Why Windows 8 Start Menu's Absence is Irrelevant

[LstBrunnenG]

The reason most people will skip on Windows 8 isn't because of the ugly GUI, or lack of options or joke application store. Its because without the Metro store junk, there isn't much difference. It's a lazy service pack by lazy idealess developers for full retail price.

When has a Windows version ever been released to the general public at a price of $39.99? It was always $99.99 or more for the upgrade version, and still more if you wanted anything but the Home version or a full version.

Plus the "Well if you ignore everything that's different, it's the same!" mentality drives me batty.

 

[aaronspink]

Unless you're willing to show your professional credentials that makes you a capable judge, I will just assume you're less qualified than those who have done the research.

User learning curves are weird things. The same popup bubble which is nice the first time is annoying the hundredth. When Windows 95 came out, it required text to scroll along the bottom and point to the start button to say "click here to start". Can you imagine if that was dragged through every subsequent version? However, that's what you propose: a hint is needed every time for every user.

Of course, you're a genius and know this stuff waaay better than all the people who spend their lives studying it. I bow before your wisdom and feel humbled in your presence. Thanks for gracing us, here, with it, for we would be lost without your opinions.

The problem is confusing learnability with usability. Just because something is easier to learn doesn't mean it has better usability. And this is of course why metro on a desktop fails.

 

[Jasec]

I think MS should just leave Win8 be a phone /tablet thing and the OG Win 8 edition be the desktop version and for free for Win7 users and have the desktop as default. Bam! Solved everything.

 

[aaronspink]

Well sure, Windows 8's focus is on mobile. The traditional PC market isn't growing, plenty of people, probably many that don't like Windows 8, wouldn't have bought it anyway if all it was desktop keyboard and mouse only OS. Windows 7 is just fine a lot are saying and I don't think that there's much that Microsoft could do to convince a stagnant market to go by a PC that's pretty much just like the one they already have.

Windows 8's focus is the desktop and will make up 95%+ of windows 8 revenues. There is no logical reason to force a tablet interface on desktop windows, which is exactly what they have done. In doing so, they will reduce the revenue from the primary revenue market without doing anything to increase revenue on the supposed growing market.

Yes, Windows 8 is trying to appease a growing market while retaining the desktop.

and from all appearances, they are doing a miserable job at both!

 

[heatlesssun]

Windows 8's focus is the desktop and will make up 95%+ of windows 8 revenues. There is no logical reason to force a tablet interface on desktop windows, which is exactly what they have done. In doing so, they will reduce the revenue from the primary revenue market without doing anything to increase revenue on the supposed growing market.

Microsoft had to consider the PC hardware market with Windows 8. The conventional PC market is simply not growing, that's what virtually every number is saying. As many have stated, plenty of people are doing just fine with their 5 year old PCs and there's little that could be done to the desktop to go make people buy more desktop only machines.

I would suspect that the large bulk of Windows 8 license revenue will come from cheap conventional machines but I bet from the OEM side the margins in tablet and touch devices will be much better.

 

[Tawnos]

What's the easiest way to shutdown windows 8?

Press the power button

 

[Tawnos]

The problem is confusing learnability with usability. Just because something is easier to learn doesn't mean it has better usability. And this is of course why metro on a desktop fails.

Wait, what?

You're going to have to back up a bit, as the common complaint thus far has been "but metro is so hard to figure out on the desktop, it's like it wasn't made for it at all." *insert videos of old people using it for the first time and not figuring out how to launch start*

Now you're going the other way?

 

[heatlesssun]

Wait, what?

You're going to have to back up a bit, as the common complaint thus far has been "but metro is so hard to figure out on the desktop, it's like it wasn't made for it at all." *insert videos of old people using it for the first time and not figuring out how to launch start*

Now you're going the other way?

Well it's said all the time, if I wanted a phone OS on my PC I'd use a phone, its dumbed down. And, oh by the way, it's too complicated and different and people are too dumb and resistant to change so nothing can be changed.

