Is This What The Windows Start Menu Will Look Like?

[AsTheDeath]

I love it. It looks even better then the win7 start menu. Now all they have to do is enable Aero and I'm sold.

@bryonhowley - what if I told you I (and lots of others) rely on the start menu and want it back?

@razzb3d I've asked this question before, and only got red thumbs instead of an answer, but I'd genuinely appreciate hearing your thoughts on what the start menu provides that the start screen doesn't. I've never used the Metro UI as anything more than a place from which to launch installed desktop apps (i.e. exactly the same use as the start menu, but with more usable space and more customisation options), but I have found I actually started using the start menu on my Win 7 desktop more after getting used to Win 8 on my laptop (no touchscreen!).

So why do you (and so many others, clearly!) miss the start menu?

 

[SteelCity1981]

Microsoft stop forcing metro down our throats. so you made a start menu, but you couldn't just get rid of metro entirely could you for desktop users, you had to some how cram it into the start menu. I hope that there will be an option to hide that from view with windows 9.

 

[AndrewMD]

There are a ton of assholes here..

This start menu is nice.

 

[mortsmi7]

I just drag everything to the taskbar or desktop so I don't have to use the tiles.

I hate it when Windows update starts the app from desktop mode instead of just opening the freaking window.

The performance is nice, but a lot things in 8 just feels half-assed.

 

[Durandul]

I just drag everything to the taskbar or desktop so I don't have to use the tiles.

I hate it when Windows update starts the app from desktop mode instead of just opening the freaking window.

The performance is nice, but a lot things in 8 just feels half-assed.

Exactly, runs like a charm, looks like a joke.

 

[Jay Stew]

Windows 8 is a clear failure. Adoption rates are similar to Windows Vista, also a clear failure. Root cause of Vista failure UAC and driver incompatibility.
Root cause of Windows 8 failure driver incompatibility and user interface inefficiency for the majority of hardware. .

Adding in Windows 7 Start Button Functionality is only a fix. Windows 9 needs to be faster yet, more secure, should run entirely in the RAM and not on a HDD page file. If possible it should have a boot process that allows you to have a master control panel for updates, virus scans, system resources and anything that can slow down your experience.

It should be working with user speed ease and functionality as the core of its design not hip cool and marketable. Leave hip and cool to Apple, the rest of us want to get the job done faster and without clicking all day or waiting on updates or screwed up drivers and therefore screwed up computing.

Windows 9 better Improve the rep of Microsoft now continue to feed its decline.

 

[BlankInsanity]

to be honest idk what this hype is about needing a start menu. I got windows 8.1, I put my most used programs on my taskbar, steam, chrome and skype. some less common apps( a small amount) goes on the start screen like after effects and my other utilities. if I need anything in particular I simply press LWIN+Q, which provides the same search function as the start menu. I will admit that start screen image looks terrible but alot like the start screen I'm sure you can customize to how you want it. this is just my opinion though

 

[falchard]

I think that is simply R&D. An idea like that will more than likely be scrapped because how does it improve the UI experience? I have not actually seen Microsoft half ass an implementation to that point before. Usually if they have an idea, they will go all in and not bother compromising.
I don't think Windows 8 half-assed. I feel it was a development trade off, and the Modern UI implementation was not complete at that point.
Modern UI is not just a visual change, its also a programming change. I feel that such a programming change would require much more time to develop out than the time between Windows 7 and Windows 8. So something tells me on Windows 8 release they planned to get a workable version out, and delay release of a more complete version in a future update. Microsoft would also need a transition phase that supports legacy software in order to at least give the new changes legs to stand on. As more software support becomes available and the programming changes become more fleshed out, they will drop what's known currently as Windows Desktop Environment.
The main difference has to do with making the window. The desktop environment creates a windows handle, and the modern UI makes a core window. I feel that Microsoft will build upon CoreWindow to eventually offer the same capability of Windows Desktop in a more streamlined environment. After all, Companies will not move onto a new Windows OS until it can perform multi-tasking well.

