IDC: Lack of Start Button Deflates Windows 8 Interest

[dfusco]

[citation][nom]Cryio[/nom]I think people are retarded thinking the whole OS is simply broken, nonfunctional and incompatible with everything simply because the Start has a different interface.[/citation]

How nice of you to break that lamprey like lip-lock you had on Balmer's butt to come over here and insult the immense number of people with valid concerns regarding the WIN 8 UI.

 

[janetonly42]

Excuses excuses, face it, Winblows 8 blows. MS really screwed up this one, worse than Windows ME.

 

[janetonly42]

[citation][nom]antilycus[/nom]So dumb. If you are going to force change on consumers they will look for alternatives such as linux and mac. Some will pay the rip off prices for MAC some will take the free and open linux and some will stay. Either way yuou are forcing them to make decission whereas previously they didnt need to. Split up yoyr market...yet another great business idea on behalf of MS.[/citation]
Was going to thumb you up till I read your little Mac bashing rant.

 

[Guest]

Anyone remember that when Vista first released, they had the shutdown red-button from the start menu as the reset button. You had to go an extra click to actually have the option of shutdown. Vista SP1 fixed that problem.

 

[anonymous_user]

[citation][nom]Saji Thabolingam[/nom]i think it would help people understand windows 8 better if they thought of the metro interface as a big start button screen.[/citation]
There is still the issue of having Modern (Metro) programs separate from Desktop programs though. Furthermore, there are quite a few programs/features that are only available in the Desktop mode like Windows Explorer (native file manager), many control panel options, etc.

 

[warezme]

[citation][nom]Cryio[/nom]I think people are retarded thinking the whole OS is simply broken, nonfunctional and incompatible with everything simply because the Start has a different interface.[/citation]This whole article is retarded. Not having a start button is the least of Win8 issues. If MS thought people didn't use the start button and just created shortcuts then why did they make it so convoluted to create shortcuts in Win8? Also, did MS forget people use more than one screen? And it isn't a touch screen? Try using your charms and the metro BS on three screens before you start labeling the user retarded. It was MS who is retarded and fanboys who go along with them.

 

[warezme]

[citation][nom]Cryio[/nom]I think people are retarded thinking the whole OS is simply broken, nonfunctional and incompatible with everything simply because the Start has a different interface.[/citation]This whole article is retarded. Not having a start button is the least of Win8 issues. If MS thought people didn't use the start button and just created shortcuts then why did they make it so convoluted to create shortcuts in Win8? Also, did MS forget people use more than one screen? And it isn't a touch screen? Try using your charms and the metro BS on three screens before you start labeling the user retarded. It was MS who is retarded and fanboys who go along with them.

 

[Cheesevillage]

Win 8 is progress. Or at least, progressive.

Does it totally make sense from a Win7/XP POV? No.

Does it totally make sense from a projection into the future where the lines between mobile device and home PC are blurred; where we interact with our devices with touch at the very least? Yes.

A lot of fuss over what by any stretch of an objective review is a very good product. Imagine a company other than Microsoft released this OS.

Just chill out, buy Win8, and one day soon you'll enjoy a Minority Report esque UI ;p

 

[visa]

[citation][nom]janetonly42[/nom]Excuses excuses, face it, Winblows 8 blows. MS really screwed up this one, worse than Windows ME.[/citation]
Worse than Windows ME? If you honestly think this is worse than ME you obviously are clueless about this subject.

 

[ibemerson]

Microsoft's reasoning was that people using windows 7 were not using the start menu. I guess they failed to see this as proof that the changes they made to it were awful. WindowsXP had an awesome start menu. It was customizable and organizable. But for windows 7 they compressed into a tiny claustrophobic box and made it extremely difficult to organize. Of course people weren't using it-they broke it!

Windows 7, of course, also broke windows explorer. So when I began to read that Windows 8 was going to fix all the things they broke I was excited at first. But then microsoft went down some rabbit hole where I am not willing to follow.

Windows 7 took away a lot of my control and customizability. Windows 8 appears to be even worse. Even if I could spend another 3 months restoring the productivity I had with WindowsXP (Like I had to do with Windows 7), I would rather spend that time learning to use Linux.