People love to say that Microsoft doesn't listen, the problem is that vehement Metro opponents are saying any and everything. There's really no way to listen to them at this point. About the only thing that they seem to have in common is the desire for a Metro off switch/desktop mode.

 

[bigdogchris]

Yes because, clicking the corner or hitting the Windows key and then either typing or scrolling in Windows 8 so radically different with a keyboards and mice in Windows 8 it's completely the same in Windows 7, functionally speaking.

I got a new one for you. Sure Metro does similar things in different ways, but how about this one. I don't like all my programs spread out across the screen. I want a nice small pop up menu for them. Metro is the exact opposite of this.

 

[Tawnos]

I got a new one for you. Sure Metro does similar things in different ways, but how about this one. I don't like all my programs spread out across the screen. I want a nice small pop up menu for them. Metro is the exact opposite of this.

How many programs do you launch via start?

 

[NoNRG]

Article should have been named "Shameless grab for pageviews"

 

[Eman D. Rahym]

Sure Metro does similar things in different ways, but how about this one. I don't like all my programs spread out across the screen. I want a nice small pop up menu for them.

Use the View Tab in Windows Explorer to choose to show hidden items.

Right click on your task bar, choose "Toolbars...New Toolbar..." and point it at C:\ProgramData\Microsoft\Windows\Start Menu

Done.

 

[heatlesssun]

I got a new one for you. Sure Metro does similar things in different ways, but how about this one. I don't like all my programs spread out across the screen. I want a nice small pop up menu for them. Metro is the exact opposite of this.

Can't argue with personal preference. But having used Windows 8 everyday as my primary OS across a range of devices and input methods, I simply cannot see any loss of efficiency in launching programs the Start Screen with a keyboard and mouse compared to the Start Menu. And obviously when using touch the Start Screen is easily 10x faster.

The end result in practical terms is that the Start Screen is better balanced. The Start Screen has minimal impact on program launch speed when a user adapts with a keyboard and mouse and is FAR faster with touch than the Start Menu.

 

[heatlesssun]

Use the View Tab in Windows Explorer to choose to show hidden items.

Right click on your task bar, choose "Toolbars...New Toolbar..." and point it at C:\ProgramData\Microsoft\Windows\Start Menu

Done.

Virtually everything that is in the Start Menu can be done in File Explorer including launching desktop and even Metro apps if one likes tiny lists. Or even big lists.

 

[wonderfield]

When has a Windows version ever been released to the general public at a price of $39.99? It was always $99.99 or more for the upgrade version, and still more if you wanted anything but the Home version or a full version.

Plus the "Well if you ignore everything that's different, it's the same!" mentality drives me batty.

That's an introductory promotional price.

 

[Advil]

Metro IS functionally identical to the Start Menu... and better in almost every way. It's graphical, the icons are larger and can better represent the program being launched and you can organize it any way you want, clumping together related software.

How is that bad?

 

[heatlesssun]

That's an introductory promotional price.

Introductory or not, it's still the best price and easiest upgrade path that Microsoft has ever offered. Virtually every Windows machine for the last decade is eligible for the Pro (domains, Windows server tools, etc) version of Windows 8 for $40, no if ands or buts.

And it may very well turn out to be more than introductory. Microsoft promotional pricing tends to come back from time to time, especially if Windows 8 sales are slow or sluggish. For people with later model XP or Vista machines, this could be a cheap and easy way to breath a lot of new life in those aging devices.

 

[heatlesssun]

How is that bad?

From the perspective of Metro opponents because Metro design is not optimized or suitable for the desktop. But the more I use Windows 8 on desktops, the more suitable for me it certainly has become and as top line Metro apps come on line, the more suitable it will become for more.

Like the OneNote Metro app. A beautiful Metro app that's very productive and works great with tablets and touch and pen and desktops and keyboards and mice. It'll be Metro apps like this that will slowly but surely continuously buck the notion that Metro is only for touch devices.