 

[ghostshade]

the start screen disrupt my work flow and take me out of what i was doing. the start menu take up a much smaller portion of the screen and has a useful hierarchy when it comes to the way it handles programs.

For example right now i have 2 browsers each with multiple tabs open as well as lync, word, excel, notepad in multible instances. As well as my case handling system BMC Remedy a remote desktop connection to a server where i have exchange, active directory as well as other programs and systems related to the customer i support right now. Not to mention the digital sticky notes i have on my screens.

I dont need a fullscreen app with limited functionality and lots of wasted space to be in the way of the information i need to support my customers.

Search is useless as well since we work with so many systems and quite a few of them you only get calls about maybe once or twice a month which means you don't know the name of the system or for that matter where its located.

That is the reason the start screen is useless for me at work.

At home There is no reason for me to have it either as its faster for me to open the program from the taskbar if its a program that i use often. If i dont use the program often i dont recall the name of it anyway and if that is the case i find it much faster in the start menu compared to the start screen anyway.

 

[w8gaming]

Those who think Microsoft did the right thing to planning to "drop" the whole desktop environment is missing an important point. Desktop environment is truly more productive compare to the split screen approach of "Metro", when you are working on a PC or workstation with big monitor, and proper keyboard and mouse. There is a reason why the OS had evolved from "single screen" mode into the "multi window system" as of today. Split screen approach already existed back in the DOS and Apple II days, and the users at that time dropped them and migrated to window based UI due to the significant productivity advantages it brought. Now that Microsoft has become successful and big, they suddenly feel envy about Apple getting the "next big thing" right and want to copy them and hopefully earning much more profits. But they have forgotten the reason why Windows OS were created back in the 80s. Or unless they never knew the true reason, they just copied whatever Apple was doing?

 

[Belardo]

The screen shot is what I and a few others posted what Windows 8 SHOULD have worked a few years ago, before MS pooped out Win8 to the public. *THIS* is more functional... and having Metro APPS run like regular desktop programs *GASP*.

Keep in mind what the goal is for Microsoft with their desktop OS... Its to be purely a METRO only platform. As of today, millions of programs are bought and sold online, at the store etc. The need for Windows will continue to shrink. So by making ALL future programs METRO, then they must be purchased from the Microsoft store... which means MS makes money for every program sold. $1~1000, etc.

The flat-desktop is still butt-ugly. Would prefer AERO like Windows 7.

 

[Belardo]

I think this screen shot is more likely to be Windows 9:

(Press the QUOTES button at top of articles to view avatars and images people use in posts - forum mode).

I'm thinking Windows 10 will be in 2 colors to prevent confusion.

 

[back_by_demand]

Those tiles are so ugly and forced. Give me a Windows 7 look and feel with Windows 8.1 performance.

Wait. That's to much to ask....

It is too much to ask, don't ever expect MS to do it for you, what you should do is install ClassicShell, it puts the Apps in the Start menu also but has them as just menu items rather than showing the tiles.

This has been available since day 1 of Windows 8 and seems to befuddle everyone, they would rather spend 100 times longer complaining about it that simply downloading and installing it.

 

[jalek]

Mint with Cinnamon desktop has a pretty decent start menu. Windows 8 is what got me to install it, and it's had better driver support than Windows, which was surprising.

It seems to have everything but DirectX, OpenGL versions of multiplatform games don't run as well on my hardware.

 

[Jeffrey H]

Those tiles are so ugly and forced. Give me a Windows 7 look and feel with Windows 8.1 performance.

Wait. That's to much to ask....

That is because it means they know Windows 7 has something Steve Balmer Detested from Bill Gates UI Design, the "Classic and XP" skins to are the reasons Steve Balmer Created the "Metro Tile" Touch Screen only Design, plus I figure some Excuse about the "Classic and XP" have Multiple Security Flaws that they can not restore them,

You know if people give me a bad rating for this, then I figure I am not joining the "Touch Screen" crowed for Windows because I am not into that too Futuristic stuff...

