted many indexing programs? And why do they need to runh so frequently?

Because conservatives 7 years ago, when Longhorn was becoming Vista, whined about the move to a database filesystem and so you don't have automatic indexing that only modifies indexes on file change. We need a database filesystem but we are stuck with a filesystem that is really good for for harddrives organized kinda like large floppies.

This is only the preview version anyway

[Vince6791]

The win+pageUp or pageDown to move the metro between 2 screens no longer works. I can't grab the metro with the mouse and drag it to the other screen anymore as well.

When windows 8 starts up i get the metro on first screen but second screen is a blank solid color no more taskbar desktop, i have to hit desktop tile to get both desktop taskbar on both screens, and then i can get metro on one screen and taskbar on second.

When installing applications for the first time windows no longer automatically pins the main program to the metro you have to scroll down on second page of metro and look through all that mess to find your program and pin it to the 1st page metro.

I can't pin my shutdown and restart shortcuts to the metro anymore. The metro side scrolling with the mouse is sluggish compared to windows 8.

Labels in the metro are nice but haven't found a way yet to change the font's size, color, type. But, I think i have seen this option somewhere not 100% sure.

I kind of understand it now how people perceive windows 8 and 8.1 to be schizophrenic, we only need one GUI, but people should have the option to choose between the old start menu and the full metro gui.

The metro has to extend to the second or third monitor. It has to open any desktop applications in front of it. The left side corner is basically a taskbar anyway and should manage the old desktop apps as well.

I think it's going to be a long way before this type of OS matures and one of these GUI's will win the battle.

Re:Stop saying/repeating that! Win7 is NOT

[DrXym]

The Windows 7 desktop is demonstrably better than XP in a number of ways. The most fundamental way is that on a modern PC with a GPU, every window lives in a surface so the amount of context switching / swapping caused by invalidating a window or moving it is minimal. That alone makes the experience better. But it also benefits from lots of little things like being able to pin apps to the task bar, thumbnail previews, an improved start menu etc.

I really don't take the contention that XP is better with much seriousness at all. Even Vista's desktop was pretty usable but it just ate too much memory and had a few bottlenecks. Since I can and do run Windows 7 on a netbook I'm more than happy with its performance.

BIOS

[DarthVain]

"...basic I/O tasks..."

Actually I am pretty sure that is what the BIOS is for, a system for handling basic input/output. :)

Anyway I get what you are saying however. It is a fundamental flaw, that consumers are actually causing.

House Analogy: You want to sell your house. Your basement foundation is falling apart and leaks. Your kitchen is a bit dated. Rather than fix your basement, you decide to renovate your kitchen, because that is what people see, makes the biggest impact to the sale, increases the value of what you can get for your home. However when some poor sod buys your house they are left with a useless basement. Problem is that the homeowner has never known anything but houses with useless basements, and thus isn't all that angry about the transaction... Thus the endless cycle of MS not giving a shit about what your basement looks like.

1-800

[DarthVain]

I think a better analogy (already did a house) is that of a telemarketer. Now that I think of it, that is really what MS is, a pusher salesman, more so than anything technological.

Think of your talking on the phone to some telemarketer, and you are trying to tell them "No, I am not interested". Do they give up? No, they start to repeat the same sad sack pitch line they just told you, or try to highlight what you are currently doing wrong and how their product will fix it. You keep telling them, "No thank you" being the polite person you are, but the marketer is not going to be deterred, and will simply keep going with more and more BS, regardless of whatever objections you may have over their product/service, until ultimately in the end you hang up on them.

More people need to "hang up" on MS before they will finally get the message.

Right-Click

[bhiestand]

Right-click the start button and you can shutdown. Big improvement right there. But Windows 8.1 is still pretty damned stupid.

Re:the return of the feared Penguin

[See Attached]

Might be easier to just load Linux flavor du jour and be done with it. Or is that now illegal?