Slashdot Mirror
Microsoft Won't Bring Back the Start Menu Until 2015
DroidJason1 (3589319) writes "Microsoft recently announced plans to reintroduce the Start Menu to Windows in an upcoming version of the operating system. While the plan was to roll out an update to Windows 8.1 and offer the Start menu later this year, it seems like this is no longer the case. Now Microsoft is reportedly looking to release the Start Menu with Windows 9, which is expected in April of 2015. Windows 8 and Windows 8.1 have faced a boat load of criticism and hatred, partly due to the removal of the Start button and Start menu. The restoration of a visible Start button on the taskbar was one of the key features of the Windows 8.1 update, released back in October of 2013."
to "latest and greatest" version of Windows in 2014 either.
MS may as well start selling retail copies of Win 7 again
Why would anyone want to start anything on Windows 8?
I was forced to use Windows 8 because it's packaged in my new laptop, and a change in OS means I need to spend more money. So I gave it a try but I never liked it. I think, I might get used to it, if all the PCs I use (home/office/remote) are all Windows 8. If MS wants everybody to like Windows 8, they should have killed all other versions that uses the START button. i.e. Windows Update that automatically disables the start menu for Windows XP to Windows 7. Then everybody will be forced to grow accustomed to it.
Microsoft seems to be intentionally upholding the old meme about 'every other OS released by Microsoft sucking'.
After a while, you really have to wonder why they keep doing this.
I installed Windows 7.
Microsoft has lied about this in the past, why should anyone believe them now?
MS is apparently buying into the whole "every other release is good" thing too. They sure seem to be in a hurry to iterate the version number.
Coca-Cola paved the way. Redmond 'Nailed It'!!!
I received a windows 8 machine at work to fix some compatibility issues with my product. I bitched and moaned about how awful it was for a month. Then i let out a stream of periodic muffled profanities every time some weird unrequested interface took over my laptop from out of nowhere. Then months went by and i realized something:
Windows 8 is not really that bad. I know how to find all the stuffs now. I know how to shut it down. I know how to avoid having intrusive metro apps popping up. I no longer care if the start menu comes back or not. It's all still there. It actually seems to perform quite well. start up and shutdown times are decent. sleep when i close the lid seems to work. I'm through bitching and i just want to get on with my work. At this point, i'd rather it just stay the way it is.
I pity all those suckers that bought into the Windows 8 narrative. Yeah yeah Microsoft did a mistake and they'll give their customers the start menu back. Ooops they forgot to tell their customers they have to spend more money to get Windows 9 and who know maybe Microsoft will fuck another thing up to make Windows 10 a best seller ?
The world is full of suckers, and most of them are on Windows.
HP and Dell announce revised Q4 revenue projections.
Help stamp out iliturcy.
"Microsoft will not have a new desktop-appropriate operating system until 2015." Fixed that for you.
I'm not sure why they're doing this -- third party developers have proven it's easy to do.
Oliver's law of assumed responsibility: If you're seen fixing it, you will be blamed for breaking it.
The Start Menu in 8.1 is crap. Most of the features that were in Win7's start menu don't exist in 8.1. Typical Microsoft, screwed up their "second" OS release:
Windows 3.1x (1992) - Good
Windows 95 (1995) - Mixed bag, at the beginning it sucked
Windows 98 (1998) - Good
Windows ME (2000) - Sucked (hard)
Windows XP (2001) - Good
Windows Vista (2006) - Sucked although not as hard as ME
Windows 7 (2009) - Good
Windows 8.x 2013 - FAIL
Windows 9 - ???
No trees were killed in the making of this post; however, many trillions of electrons were horribly inconvenienced.
I have always been a person that used the search bar and loved it but by 2015 it will be long gone and forgotten!
I wrote blog like this on my page http://69social.co.uk a months a go and we got a good discussion on their
User interfaces are the battlegrounds in which the bogus microsoft corporate "warriors" do battle with each other to see who can be the captain of the sinking ship
Microsoft needs to listen to their customers and bring back the start menu that was removed in Windows 8's beta period.
My was planning to replace my 5-years-old laptop later this year, but it looks I will be waiting until next spring. My current laptop does everything I need, but slower than newer laptops. There really isn't a need for me to replace my laptop other than to get one with USB 3.0 and an IPS screen.