I never understood how microsoft could make 3 versions of its OS that were all basically the same. If you make a Professional version, why not optimize it for actual productivity????

People have different tastes and styles of doing things. Microsoft should be capable of making an OS that can adapt to these. In my opinion the windows 8 start screen is horrifically ugly. Even if I can install Classic Start Menu, I am boycotting microsoft just to show my disapproval of their insanity.

 

[KenTX]

Oh good grief.. Microsoft knows EXACTLY what they are doing and we all need to get real about what's going on here. And what is that mind you? Windows 8 is 99% about Microsoft attempting to lock down and gate software development in the desktop sector and about 1% about implementing touch functionality. I find it amusing with all the blame that Steve Sinofsky has been getting over this when in reality, this idea probably sprang forth in that pointy bald little head of Steve Ballmer. Bottom line? Microsoft wants every bit' of the computing landscape to be an appliance.. one that they have complete control over down to the hardware. Pretty sad isn't it? and they will come up with every excuse to do this.. including "security" and "piracy". I'll stop here but hopefully, I really don't have to explain why people shouldn't give up their liberties for the crap and if you are all smart? you will avoid this garbage like the plague. If Microsoft wants to introduce a touch interface and an app store? fine.. but don't make it obligatory and leave it open! Just focus on the platform and get your fingers out of my hardware.. and get the hell off of my liberties!

 

[universal remonster]

Man, are we still beating this dead horse?? Yea, I get it... you're upset there is no start button.. Can we move on please? Or are we going to write article #741 on how the missing start button is destroying the PC industry, so that the same exact comments can be left that have been posted on every anti Win 8 article since launch? Do you REALLY think that Microsoft is going to change anything if you do write yet another article on this extremely rehashed topic? The answer is NO. They will change according to dollar signs or the lack there of. So don't buy it! Besides, if Win 7 is the perfection that everyone says it is, why are you so intent on replacing it with something?? Bottom line, if you do not like Win 8, then don't support it. Microsoft will then have to choose to change it or lose out. But for godsake, WILL YOU PLEASE stop the constant crying?? You all sound like a kid that didn't get his Gameboy for Christmas.

 

[b23h]

Yes, it was a mistake to remove the start button, and yes it was a mistake to take out the option of booting into the Desktop rather than Metro/Modern UI. Other than that it is appropriate to have a UI that shares design elements across desktop/laptop/phone/X-Box.

As far as the opinion of fools who still run XP....

 

[dextermat]

Computer and laptop come with windows 8 and downgrade cost money. Then they wonder why pc sale are on decline. Forcing Windows 8 + not everyone need new computer + tablets and smartphones = decline sale in pc

 

[InvalidError]

For people who want their start menu and boot-to-desktop, Classic Shell does both for free and lets you choose your Start Menu style between Classic, XP and 7. I use the XP style.

 

[razor512]

Why do people say the standard crap about windows 8 being more secure but can point to no examples?
Furthermore, why do they say it when patch Tuesday will fix the same exploit on windows XP, windows vista, windows 7, and windows 8.

I thought the newer OS should be more secure?

It is important to understand the reality of programming. you cant fix a problem you did not know exist. A programmer making an OS doesn't think : hey I made an OS and there are 8357584875798589745 exploits that I know of but I don't care because no one will ever discover them.

They make the OS as best they can and when exploits are found, then they work to counter it.

The flawed way of programming (that at the time of programming is not flawed, gets carried onto new OS which is why exploits found on older versions of windows, will still translate to exploits being found on a newer version of windows.


While some users can argue the UAC making windows a little more secure, in reality it adds no security at all. To better understand this, lets look at what may be a scenario of a novice computer user dealing with UAC.
Novice user downloads pornvideo.exe
UAC kicks in and throws a warning
From a security standpoint, it stopped the execution of a potentially malicious application.
From the standpoint of the novice user "my porn is just 1 click away!!!"

