With Sinofsky Gone, Start Menu Could Return to Windows 8

Page 6 - Seeking answers? Join the Tom's Hardware community: where nearly two million members share solutions and discuss the latest tech.
Status
Not open for further replies.
@belardo

ever tried pressing the winkey then start typing, darn sight faster than dragging your mouse over.... strangely enough works the same in win8

i sometimes wonder why folks talk about using too much effort to do something sigh
 

I have used Windows 8 and AbbasJin is pretty much right. Without a touch screen Windows 8 is pretty much a pain in the a$$ to use.
 
Regarding GUI design, the crazy thing about Microsoft design choices lately is that they're breaking their own rules. I got a lot of great ideas regarding GUI design from Microsoft... they're the first place I read about minimizing the number of clicks needed for frequently used tasks - but ever since the horrible ribbon came into existance they've apparently been ignoring their own design standards.

In the case of Windows 8, they're doing something new... they're trying to FORCE usage behavior by intentionally breaking prior SOP. In this case they've also got a hardware component since the new gui is clearly designed to be most efficient when used with a touchscreen. I really like the multitouch concept, but I'm not yet convinced that it's workable for the desktop (mobile computing absolutetly). I'd rather have seen them deliver a 'Desktop' and a separate 'Mobile' version of Win8 if they really wanted to make the case for the touchscreen gui - though if you think about it... you can get that by staying with Win7 on the desktop, and updating your touch mobile devices to Win8.
 
Dear God no... that will just confuse things anymore. Don't people get it yet? The start screen IS the start button. That list of 10 recently used apps you always clicked on from the start menu... guess what?... they are all on your new start screen. Its not hard people...
 
[citation][nom]velocityg4[/nom]Really I think to most people the lack of a Start Menu means very little. The average user when they want a program closes open window then open the program or file they wanted and do the same thing every time they want to change a program. Because they have absolutely no idea what is going on with a computer. The only way they can get to anywhere on the computer is from the same blank slate of a desktop. They can't switch between windows let alone a start button.If the screen does not look exactly as they expect it to they can't do anything on the computer. Without at least a great deal of effort.The much bigger deal is booting to Metro. For the average computer user. They will have absolutely no idea as to what to do. They will be completely lost and not be able to do anything until someone shows them a procedure of screens and clicks to memorize.Which is something I think people that understand technology don't get when dealing with most users. They don't understand how anything is working. All they know is the procedure they memorized. Then they can work in a very limited scope outside of what was memorized. Which is why I don't understand what Microsoft hoped to accomplish with Windows 8 and alienate a great deal of customers. Whom now may look at Mac OS X since they have to relearn everything anyways. It won't be Linux even the easiest Linux is far too complex for the average user.[/citation]

tl;dr warning for the less patient readers.

The simplest Linux Distros are easier than Windows and OSX for installing and for using. Linux's problem is that it can be more difficult to get some Windows programs to work on it for the average user (and even many above-average users who aren't familiar with Linux), not difficulty with which to use for basic things, especially since most popular distros such as Ubuntu come with most of the software that the average user and even most others could ever need as well as a very easy to use repository for pretty much everything else.

Furthermore, any average user who doesn't see the IE button and such for a few other basic programs in the Metro screen is pitiable. Not seeing the desktop button is almost as bad. I've had some family members (most of which are average or even below average users, some of which were little kids) give Windows 8 a try (not on their own computers, just on a test VM on my laptop) and none of them have had any trouble with Windows 8 nor Ubuntu, Mint, and a few other Linux distros.

Even some more basic distros such as Tinycore are fine to use for most people after either installing some basic programs such as office apps and a web browser and most people have no trouble using even it's extremely basic but large repository for programs so long as they know what to look for (IE, looking for Firefox and know that it's called Firefox).

I'll never understand how any supposedly computer-savvy programmers and such have so much trouble with any common Linux distro or Windows 8 when even the least computer literate people whom I know to be hardly capable of opening a web browser and browsing the web can do it in less than a minute or two without even needing any help. I can understand somethings such has difficulty shutting Windows 8 down without knowing where to look, but taking long periods of time and still not figuring it out or at least just looking it up is laughable. I'm a little sorry if that offends anyone, but I just don't get how it can be considered difficult.