Windows 8 and Windows 8.1 have faced a boat load of criticism and hatred, partly due to the removal of the Start button and Start menu.
Start Menu. A button is just a fucking button and only necessary to show you where to click. That's how the majority of 8's blatant mistakes with all the hold mouse here, charms bar, and other nonsense.
Indeed. They didn't bring back the start menu. What they brought back is a button that says "start". To paraphrase a classic slashdot car analogy (wasn't mine), it's like ordering a brand new car with manual transmission, but when the car finally arrives, it has an automatic. An obvious mistake. The car dealer says no problem, we'll make it right. But when they call you back in, nothing has changed, except they have glued a dummy stick shift to your center console.
Who needs the most used button anyways?
Don't waste your vote! Vote for whoever you want, unless you live in a swing state it won't matter anyways
One thing about Microsoft that I don't understand is its seeming slowness at doing simple things. OK, everyone agrees there has to be a Start Menu, it is not hard to implement (see lots of 3rd party apps doing just that), it will not break any existing Windows functionality, MS has virtually unlimited highly skilled resources, yet this obvious simple improvement takes months (if not years) to release. Let alone the fact that this problem should never have existed in the first place.
But at the end of the day it's still gonna be a turd.
And the longer it sits around being a turd, the less anyone wants to be in a room with it - shiny or not.
While we're recovering options lost...
RESTORE EDLIN!!!
They're bringing the BSOD back, too.
And I can't do it without Classic Shell. Classic Shell, making Windows 8 Bearable.
Meet new people, and kill them.
Those of us who have been supporting Windows for a long time should recognize the trend by now. Only every other release is targeted to business/power users. Our upgrade path looked like this:
Windows 98 -> SKIP Windows ME -> Windows XP -> SKIP Windows Vista -> Windows 7 -> SKIP Windows 8 -> Windows 9
It works out quite well because we only have to do a major update once every 5 years or so. I expect businesses and IT shops will go straight from 7 to 9 and love it.
all those companies selling alternative start menus can continue making money.
lose != loose
NT 3.5 - new operating system
NT 4 - ok OS with great new UI. Improved over time with service packs
Windows 2000 - ok OS. Improved with service packs
XP - ok OS with ugly new UI that can be turned off and improved greatly with service packs
Vista - plauged by third party driver issues and sold with inadequate hardware at launch and another ugly UI that can be turned off. Improved with service packs.
7 - good but same ugly UI as before with added "ribbons". All features of old UI can be restored with third party applications.
8 - ok OS ruined by complete paradigm shift in UI. Usable with third party applications
What a great way to make sure Windows 9 sells like hotcakes!
1. Remove a well-loved feature from a system with sufficient vendor-lock in.
2. Only provide the feature in a paid upgrade
3. Profit!
Is this a patentable business model?
Competition Good, Monopoly Bad.
Only the odd numbered ones are any good.
Actually, who am I kidding? It's all shit.
I'm a good cook. I'm a fantastic eater. - Steven Brust
yes.
the "start menu" could be a top 5 Microsoft Case Study into Awful Business Choices (clippy, metro, 'automatic updates', Zune, or tell me your favorite)
assuming the use of a button labeled "start" on the desktop, here's what M$ should have done the whole time:
by default, put it where they think is best...where their "vision" tells them
give user option to remove it, or move it, or make it bigger or smaller, or edit the text...
in the standard Control Panel area...of course you can eventually find a way to hack this, but obviously I mean put it in Control Panel
I cannot stress enough that this is ***basic human/computer interaction design***....it's in colloquial language, but everyone who does any design work has heard of Ben Shneiderman's 8 Rules for Interface design
M$ kept the Start menu because some idiots in marketing were trying to justify their existence
I know that M$ had employees who were/are as apoplectic as I am about design choices like the Start Menu...
So the answer to "how" is this: bad business structure that gives decision power for technical questions to non-technical people and in general is built from the ground up to resist institutional change even if it is change that improves
Thank you Dave Raggett
If pattern follows we'll all think windows 9 is great.
I really hope it doesn't and this marks the beginning of the fall of the titan
>, Apple runs the apps I need. (If Linux did, I'd use that instead, but they don't yet.)