 

[Deleted member 134608]

I got used to the jarring full screen pop-up of Metro recently, but something else bothered me still and I couldn't put a finger on it.

Suddenly it hit me like a ton of bricks.

Side scrolling! It drives me nuts. I've been so used to scrolling down from web surfing, word and .pdf files that side scrolling feels unnatural to me.

I don't care for it in Android either on the home screens or on iOS.

If the Metro scrolled down/up I'm sure I'd like it a lot more. It would make more sense to me with multiple monitors as well. Already used to scolling up and down on the web on one screen then moving left/right for other displays.

 

[Chimel]

I don't understand what you could be doing in the desktop mode that's so important it can't be covered for a few seconds

The impertinence and pretentiousness of the man. All he cares about is how he himself uses the computer, not how many people use it. I don't want to stop watching a movie or video when I want to open the browser or Notepad to write down the lyrics of a song that is currently playing, I don't want to stop displaying my word processor when I call a calculator to computer a result to insert into the document I am typing, based on the raw figures in that document. I want to know what song is playing while I am reading or typing this. And a thousand more examples where full screen is not appropriate unless you're always mono-tasking.

And it's not so much the removal of the Start menu that pisses me off, but the fullscreenitude of it and the constant flash between the desktop and the Metro Start screen whenever you need to call a plain Notepad, Calc or Paint accessory.

In any case, even for the Start menu example, the author's screenshot talk better than I could: Every single application name is clearly readable in the Win7 screenshot, but absolutely none in the Tiles or small icons sections are readable. Only "Start" (which does not even appear on Win7) and his user name are readable. And how you can easily pick the proper app when there's over 50 small icons displayed all over the screen is a mystery. You probably have to type the app name, which is a huge fail for mouse users, or to use a dedicated app launching app like the author does, which is also a huge fail for such a core Windows feature.

And regarding efficiency, a single click on my Quick Launch toolbar is at least 3 times faster than any Start menu action. And please don't mention any awkward keyboard and mouse combination, like pressing the Windows key or memorizing and typing the app name, which take even longer. Even when I am already on the keyboard typing text, and I am good with a keyboard, I find it faster to use the mouse on the Quick Launch toolbar, which I customized to my needs. Typing an app name only means you haven't customized your system to a more efficient way, and that's the part where I feel left out by Microsoft, with this Metro paradigm you can't avoid in Windows 8.

Plus I thought the OS was supposed to be more efficient and less power-hungry in hardware resources, but I noticed that in the last release preview Windows 8 wouldn't let me install it on my desktop, although it works great on Windows 7 x64 Ultimate, even for tasks such as Blu-ray playback or video editing. Insulting my manhood saying I didn't have the right equipment or something...

I was thinking of getting one of these cheap upgrade kits, just to have a Windows 8 around when needed, but since I don't have machines to run it on, it would probably be cheaper or easier to get Windows together with a new PC or motherboard. Still plenty of time to think about it and wait for full pricing information on all options.

 

[heatlesssun]

Side scrolling! It drives me nuts. I've been so used to scrolling down from web surfing, word and .pdf files that side scrolling feels unnatural to me.

With a mouse with a good horizontal scroll wheel or mechanism it's actually kind of cool when apps support it well and the Start Screen is awesome with a nice horizontal scroll wheel. I can fly through hundreds of tiles with nothing more than the flick of a finger back and forth. In fact the flat nature of this Start Screen makes more sense now since I got the hang of using mouse wheels.

 

[Trimlock]

Press the power button

pretty funny I forgot about the power off function in the start menu since I have been using the hard button since early xp.

 

[heatlesssun]

I don't want to stop watching a movie or video when I want to open the browser or Notepad to write down the lyrics of a song that is currently playing, I don't want to stop displaying my word processor when I call a calculator to computer a result to insert into the document I am typing, based on the raw figures in that document. I want to know what song is playing while I am reading or typing this. And a thousand more examples where full screen is not appropriate unless you're always mono-tasking.