Also, I even less understand how people could think that anyone will turn to OSX over this... Windows 7 is still an OS commonly seen in prebuilt systems and even then, as someone who has experience with several recent versions, I don't see how anyone could say that it's any easier to use. It's no more difficult for the most part, but it's most certainly not any easier except for a few things that are easily rectified (IE I like some of the shortcuts such as how it does screen shots with functionality that I thought I'd need third party stuff to do).

Really now, let's look at Windows 8... Sure, the full-screen aspects of Metro can be annoying, but what does it lack in functionality that the start menu has (well, at least that is commonly used and not present in the sidebar)? What I see as the main complaints, application launching and searching, are no more difficult than with the start menus are previous systems. Just type like you did with the start menu and the search dialogue appears and any application that isn't in the main menu is right in the "all applications" tab.

Also, what do you think is difficult about Linux? With Ubuntu, anyone who can pop a disk in a DVD reader and boot from it can install it because the installer is extremely simple and literally walks you through it, arguably better than even the Windows 8 installer (it's a little less complicated) and launching most programs that average users would use such as a web browser (usually Firefox by default, but sometimes Chrome and more rarely, another browser in my experience) are incredibly easy to use.

Now I'm not a fan of Ubuntu's new interface, but you don't even need to use it and you can simply use the arguably even better Linux Mint instead anyway. What's so difficult about quite literally popping a DVD in a DVD reader (assuming that you have one) and letting it mostly install itself without need for user input other than what to do (install in dual-boot with Windows, install by itself, boot but don't install, etc, also the installer clearly explains what each option is IIRC) and stuff such as user name and password? What's so difficult about just clicking on the Firefox icon (assuming that it defaults to Firefox)?
 


I really have to disagree. Even before I simply threw in Classic Shell, I hardly used the Metro screen (taskbar that can pin apps and/or use a quick launch as well as a desktop can hold pretty much any launcher for any program that I could need and much more). Besides, Metro really isn't bad even without a touch screen if you give it a serious shot. You have many commonly used programs right in front of you and at least from what I read here, most people use the search instead anyway, and that's equally fast to the start menu. The all programs works easily too.

What makes it a pain to use? The main reason for getting Classic Shell was mostly so that I wouldn't have to get used to working with something else without more time to adjust/experiment with the different UI methodology of Windows 8 and I hardly use it anymore (I don't really use it nor the Metro menu much) except for being able to boot directly into the desktop automatically.
 
I ABSOLUTELY HATE the fact that W8 doesn't have a start menu. As many other have pointed out, using this lame "metro" interface with a mouse makes it useless. I'm not going to buy a touch screen for my home computer. Why would I want fingerprint marks all over my monitor?

This is a classic example of doing something just to do it. It does make any sense.

All I want is a updated Windows 7. Make it faster, make it less resource intensive, update the "look" and that's it. Don't change the entire way I interface with the computer! It's an answer to a question no one was asking.
 
[citation][nom]jtv666[/nom]I ABSOLUTELY HATE the fact that W8 doesn't have a start menu. As many other have pointed out, using this lame "metro" interface with a mouse makes it useless. I'm not going to buy a touch screen for my home computer. Why would I want fingerprint marks all over my monitor?This is a classic example of doing something just to do it. It does make any sense.All I want is a updated Windows 7. Make it faster, make it less resource intensive, update the "look" and that's it. Don't change the entire way I interface with the computer! It's an answer to a question no one was asking.[/citation]

[citation][nom]jtv666[/nom]Meant to say "It *doesn't* make any sense."[/citation]

So install a start menu... There are plenty of free programs to do this(and more) excellently. Besides, even without one, there's no need to get a touch screen to use Metro.