I used Linux exclusively for many years. I was pleasantly surprised how natural OSX felt when I started using it. I knew that OSX is certified Unix, but I expected it to feel at least as different as FreeBSD. I certainly recommend OSX (not iOS) for people who like Linux.
Of course there's competition for desktop and laptop PCs that ship with Windows. Microsoft could be losing desktop PC market share to consoles for gaming and Macs for everything else. Or Microsoft could be losing laptop market share to MacBooks, Chromebooks, and tablets running a smartphone-derived operating system.
Me: No more Windows on my PC until.... forever.
Linux... I heart you.
Thankfully they haven't gotten rid of the command terminal yet.
Don't say that out loud! It'll give them ideas for other items to remove!
> "The restoration of a visible Start button on the taskbar was one of the key features of the Windows 8.1 update, released back in October of 2013."
Apparently this needs to be pointed out yet again: A button that takes you to the start screen is not a start button. What users requested was the start menu back. What was delivered was at best a condescending "we know what you really want better than you", and more like a calculated insult.
Oliver's law of assumed responsibility: If you're seen fixing it, you will be blamed for breaking it.
But we have invested years learning those habits. Productivity kicks in when the tool becomes a reflex. Reflexes are not a bad thing: they speed us up because we don't have stop and think.
I have nothing against the octopus body design, but there is a big learning curve for a brain used to a human body to suddenly be shoved into an octopus body.
Unless the "new thing" offers about a 20% productivity improvement, it's generally best to stick with the existing interface because the learning curve will eat up that 20% for a few years. In biz investment terms, the ROI is too far out. Why can't MS just give us both interface choices as a user setting?
Change for changes' sake is a productivity drain. (There is a reason I kick kids off my lawn :-)
Table-ized A.I.
Windows 8.x is pretty good only as long as you have a touchscreen.
What is really atrociously stupid is Microsoft's idea of putting the Metro interface onto Windows 2012 Server. It is just breathtakingly stupid to put an animated, graphical user interface onto a system that is almost always accessed via Remote Desktop Connection.
Kriston
So who really here is still using a start menu, really if you were stop because you don't know how to use anything since Windows XP. Start menu was only for your parents and people that never used an OS before. They love it, you guys think people don't but they do. Just go hang out at the electronic area in best buy, frys, or Walmart. The big icons was made for them. Rest of us "techies" that use this website it should have since windows xp and now Windows Key + Type what you want, or click on the task bar. If you were going click start menu -> click program files -> Click name of program -> Click whatever special folder they wanted the EXE in. -> Click on EXE, you need to stop using an OS all together. 5 clicks is NOT a good way to use an OS. Same reason why OSX has been having the ribbon at the bottom forever. Microsoft just gave you a big screen for end users that need it.
Start up speeds are crazy fast on Windows 8 and an SSD, being able to pin Skype/Lync and spotify while having almost 3 full monitors for Visual studio is a godsend. My productivity as a programmer has gone up a lot with windows 8. The resume from sleep is amazing to be able to commit at the end of the day and have it all there when I return the next morning. Our entire office upgraded to windows 8 for all programmers ( we do windows XP/7 ) desktop apps so we were not required to.
Also running the same account on my work and desktop pc + SVN = same experience across both home and desktop.
So jump off the bandwagon :P It is a really good OS for programmers/Artists.
Why do they hate their customers so much?
I partly agree. Windows 8.1 isn't as tragic as it seems at first. But they've forgotten one of the primary goals of a UI: discoverability.
I'm a Linux geek, so I'm used to typing arcane commands into shell prompts. I can find whatever I need in a Google search if I don't know it already. Command line interfaces require you to specify what you are looking for. It's expected that you should know in advance what you want and how to ask for it. This is somewhat less true for the double-tab interface in bash, but still, the basic idea is to specify.
What made Windows and MacOS such a big deal back in the day is that they were "discoverable" - you could figure out what options you had available by reading the menus and picking one, with the basic expectation that, if there was an option or command to run, there'd be a menu entry in a hopefully sensible place to allow it. Thus, anybody could "use" a computer by finding the obvious start button.
Windows 8.x tosses discoverability to the wind. You just have to know in advance which combination of swipes and from which side in order to get what you want. Because of this, it's not discoverable. What makes Windows 8 so damning and frustrating for the new user is that stuff happens and there's no obvious reason why.