 

[Neve12ende12]

I love my current start menu in windows 8. It takes up my entire screen so I can see more of programs at once. I can also customize my start menu and make programs that are more important to me stand out by making them bigger. My programs also notify me of things I might otherwise not know unless I choose to actually open that program, such as I got a new email or someone commented on my Facebook post. Now I am supposed to reduce all of that functionality back into little icons if I don't have a touchscreen and am using Windows 9?

 

[mariusmotea]

I hope that prinscreen is from Windows 9 Starter, and in Pro and Ultimate version we will have a start menu for day by day work (no apps).

 

[Alec Mowat]

NT 6.4?
Unless there is some major feature that's included, or this upgrade is free of charge to Windows 8 desktop users, I don't see myself bothering with this upgrade, really.

I'll wait for NT 7.0. It's come along way, but we are still looking at Vista version 4.

 

[Alec Mowat]

to be honest idk what this hype is about needing a start menu. I got windows 8.1, I put my most used programs on my taskbar, steam, chrome and skype. some less common apps( a small amount) goes on the start screen like after effects and my other utilities. if I need anything in particular I simply press LWIN+Q, which provides the same search function as the start menu. I will admit that start screen image looks terrible but alot like the start screen I'm sure you can customize to how you want it. this is just my opinion though

It's OK, but it's not better than a start menu. I guess that's the main point.

 

[luissantos]

Gods, you people are moronic to the bone.

First of all, that menu looks like a perfect fit in with the rest of the UI. Go ahead and say it's ugly... Android (and it's many vendors with their many UIs) and iOS are following suit - probably because it's bad, right?

Secondly, it has ALL the functionality of the old Start Menu PLUS the possibility to add live tiles... POSSIBILITY. If you want to unpin every last one of them you'll get your stripped-down, old-faithful Start Menu.

Thirdly, those are LIVE TILES. An improvement on the old Gadgets. You can bring up the new Start Menu and get an immediate eye-scan of the weather, news, stock, latest e-mails or calendar events... whatever you wish to pin there, without the need to open any of the applications. Also, there are videos out there showing that the next gen of live tiles will be fully interactible... you'll be able to scroll your mailbox or the news in the tile itself, or use playback controls, etc.

Lastly, with 3D touch coming in the near future, it makes perfect sense to lay the foundations now for an interface that CAN BE touch-friendly on any form factor. And I say CAN BE because you can make those live tiles pretty small and unobtrusive too.

 

[Bondfc11]

No real horse in this race, I use 7 and love it, no plans on going to 8. What I found a little interesting was the posts with anything remotely negative to say about 8 all seemed to be downvoted - and anything with something positive were voted up. Interesting.

That's because those of us who have tried the OS and bothered to take five minutes to customize it and figure out how to make good use of it realize that it is an improvement over windows 7. I mean, I would take windows 8.1 any day of the week over 7 just because of the massively improved bluetooth.

The people complaining about windows 8 or metro are the ones who obviously either haven't tried the OS or are too lazy to customize it just slightly. If you get rid of Metro apps and just use it to hold your programs, it works wonderfully - the ones that you use frequently, you know exactly where they are... the ones that you don't, press the windows key, type three or four letters, and hit enter.

I don't know about you, but not having to take my hands off the keyboard sure sounds like an improvement to me. Yes you could do that with win 7, but it was much slower and less accurate.

That's great for you - glad you like it.

My point is my point - people downvote just because someone says something they don't personally agree with - the point of your entire post. I am happy for all those that love Windows 8 - I don't need a tablet-style interface and love using Windows 7 - I think it's perfect for how I use my computer. Downvoting should be used, in my opinion, to pinpoint misinformation or just useless "I got a job making $74 an hour using Windows 7" posts - not because you disagree with someone's personal opinion.