Windows 8 is no more secure than windows 7. and without the partial hibernation, windows 8 actually boots slower than windows 7. (wndows 8 tries to speed the boot time by hibernating the kernel during shutdown)

When looking to upgrade a OS think about what you can do on the new OS that you cant do on your current OS (this will prevent you from wasting money on a new OS like windows 8 when in reality you will gain no real new functionality.


(PS old is never a reason as to why you need to upgrade to a new OS. Products for functionality are purchased based on the needed functionality, and last I checked, an OS is an operating system and not a fashion accessory.

 

[dextermat]

The biggest problem with windows 8 is all the options and right click menu option not being there anymore. Yeah it start fast and integrate fine with hotmail (outlook.com) but what if the user don't.

The worse waste of time with win 8 is looking on how to do basic thing you could do before that you can't anymore.

 

[ubercake]

For people who want their start menu and boot-to-desktop, Classic Shell does both for free and lets you choose your Start Menu style between Classic, XP and 7. I use the XP style.

Does it stop the opening of pdf documents from bringing you back to metro?

 

[farensabri]

people might be complaining about windows 8, but i've been using it since the retail version got released, never had a single blue screen or freezing coming from the OS. the only errors i get are from the apps themselves. i don't even have any antivirus installed.

pretty stable OS in my opinion compared to my previous experience of WinXP and Win7. Never used Vista though.

 

[ibjeepr]

For people who want their start menu and boot-to-desktop, Classic Shell does both for free and lets you choose your Start Menu style between Classic, XP and 7. I use the XP style.

Does it stop the opening of pdf documents from bringing you back to metro?

You can stop every file type from bringing you back to Metro, just choose to open it with the desktop application instead of the metro version.
If I remember correctly you just right click and choose "open with".

 

[Fierce Guppy]

But *why* do people miss the start button? Is it because they prefer navigating the mouse pointer through 1 to 4 submenus to get to an item rather than press Win+q and have items displayed on a scrollable screen?

Is getting to Programs & Features, Computer Management, or the Control Panel, etc, somehow more difficult? -- because that stuff is accessible just by right-clicking on the bottom left corner of the desktop.

What is harder to do now that was easier using the start button menu system?

 

[ubercake]

For people who want their start menu and boot-to-desktop, Classic Shell does both for free and lets you choose your Start Menu style between Classic, XP and 7. I use the XP style.

Does it stop the opening of pdf documents from bringing you back to metro?

You can stop every file type from bringing you back to Metro, just choose to open it with the desktop application instead of the metro version.
If I remember correctly you just right click and choose "open with".

It's been my experience that clicking a pdf link in a desktop browser opens the pdf in acrobat for metro. I'll see if open with makes a difference next time.

 

[dgingeri]

How stupid can people be? It's not gone! It's changed into a full screen and is much more functional than the limited, tiny menu that it was in Win7 and Vista! This argument is really annoying me.

 

[dgingeri]

[citation][nom]warezme[/nom]This whole article is retarded. Not having a start button is the least of Win8 issues. If MS thought people didn't use the start button and just created shortcuts then why did they make it so convoluted to create shortcuts in Win8? Also, did MS forget people use more than one screen? And it isn't a touch screen? Try using your charms and the metro BS on three screens before you start labeling the user retarded. It was MS who is retarded and fanboys who go along with them.[/citation]

I use Win8 at home, with two screens and no touch screen. I prefer it in many ways to Win7. The old start menu is small and confining. It's almost mandatory to make desktop icons in order to start my favorite apps. With Win8, it's super easy.

How do you mean "why did they make it so convoluted to create shortcuts in Win8?" I don't find it convoluted at all. It's not any harder in Win8 than it is in Win7, and easier to put tiles on the start menu. Right click -> pin to Start. Duh. How hard is that?

As for getting to the charms bar or start menu with multiple screens, that's not hard either. You just have to be a little more careful not to overshoot. Not such a big deal.

 

[jkflipflop98]

I mean really, how dumb are you sheep? It doesn't boot straight to desktop and "no start menu"? Guess what? THERE IS STILL A START MENU. IT JUST GOES FULLSCREEN NOW. You get there the same way. Put your pointer in the lower left corner and click. Boom. Start menu. How hard is this?