With this recent statement, Microsoft has made clear that they're going to try to double down on the Metro Interface, and hope that by promising it at some distant, future date, the haters will shut up long enough for people to get used to the not-discoverable Windows 8 interface.
I have mixed feelings about this.
I have no problem with your religion until you decide it's reason to deprive others of the truth.
Microsoft had an epiphany. That epiphany was called iTunes and later spun off as the App Store. You see Apple gets a cut of EVERY APP SOLD via their marketplace and I believe they might even share in revenue from ads in ad supported apps as well. Since it is impossible to sideload apps without jailbreaking an iOS device they have ISV's over a barrel if they want to sell to Apple's customers. Microsoft decided they liked Steve Job's decidedly Gatesesque business model. They knew their mobile devices would be a hard sell given the saturation of iOS/Android so they decided they could back door their model into their desktop OS. It has been a multi-tiered approach but non of their vectors has gotten much traction. Surface RT was DOA and Surface Pro and desktop users continue to use traditional Windows apps. If Microsoft brings the start menu back it would delay even further Metro App adoption and Microsoft's newest revenue stream. So they will continue to promise to bring it back so people won't just throw Windows 7 on their new PC but keep delaying it as long as they can in hopes Metro App use continues to climb.
"A person is smart. People are dumb, panicky dangerous animals and you know it." - K
Right now windows 8 has a bad rap and they have made some miss steps.
Windows 9 seems better then windows 8.2 / 8.1 U2.
Windows 7 came out when they could of had windows visa R2 / Windows visa SE.
not just start menu the full touch UI does not work good on desktops / laptops with touch PADs / multi display.
Systems with full keyboards and mouses do not need hot corners or other Touch UI stuff as well.
Also the limited side by side / full screen apps are out of place on big displays as well.
Windows 9 is already going to come in an OEM Bing edition. From day one, MS has planned this. They're going to have a captive-audience Bing edition to drive traffic to Bing and other MS web sites. That's the cheap OEM edition. Then there will be a "legacy" edition to run normal Windows programs, priced super-high for enterprises where consumers can't afford it (but enterprises will get deep discounts) - all part of the plan they have for taking the desktop away from you and putting you in the MS walled garden.
It kills me that MS made the Start Menu fill your entire screen and everyone says is missing.
There's nothing great about the 'start' button. When it first appeared in Windows 95, no one jumped up and down and shouted 'eureka!' It was just a way of providing users with a reference point for key functionality...starting apps, shutting down, seeing a short semi-custom menu of options, finding system stuff, and so on. I use a non-window os and there is no 'start' button and there never has been one...and no one misses it. Windows 3.1 and NT 3.1 did not have a 'start' button. The 'start' button is even a semi-retarded non-intuitive way of centralizing stuff. For example, as has often been pointed out over the years, clicking on 'start' to shutdown is not exactly the cleverest way of doing things. (My system has a button cleverly labelled 'shutdown.') But...but...but...the 'start' button was missed for just one reason...because windows users are used to it. So, when Microsoft takes it away and does not replace it with anything comparable, users complain. We would happily click on 'kill' or 'terminate' or 'stop' or 'don't do that anymore' or a frowny-face or whatever, as long as it was...the same. Putting the 'start' button back...in 2015...kind of misses this point. By that time, we users will be used to something else.
and not the more walled garden like apple one. At least Google let's have easy side loading / alt app store with less sand boxing then apple.
at least MS store has more flex to it then apple does.
If one button causes you to no longer be able to use an operating system then you should not be using a computer. I was turned off by the 'tiles' too at first, but once you get used to the new way - it is pretty simple actually.
I remember the same old whiny crap when people were forced to windows 95 from Windows 3.1... Bo hoo.
Microsoft has been on a long-term trend in the name of ease of use of burying everything behind complicated and convoluted UIs since at least Vista, although the default XP UI was also in on it a little.
Little things, like changing your computer's IP address seem to require more and more clicks, dialog boxes and window changes to accomplish the same tasks as before. More and more settings seem to default to "idiot light' mode where basic information is deliberately turned off or hidden.