 

[Durandul]

Mint with Cinnamon desktop has a pretty decent start menu. Windows 8 is what got me to install it, and it's had better driver support than Windows, which was surprising.

It seems to have everything but DirectX, OpenGL versions of multiplatform games don't run as well on my hardware.

Linux has had better retroactive drivers for a couple years now, I think people are finally realizing that. I love linux, and use it on my laptop, but for applications besides basic functionality, it's just not ready yet. Maybe a switch off of the X display server will help usher that.

 

[Guest]

WTF, I'm still seeing tiles on there. Is it too hard to understand that quite a few users don't like the whole live tile thing? It also probably comes with a bunch of bloatware that must be removed like a stupid weather app and live facebook updates. I'd rather just open my browser to look at such things. They better give us the option to disable that stuff completely or I'm staying with 7. On a related topic, I wonder how steam is doing with their O.S.?

 

[Guest]

I love it. It looks even better then the win7 start menu. Now all they have to do is enable Aero and I'm sold.

@bryonhowley - what if I told you I (and lots of others) rely on the start menu and want it back?

@razzb3d I've asked this question before, and only got red thumbs instead of an answer, but I'd genuinely appreciate hearing your thoughts on what the start menu provides that the start screen doesn't. I've never used the Metro UI as anything more than a place from which to launch installed desktop apps (i.e. exactly the same use as the start menu, but with more usable space and more customisation options), but I have found I actually started using the start menu on my Win 7 desktop more after getting used to Win 8 on my laptop (no touchscreen!).

So why do you (and so many others, clearly!) miss the start menu?

I still use Windows 7 myself. After 20 minutes playing with a new Windows 8 PC at Best Buy, I built my new rig with Windows 7. I have always used the start menu. The main reason I would miss it would be that I hate clutter on my desk top. I link short cuts to games and my favorite browser, that's it. The task bar contains links to my internet browsers, Windows Explorer, as well as driver control panels on the right. You can configure the start menu in 7 to save as many recently used programs as you want in it's list, which does not take up the whole screen so you can still see open windows. And also makes your desktop less cluttered. On top of that, I organize any custom made directories into folders with sub folders and use Windows explorer to view them. For example, E: Pics/Projects/Gimp/InProgress. I know ALL pics are in the Pics folder, because I put them there. And I am only a few clicks away from opening my projects which are in the appropriate sub folders inside the Pics folder. This method allows me to view all picture "albums" using only one shortcut, the explorer one, instead of links to every individual thing I do, which would create quite a mess. It also eliminate the ugly folder links on my desktop, which is a pet peeve of mine. If I want to open a program, I just scroll down the All Programs list at the bottom of the start menu and find it in it's folder if it isn't listed as a single executable file there. The control panel, system tools, event viewer, etc., etc., and more etc. are also not in one place where they can easily be found as they are in the start menu. The whole start menu system is much more streamlined and easier to navigate for almost everyone. It's so basic and simple, everything is laid out on a list for you to see. It shows everything you want it to in by far less space. If I had live tiles of everything on my rig, it would take up a lot of room, and take longer to scroll through than a list of words would. Also a word that says, "Photoshop CS6" is impossible to misinterpret where a picture could be misleading. It also scrolls sideways, which feels weird on a PC. There is also the annoyance of closing some programs by swiping them down like on a phone and hot corners or whatever they're called, all things that are not needed if the start menu is there.

The main issue I and many others have is the drastic difference between 7 and 8 when trying to simply navigate through your computer and finding simple tools and less used programs, which has been done basically the same way for about 20 years now, and was suddenly turned upside down. 7 was the pinnacle of the original Windows 95 UI ideas, and many loved the way it looked and felt. You had complete control of what was shown, what was made into a shortcut, and where it all was displayed. Aside from the slight customization of recent programs list and appearance, NOTHING needs to be customized to be useful. A little long winded, but this is the best way I can describe why I hate the whole Metro UI design.

 

[htmlboss]

Looks tolerable to me 😛