There are no less than three ways to launch desktop apps built into Windows 8 without ever leaving the desktop if it's that critical not to see a full screen app launcher.

 

[Tawnos]

pretty funny I forgot about the power off function in the start menu since I have been using the hard button since early xp.

Even the hardware button has been a "soft button" since at least 98SE. Long past the days of AT power supplies where the power button was a hard switch that actually turned on or off the power.

 

[Chimel]

There are no less than three ways to launch desktop apps built into Windows 8 without ever leaving the desktop if it's that critical not to see a full screen app launcher.

These 3 ways, which are probably 2 only with just a mouse, do not suit all types of apps. For instance, the shortcuts in the taskbar work fine with a very limited of the most frequently called apps. Any more, and it's a messy and confusing UI, the same mess and confusion I find in the Metro Start screen.

I don't know if the Quick Launch toolbar still works in Windows 8, since it won't let me install it, but assuming it does, this is again best restricted to a few less commonly but still frequently used tools, accessories and apps.

I don't know of any other single-click possibility to call these apps, and any other app will of course need to be called via the Start Screen.

In any case, are all the accessories available both in Metro and Desktop UI? Like the calculator, Notepad, Paint? I thought they were only Metro apps and required the Metro Start screen when called from a desktop app.

Hey, if some of you guys have any virtual Windows 8 machine we could connect to from the Internet, that would be fantastic.

 

[Red Squirrel]

The more I hear about windows 8 (and ultimately, the new direction MS seems to want to be going) the more I'm glad I recently removed my dependence of Microsoft... well at least to some degree. Still have to use Windows for gaming. But I'm sure games will continue to be compatible with 7 for a long time. With the bad press 8 is getting 7 will probably survive as long as XP unless 9 is a complete overhaul and is actually suitable for a real computer. This movement towards trying to replace PCs with tablets and phones is ridiculous.

 

[SixFootDuo]

At the end of the day, the only thing that really matters is the public's general consensus and that is, Windows 8 sucks, and for a whole host of reasons I don't need to repeat. Just like Vista, if people don't like it, people won't want it. Same with Vista, and same here.

Microsoft is sketchy at best.

 

[heatlesssun]

The majority of people aren't mad about the change, they're mad about the lack of backward functionality. Fine, add the new thing. But let me drop back to the 7-style Start Menu if I wish.

Then use Windows 7 if all you need is keyboard and mouse capability. I've been using Windows on tablets for years and like the ability to move between devices and input methods while retaining the same capabilities. This is simply the way that more and more people are going to use PCs. Retaining a 20 year old UI designed for keyboards and mice only might appease some people but I don't know how it would move Windows forward. Windows 8 is virtually 100% backwards compatible with existing Windows software and hardware and forwards compatible with a whole new generation on hardware and software which the Start Menu can't support well.

 

[heatlesssun]

At the end of the day, the only thing that really matters is the public's general consensus and that is, Windows 8 sucks, and for a whole host of reasons I don't need to repeat. Just like Vista, if people don't like it, people won't want it. Same with Vista, and same here.

Microsoft is sketchy at best.

And the public's consensus was that Office 2007 sucked with the ribbon. Five years latter into revision #3 and record growth and sales, the ribbon in Office still sucks for many in the public's view.

 

[heatlesssun]

The more I hear about windows 8 (and ultimately, the new direction MS seems to want to be going) the more I'm glad I recently removed my dependence of Microsoft...

Sure, the more you hear from people who don't use the product much on anything beyond a keyboard and mouse would more than likely not have a favorable opinion.

 

[Dekoth-E-]

Sure, the more you hear from people who don't use the product much on anything beyond a keyboard and mouse would more than likely not have a favorable opinion.

And those people are the overwhelming majority of users who will be dealing with Windows 8..So if the majority of feedback is negative from the largest demographic of people, that says something.

Not going to bother debating the inane article.