This might be tolerable for a "home" edition of something designed to get grandma on the internet with a minimum of long distance phone calls to her grandkids, but it's absolutely maddening for "professional" editions and simply uncalled for in "server" editions.
I just cannot fathom what group or individual decided that Server 2012 needed the same UI as the most basic desktop OS. I don't mind the concept of Metro and the execution seems OK on a Surface Pro provided you stay in Metro mode, but there should be a switch or something that just completely disabled Metro mode for server OSes (and should be the default) and it should be switchable for desktop OSes.
Further, the desktop UI needs an "expert" mode where some of the "wizards" are disabled (can't I just have my network connections without the network and sharing center) and more details and technical information are presented to the end users without being filtered/turned off.
I got 64 bit pro for $50 for participating in the beta. And by participating I mean getting aggravated and not bothering to care until they sent me the offer. See I couldn't run directx 11 on 32 bit XP. so I was happy for a cheap upgrade. It's all there. It's stable. Fear of the unknown I guess.
Any word yet on Clippy?
Extended support for Chrome on XP is a nice little jab between these two. It's nice for us users to get some benefit from these wars once in a while. If there were no decent browser for XP, I'd get Windows 7. Now it looks like I might be able to hold off on a new hardware purchase just a bit longer. I'll have 10 YEARS on my current hardware, which was kind of unthinkable when I bought it.
My button lies under the metro
My button lies under the C (code)
My button lies under the metro
Oh, Bing back my start-button to me...
Bing back, Bing back
Bing back my button to me, to me
Bing back, Bing back
Bing back my start-button to me!
Table-ized A.I.
Long version: see pwnies' (IU designer at MS) posts at reddit, like this one: http://www.reddit.com/r/techno...
Metro has 2 UIs: Metro for casual use; classic for power users / production. MS wasn't particularly clear on the split and made it seem like Metro was the only UI going forward with classic atrophying in the background. That, apparently, is not the case. But MS pulled a boner here and mis-sold the UI.
It was always easy enough to restore the old school start button with either Start8 or a handful of free utilities. But ... you had to go and find them. MS was hoping that was just enough hassle that casual users would stick with Metro. So ... casual users get a UI optimized for touch and keyboard (alt-f4 to close windows; alt-tab to switch; win-w to search settings; win-s for searching docs / the web / whatever; type to find apps). Further, the included apps tend to be basic ("dumbed down") so that your grandpa can figure them out. Metro is also optimized around the idea of single-and double-tasking (i.e., media consumption). Metro isn't made for your typical /. user.
Classic is for people with multiple windows open, Office users, and so on -- those who can find OS settings and utilities (I think MS' definition of power user might have been overly generous).
Metro is really, really good for what it is. Once you grok the keyboard shortcuts or the gestures (swipe from the sides to make stuff happen), it's actually pretty cool.
What MS screwed up is not the UIs, but, rather, how they interact with each other. With release-era 8, if you opened, say, the picture viewer from classic, it punted you into full-screen Metro. Ditto for the calculator (true story, needed to check some math for an email, opened the calculator, and was presented with a full screen, 22" four function calculator -- that's just stupid). Some settings are accessible only through Metro (again, that's stupid -- hiding settings casual users shouldn't need to touch in Metro was bad design). Some default associations, like those for RAW photos, can only be set through Explorer if you want to use the classic app -- the Set Associations app only shows the Metro viewer as being available for those types. And so on. And forth.
As for the Start menu? It's easy enough to get back ... but I'm torn. I don't honestly use it all that often since I read about hitting the win key then typing the name of what I wanted. It's ... different than using the mouse. But, most of the time, it's also faster than going through nested menus.
Win8 is flawed. And weird. And occasionally antagonistic. And the dual UI aspect was very, very poorly handled. But its bones are good (fast, stable, secure). I like Win8, but it seemed to take longer to properly set up my desktop than it should've (Modern Mix also helps to control full-screen app pop-ups by running Metro apps windowed).
Which validates the belief that the even version numbers (Vista, Win8) are crap and the odd version numbers (XP, Win7) are better.