Furthermore, it's not an answer to a question that no one was asking. It's MS trying to make up for the decreasing profits from other causes such as the slowing of the desktop/laptop market in growth and more. I don't think that they did nearly the best job of it, but they most certainly do have reasons for doing it.
 
No,[citation][nom]GreaseMonkey_62[/nom]I have used Windows 8 and AbbasJin is pretty much right. Without a touch screen Windows 8 is pretty much a pain in the a$$ to use.[/citation]

No, its really not.
 
First of all, we should be able to configure it. Second, it would make a great deal of sense to me for Windows 8 to hide the tiles and give me a real desktop whenever it detects a keyboard attached. So if I have a real PC my problem is solved and if I've got a convertible tablet/notebook it would flip modes back and forth automatically and intuitively. Of course, some folks might have an all-in-one with a touchscreen and want the option to disable keyboard detection. Windows should be easily customizable.
 
Windows 8 is very difficult to use without the Start button. I will not recommend it to anyone because of this. I also the the Metro UI which is terrible. I would not like to use it at all. Because of this, I will stay using Windows 7 or Windows XP. I would like to have the traditional Start menu back to Windows 7 too, but luckily I can use Classic Shell for that. But I would like to use Windows without extra utilities. Currently it is not possible.
 
[citation][nom]Anonymous[/nom]Windows 8 is very difficult to use without the Start button. I will not recommend it to anyone because of this. I also the the Metro UI which is terrible. I would not like to use it at all. Because of this, I will stay using Windows 7 or Windows XP. I would like to have the traditional Start menu back to Windows 7 too, but luckily I can use Classic Shell for that. But I would like to use Windows without extra utilities. Currently it is not possible.[/citation]

Name one thing that you absolutely need the start menu for.
 
[citation][nom]blazorthon[/nom]Name one thing that you absolutely need the start menu for.[/citation]

Personal preference... which, as the driving factor behind my personal purchase decisions, is all that matters to me.
 
[citation][nom]nicodemus_mm[/nom]Personal preference... which, as the driving factor behind my personal purchase decisions, is all that matters to me.[/citation]

As personal preference, the start menu is still available in Windows 8 if you simply put it there. My question might better be worded as something like this: What makes Windows 8 difficult to use without a start button and why does that matter to any of us at Toms and most other people as well since if we can choose our own web browser program, we can just as easily choose our own start menu program.
 


No - the start menu is NOT available in Windows 8 without using THIRD PARTY SOFTWARE (until MS unlocked the Registry entry again).

What part is it that you and others don't realize that PERSONAL PREFERENCE is the number 1 driver of people buying, AND MORE IMPORTANTLY NOT BUYING, new software (and hardware and anything else)???????
 


As an OS, Windows 8 is superior to Windows 7 overall. That much is proven due to its improved resource management and performance in some areas.

The registry entry wasn't locked, the code that it referred to was removed.

Third party or not, the start menu can be put back in for free. Whether or not its third party makes no important difference. I still have personal preference because this is still doable. Whether or not MS gave the option by default doesn't change the fact that the option is still there.
 
i was forced by a hardware failure to buy a new PC, which happened to be bundled with win8. i've been trying for the past few days to use the metro start menu, and just can't make it work for me. i ended up giving in late last night and installing start8.

the biggest problem here is that there is a brand new interface that has almost no apps ready for it. almost all the software i use only runs in desktop mode, and even the apps that do have metro front-ends are lacking in function, or hand off to browsers to get large chunks of their job done). there are good things in metro, but taking away existing functionality without a credible replacement was just wrong-headed and dumb.

i've followed microsoft platorms through from MS-DOS to the present, and this is the first time i feel like i've been stranded on a platform without a good way to work. using the desktop/metro back-and-forth nav just makes everything harder, and doesn't actually expose me to the metro interface much.

there's also absolutely no reason other than it's own dogma that microsoft would have eliminated the start menu. it's clear that it's really easy to put back, and would have been just as easy to leave alone as the first step of a UI evolution, and to let the users figure out how to best use the interfaces based on their work styles, devices, etc.

bad move, guys.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.