 

[Numan]

The impertinence and pretentiousness of the man. All he cares about is how he himself uses the computer, not how many people use it. I don't want to stop watching a movie or video when I want to open the browser or Notepad to write down the lyrics of a song that is currently playing, I don't want to stop displaying my word processor when I call a calculator to computer a result to insert into the document I am typing, based on the raw figures in that document. I want to know what song is playing while I am reading or typing this. And a thousand more examples where full screen is not appropriate unless you're always mono-tasking.

I hope you didn't go from Windows 3.1 to 95 because that was the same argument people had against the Start menu; that it covered screen real estate and you couldn't always see behind it. Rubbish.

And those people are the overwhelming majority of users who will be dealing with Windows 8..So if the majority of feedback is negative from the largest demographic of people, that says something.

I think it's more 50/50, and some of that Against50 have some goofy arguments. I keep reading how it's impossible to use a mouse with Win8 yet it literally feels like Win7 to me, yet in Win8. I think a lot of people have some broken mice out there. Also the 'me too' people chime in. There was a lot of them with Vista who never touched it but because Bob down the street said it was crap so it must be true.

Keep 7 if you don't like 8. And keep 7 if you're "gona pass and wait for 9" because we'll have more tablets, hybrids and a large app store and more Metro then a French subway station!

 

[Seventyfive]

Windows 7 Start menu - 10-15 items visible on search
Windows 8 Start Screen 30-60 items visible on search

When someone can come up with an argument for why using more space to find an item is a bad thing, then I will debate you. Until then, the "its full screen!" argument has got to be the silliest thing I have ever heard in my life.

And good lord, how often are you launching apps that it would actually bother you?

You know there's an option to do small font and to show more recent programs right? If I hit the windows key and start typing a program, I get at least 30 results on my screen. Oh and I can still see what's going on in my workspace while I do it.

 

[TechLarry]

Classic Menu's. Done.

 

[Jagger100]

Yes because, clicking the corner or hitting the Windows key and then either typing or scrolling in Windows 8 so radically different with a keyboards and mice in Windows 8 it's completely the same in Windows 7, functionally speaking.

They had hotkeys in DOS. I mean if you're saying the you can make Windows 8 act like a term window just like Windows 7 can be made act like a term window for power users. Good for them.

The rest of us non-power, but still heavy users, don't need these features 10 times a day so we never use hotkeys for them. But we still need those features from time to time and, when we do, we don't have time to waste jumping through hoops of a new UI system.

 

[heatlesssun]

And those people are the overwhelming majority of users who will be dealing with Windows 8..So if the majority of feedback is negative from the largest demographic of people, that says something.

Not going to bother debating the inane article.

Well there are those who with just a mouse and keyboard that haven't used it much either. But the fact is that most people are going to get Windows 8 with new hardware and in time more and more of that hardware is going to be geared towards Windows 8 and touch is going to be front and center. Even a lot of folks that may not like Windows 8 with keyboards and mice might like it on tablets, particularly x86 devices because Windows 7 and 8 are highly interoperable. Being able to work with a Word document or PowerPoint presentation in Windows 7 with a keyboard and mouse and then moving to a Windows 8 tablet using the same programs by simply copying files around with no loss of functionality in the programs.

Whether one hates or loves Windows 8, people simply haven't seen it action beyond trivial use, particularity the haters since they don't use it daily.

 

[Seventyfive]

Windows 7 Start menu - 10-15 items visible on search
Windows 8 Start Screen 30-60 items visible on search

When someone can come up with an argument for why using more space to find an item is a bad thing, then I will debate you. Until then, the "its full screen!" argument has got to be the silliest thing I have ever heard in my life.

And good lord, how often are you launching apps that it would actually bother you?

From my work computer (which is running vista). Pretty sure that's more than 10-15...

 

[DeathPrincess]

Keep 7 if you don't like 8. And keep 7 if you're "gona pass and wait for 9" because we'll have more tablets, hybrids and a large app store and more Metro then a French subway station!

Who in their right mind would bother making a Metro application?

Seriously. Lets weigh up a Metro vs desktop application.