"I believe in Karma. That means I can do bad things to people all day long and I assume they deserve it." : Dogbert
This proves Windows 9 will have no likeable features - so they're 'saving' the start button for Windows 9 to balance the scales. Or at least, that's what a hater would say :-)
- The Kessel run is for nerf herders. I can circumnavigate the entire Central Finite Curve in a lot less than 12 parse
They should have a bigger mini with desktop cpu and maybe some kind of add in video card choice.
The MAC PRO is nice but it is overkill for lot's of uses and the base system only comes with 256 GB storage.
Why not have an mini mac pro at say $1,200-$1,500? with an I5 - I7 desktop cpu and 1 good mid range to high end video card?
The imacs are ok but the AIO / thin part holds them back a bit and there video chips are a little under powered (even more with the screen size on them) the top of the line Imac does have an GeForce GTX 780M addon but at the price for that system you can get a better PC for about $800-$1000 less. Even if you buy a screen for $300-$400 it's still $400-$600 less for an system with more ram, better cpu, better video card, and bigger HDD and or SSD.
Windows 8 with Classic Shell is just as usable as Windows 7. Windows 8 without Classic Shell has a terrible interface for grouping the programs you have installed. If Microsoft had issued Windows 8 with the equivalent of the Classic Shell start button, then acceptance of Windows 8 would have been a no-brainer, and all the complaints about it would have been almost non-existent. Windows 8.1 was the right place to recover from the mistake, but instead they just gave a *different* button in place of the start button that essentially did nothing useful. Don't be afraid to use Windows 8, but get Classic Shell to go with it. It's free.
Nuff said - cheap solution, works wonders.
Now if only the rest of Windows 8 didn't look like it came from the stone-age (ie, 2 color full screen garbage better suited to an 8086 system era)
We JUST got off XP - more or less, still a few stragglers out there. Anyone who gets a machine this year won't be capitalized until the end of 2017 so we won't worry about Microsoft until then. And by then I'm sure the executive will have invested a billion dollars and a billion meetings in finally coming to agreement on the makeup of a usable Linux desktop by then.
. . . welcome our new butt-plug overlords!
Win8 doesn't have two uis, it only has 1 and a quarter.
Yeah, it can sort-of mimic the start button, but without menus (okay 8.1 sort of gave some of that back), but they left everything else with the ex-lax induced shit-storm of an interface that should only have been seen back on an 8086 cpu where you wanted full screen, 2 color interfaces.
It's garbage pure and simple.
You want a tablet interface, use Android. Want a desktop, then use a real desktop interface, not some dumbed down piece of shit interface destined for retirement 6 months before it's released.
... "oh look, Apple is making a shitload of Money from their app store. Google is also making a shitload of money from their app store. Let's make an app platform, and very strongly encourage as many people as possible to use it by making it a primary interface on the new version of Windows, giving as few concessions to naysayers as possible. We'll make $$$!"
Mine handles hooking up to a projector just fine, but I've used Windows laptops that took some amazing voodoo to do the same
Screenshot...no argument, I love Win7's Snipping Tool
Home and End key, well, I like the Macbook keyboard, and there's only so much real estate to work with, so some keys had to go. I'd rather have key combos than smaller keys.
Never let a lack of data get in the way of a good rant.
...counterintuitive"
That doesn't make sense. So I believe it.
Never let a lack of data get in the way of a good rant.
Windows has jumped the shark. It's all downhill from here.
Many folks have finally tired of Microsoft just churning the interface just to make a new product. All that did was alienate the users that had grown accustomed to menu interfaces in Office and the Start menu. Paying to buy a whole new version of the OS and then dealing with the headaches of just trying to figure out how to just get back to the capability the user had before the change got really old.
The problems with Windows 8 are not necessarily with the features. Windows 8 may be the best OS under the sun, but most users won't ever know that because it is buried under one of the most craptastic PC user interfaces contrived. Folks probably would be happy to have the core features of Windows 8 if the menus and buttons looked familiar to the last version. They do not.
I finally went to Linux simply because they kept a lot of the UI features like menus and start buttons that Windows abandoned. Linux really is now at a point where it is an easier OS to transition to from Windows XP and 7 vs transitioning to Windows 8. That is not because Linux interfaces improved dramatically (though they are better than they were) but because Windows 8 broke a lot of UI features that the users really liked and wanted.
Happy trails Microsoft, best wishes from a formerly happy customer from the Windows 3.1 days. Friendly advice - stop pissing off your loyal customers and give them what they want to see.
Left MS Windows for Linux Mint and never looked back!
Vote for Bernie in 2016!
While Microsoft will not bring back the Start menu anytime soon, they promise to keep or increase the amount of pure Suck in Windows 8.
The shepherds did so well protecting the flock that the sheep no longer believed that wolves existed.
You're trolling hardcore and you know it. It doesn't matter what response you get, you'll still hate Win 8 and make excuses why it won't do whatever. I already see you've answered all responses as such. Obvious Troll is obvious.
Well my boss pays me money to throw Jews into an incinerator and that money pays to feed all of my bratty ass kids and my bitchy ass wife. All of my customers prefer their Jews incinerated, my boss's boss prefers it that way (zeig heil!), and most of his customers prefer them that way as well. So I will keep shoveling these Jews into that oven and when I get done, I might throw my bitch of a wife in there along with all of those crotch spawn.
The alternatives are far better, I use Start Menu X, ObjectDock, and Directory Opus "fucking awesome" which puts explorer to shame. Shit, even the free tools like Classic Shell, Classic Start, Classic Explorer, and Explorer++ are way better.
Yes, I get it, most people have no clue they even exist. :'(
You forgot *servers*. Yes, the Metro tile GUI is also the GUI chosen for *servers*. CRAZY.
Doubling down on stupid.
Get the following while you wait or simply go back to Windows 7.
Start8 and ModernMix or Classicshell.net
1. Fix start menu
2. Fix ribbon toolbar
What idiot did decide on these gui changes?
1. The ribbon gui in msoffice drove many people to switch to LibreOffice.
2. The missing start menu drove many people to switch to Linux.
3. The destruction of win32 (a good API in it's time) drove many developers to switch to Linux/posix.
What's next? This is an epic fail.
...that removing/replacing 0.01% of the functionality/code can actually make a product fail.
I'm sure that the whole "changed start menu" is, technically speaking, one of the smallest changes in Win8. But, from a marketing point of view, it's an intended "breaking change" - they want to force users to adapt to the new metro style UI so everyone has seen it before buying a new phone.
If the whole thing was inventend by technicians, they would have (of course!) included the "Classic start menu" option ...
And IE is the number 1 browser for downloading another browser... Does that make it good?
I'm only half joking when i say MS should buy Start8 and offer it as a free download.
What you meant to say in a single sentence , is that you get used to the taste of a shit sandwich after a while, to be blunt. That's all nice of you, but some of us simply refuse to start eating that fare to begin with.
C. Sagan : A demon haunted world:
http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/0345409469/
visit randi.org
Comment removed based on user account deletion
2015 will be the year of Windows on the desktop!
Ture. Every serious user is able to customize the start menu. Even my 65 year old mum who got her first pc around half a year ago is able to delete not used entries and group the ones she uses into logical folders... why can't all the other "great ego on the interwebs" people? (Or use desktop/task bar icons if the dont like digging the 2 clicks trough a nicely managed start menu?)
Everyone should use fixed width fonts. (Thats why I don't cause I'm the attention whore here!)
When Microsoft first announced Windows 8, the bashing began (as usual and expected). "Metro's bad", "no Start Menu", yada yada.
Now, fast forward to today - Windows 8.1 and still no Start Menu. Is it really that bad? How many users that are commenting here, complaining about it, have actually tried it? Does it truly hinder your ability to use the computer?
I, for one, have not tried Windows 8. Not because I don't like the idea of it but because I'm still on Windows 7 and have no need to actually upgrade yet. However, I have *seen* both PCs and laptops with Windows 8 (neither with touch screen) and it actually looked pretty good. Both switched from the Metro-giant-buttons screen over to the desktop and it looked like a normal computer with a normal version of Windows on it, nothing crazy.
The primary reason I'm not going to issue a complaint about the "no Start Menu" isn't because I haven't actually tried Windows 8 and dislike it, it's because as an actual "power user" of Windows, I don't use the Start Menu that much. WinKey+R to run whatever I need, main apps pinned to the taskbar, "My Computer" / "Documents" icons available on the desktop - everything one double-click away. My linux boxes are quite similar (except the WinKey+R, of course =P).