Desktop... Metro.
Development: Built using known tools with years of experience. Built using new shit, meaning more staff training and possible screw-ups.
Screen use: Supports any known screen arrangement. Extremely limited single full screen window or half screen.
Profits: You keep 100%. You pay Microsoft 20-30% of your profits...forever.
Pricing: Whatever you want. $0-$whatever. $1.49 - $999, packages which cost more than that will have to reduce prices or go screw themselves.
Installed userbase: About a billion+. Heatlesssun.
Has legacy support: Yes. No.
Can have touch screen support: Yes. Yes.
Has to be sold through a silly "store" reliant on a third party: No. Yes.
Can be removed on a whim from users computers: No. Yes.
Can be banned from being sold on whim of Microsoft: No. Yes.
Has to abide with content policies: No. Yes.
On Windows 8: Yes. Yes.
On popular OSs: Yes. No.

Etc.

There isn't really much positive for a Metro application.

 

[Chimel]

I hope you didn't go from Windows 3.1 to 95 because that was the same argument people had against the Start menu; that it covered screen real estate and you couldn't always see behind it. Rubbish.

I did, I went from PC-DOS to the 2 first previews of Windows 8 without skipping a single release, including the enterprise NT and 2000 or the short-lived OSR2 and ME. During all of Vista development period, my main work computer was set up to install the new daily builds overnight because I believe in self-hosting (or eating your own dog food, as some call it). I always was one to appreciate the new features and advances of the new versions, and to denigrate those that were plain stupid or half broken, like ME or UAC in Vista.

I never heard of such a stupid argument for Win95, so it must not have been a very vocal one, or a very important one, and in any case, it never was a problem to me. But there is a whole lot of a difference between something that eats a sizable chunk of space in a 640x480 monitor, and a flashy full screen with solid colors in a radically different graphic user interface.

It's not just about the full screen part, but also the feeling you get about this hybrid mutant that is Windows 8 when you constantly switch between the 2 interfaces. Running all apps, including legacy apps, from Metro would have been much better in that respect, although it would be worse for multitasking and other aspects for non-touch users. It just doesn't feel like a finished product that self-asserts itself and can handle every touch and non-touch user in the same standard fashion. If Windows 8 does not believe in itself, why should I support it?

Feedback seems to be way more than 50% negative, I haven't seen any glamorous positive reviews so far, most of what passes as "positive" are just describing the features of Windows 8, very few express a personal enthusiasm for the new O.S. for non-touch desktop users. Look at how this very article is phrased, "Windows 8 Start Menu's absence is irrelevant", not "Windows 8 Start Screen is sheer genius", and it doesn't even prove its point 100% positively, with so many blemishes and concerns highlighted.

I'm sure Windows 8 will be a blast with users of modern tablets like the Surface, but these users are also likely to own several non-touch computers, either at home or at work. Anyway, we don't have to discuss it, sales will talk soon enough.
One of the most important things I'll be watching is if OEMs will still offer Windows 7 alongside Windows 8 after the release of Windows 8, or if they will be forced by Microsoft to ship only Windows 8 in their computers. Some Dell, HP, Acer, Asus insiders should jump in...

 

[Chimel]

Installed userbase: About a billion+. Heatlesssun.

Priceless! ^-^

While I don't believe most of these points are valid, each new .NET Framework or developer tool's update is usually a pain and frequently breaks compilation or runtime, the arguments about the Microsoft Store are valid and most worrying. And don't give me any shit about it's to protect the users like if it's the new it's to protect the children. If Microsoft really felt concerned about the safety of users without any other hidden motivation, they would offer an app to test other apps for security flaws or malicious behavior, either running locally or on their servers and notifying the user of the danger, but letting them decide for themselves. And this check would happen only for the very first user(s). Most people downloading the app would be able to see beforehand if it has any security flaw or malicious behavior. It's not like all the apps in the Apple or Microsoft stores are immune from flaws, these come mostly from the developer tools used and can be exploited at any time. How are the well known SQL injections still possible in this age, for instance?