Are there any users out there that actually had their "experience" ruined because they didn't have a Start Menu and, if so, why / how?
my downmod is ridiculous and unreasonable...
i'm asking for help here...anyone agree?
Thank you Dave Raggett
Anonymous Coward your ass!
Just update the XP to the modern computers, thats all. Forget the fancy translucent buttons and windows the hidden menus and the for idiots philosophy.
Everyone on here whines that MS never innovates, then when they do, you whine about how you want the old thing back.
It would have been nice to have an offical start menu back into Windows 8. Although I find myself hating windows 8.1 a lot less as I got forced to using it for college, even if I really only use it to get into a virtual box to get into Linux :P) Still it sucks as I found myself using the pin the the start menu a lot more to access programs tfor everyday use and so no start menu no way to get that in 8.1
They were fighting on the same reason, whose idea was it the dashboard? It was my idea, partially inspired by Ami Pro s customizable button bars. But I wanted something giving the impression of driving... distance... cityscape... dawn or dusk... and the implementor was Hewlett Packard. It was very limited in functionality but it s virtual screens functioned perfectly and it did give the impression I was looking for. Then came Win 95 and alas! It contained the Menu Bar! While Packard s dashboard went SO OUT OF SCOPE I could barely recover a non functional copy of the file last time I tried, and the Dashboard was last seen working in a (my) 486 Win3.1 computer circa 1994. Then I kind of loathed the Menu Bar... did not really use it at all, and the Start Menu least of all: the also incompletely-understood Desktop implementation provided very functional icon control that the Menu Bar was almost pointless. So ironically I started _using_ the Menu Bar til XP, more or less at the time MS decided in negative sloping decisions to dispose of the Start Button and the whole structure! Between XP and Win7 I _GOT USED_ to use the Menu Bar and Start Button... because its layout was different from the Win95-WinNT branches so it became relatively more useful... And again it was not a stray idea but misunderstood, the idea of providing a dockable application frame to handle windows as... CONSOLES! A series of fixed-relation (customizable) console window viewports forming a console (eventually with analog looking controls and the like, retro, vintage, etc.). Which SOMEHOW, became the Win 8.1 OS interface. So it is good MS is bringing back the Menu Bar and Start Button. It would be much better if they implemented a DASHBOARD, with virtual screens and middle res citiscape under dawn sky background images... feeling like actually reaching somewhere you know? Then maybe my projected Consoles app would stil make sense and MS would stop playing mice-and-cat with HP regarding this small detail in CURRENT MODERN STYLE COMPUTING. - Danilo J Bonsignore
PS No HP program I used is available, neither Dashboard nor WebL ! WebL was astounding and superuseful for scripting the web, full with full-code sources, but as with Dashboard my last attempt at recovering the file/application (after my COMPUTERS and NOTES were STOLEN from ME AGAIN), was totally futile. There is no code for the Start Menu/Menu Bar component either as it is not an application, which overall means there is no code! As if it had not happened and this was already a Lost Civilization theme area in Computerland... Can ANYONE provide downloadable COPIES of the full WebL language? Independently of maintainers or rights, things can be sorted out later as long as there is SOMETHING to sort out about... Should anyone still have the source code to Dashboard... too... DJB
Now that Microsoft has coerced the majority of keyboard manufacturers to include a button just for Microsoft Windows, they decide to deprecate the feature leaving the distribution channels full of keyboards that have a useless button. I suppose about the time the channels clear of the startbutton'd keyboards, Microsoft will put the feature back in and the manufacturers will be sitting on a ton of keyboards without the revived button. It is clear that modifying the keyboard design of the qwerty keyboard to support a single sourced proprietary operating system was a decision that seemed ok at the time, but now is nothing but trouble. As if supporting nationalized keyboards is not troublesome enough, we now have the permutation with and without the start button.
Win 7 running under Citrix. Everyone gets a VDI! All 5000-9000+ of us and they wonder why it's a POS. Even though it's running on a perfectly good PC to begin with. Nope, gotta centralize and use 2X (at least) the licenses. Slow I/O? Well, buy more servers to slow it down even more!
Funny... but I know where this is the case and it's far from funny.
I think this would be the main feature of Windoze 9.
"Hey, we've re-invented the start menu!"
Beware! much sarcasm is added in this post!