Start menu coming back

X

XOR != OR

[H]F Junkie
Joined
Jun 17, 2003
Messages
11,547
http://www.theregister.co.uk/2013/12/09/microsoft_threshold_start_menu/

So MS has realized that people use their devices differently and are now out to accommodate them.

It would be incredibly petty to say "I told you so", and really rub it in. To point out how I came to the same conclusion years ago and said as much, only to have some..um..."advocates" tell me how wrong I was.

Good thing I'm not petty though, right?
 
You mean MS realized some people will cry and refuse to change/learn/adapt, regardless of how inefficient they actually are... Then gave in to shut them up? Yea don't pat yourself on the back too hard there.
 
Once I set up the "All Apps" menu in 8.1, it's pretty much the same thing. I don't mind them doing it, but giving people better tools to customize what's already there might have done the same thing.
 
Biznatch said:
You mean MS realized some people will cry and refuse to change/learn/adapt, regardless of how inefficient they actually are... Then gave in to shut them up? Yea don't pat yourself on the back too hard there.
Click to expand...
Much of what I said years ago, incidentally.
 
Too little too late.

You either bought Start8 or Classic Shell etc already

Or you hate Windows 8 and have already wrote it off as
"I'll wait till Windows 9"

The consumer populus hates it because the people they refer to hate it.

In other words, they screwed the geek and he told his friends about his hatred. So if HE hates it, they'll hate it.

It was the mantra that killed Vista, and its been that way with 8.
 
The idea appears to be that Microsoft will tailor slightly different versions of its operating system for different audiences, rather than the one-size-fits-all approach it tried when it launched the touch-driven Windows 8.
Click to expand...
This just so happens to go against Microsoft's primary goal with Windows 8. I find this unlikely.
 
Biznatch said:
You mean MS realized some people will cry and refuse to change/learn/adapt, regardless of how inefficient they actually are... Then gave in to shut them up? Yea don't pat yourself on the back too hard there.
Click to expand...

Exactly. But, most general end users aren't too happy about change/learn/adapting. They just want to sit and get their work done. These are the people Microsoft needs to appease to, not us technology nerds that don't like it. If it was just us bitching, I'd say screw it, don't give the option. But, as there is a lot of bitching from people in every position, I think it'd good to put the option to return to the classic start menu.

Me? I'll start with the start screen and ModernUI. I prefer it to the start menu (most of the time....).
 
I love how Windows 8 fan boys always say your afraid of change or learn to use it.

The thing is Windows Desktop Computers in the Consumer market are tanking but shipments in the Corporate have actually increased. Businesses don't make a habit of changing things when they work.

All you H guys are home users and don't lead any major IT departments or companies (unless they can prove me otherwise)

Home/Power/Enthusiasts you MEAN NOTHING YOU ARE NOTHING TO MS. Your 135 Dollar purchase of Windows 8 Home means shit, it means less then a milisecond in MS operational costs. You are lower then a fart in the wind in the grand scheme of things.

Even I mean nothing and I have purchased and or resold over 100k of MS Licensing VLK/OEM.
I have purchased close to 70 desktops and about 15 servers this year alone. I mean nothing in the grand scheme of things but My Purchases > your purchases

Since 2/3 of MS revenue comes from people like me and our complaint was Metro is a disgusting disaster for most companies MS is starting to actually realize that Consumers and Corporate Businesses are very different beasts.

They would have been fine if MS did the NT thing and separated the consumer low grade shit from Corporate products.
 
The problem is not the Start screen. Start isn't Metro, it just uses it. The problem is IT admins and decision makers who already made up their mind they hate it, refuse to train users or even consider it.

For most users, Metro apps and managing Metro vs desktop is a pain. Using the new start screen is not - its in fact more usable and friendly. But god forbid anyone have an open mind.
 
MrCrispy said:
For most users, Metro apps and managing Metro vs desktop is a pain. Using the new start screen is not - its in fact more usable and friendly. But god forbid anyone have an open mind.
Click to expand...

I've found the opposite. We turned off all Modern apps, and only have the start screen for desktop apps. Our users hate it. They hate the start screen. Most of them do. There are a few that don't, like anywhere.

I'm the only one that uninstalled the start menu replacement and use the start screen and Modern apps in our IT department. I'd like to see more users run with Win8, but I think that as more and more get it on their home PC's, they will be more comfortable with it and we'll eventually move to it.
 
MrCrispy said:
The problem is not the Start screen. Start isn't Metro, it just uses it. The problem is IT admins and decision makers who already made up their mind they hate it, refuse to train users or even consider it.
Click to expand...
And why should they? I never understood this argument. Why should business foot the training bill and productivity loss for a GUI change?
 
Another thread? The other one has 5+ pages already.

It should have been in windows 8 from the start.
 
It's not a problem of adapting. It's an issue with it not being the proper interface for EVERY computer.

If I were using a smart phone, or laptop with touchscreen, or tablet, Metro would be great.

I don't want to adapt to a feature that was designed primarily to push people into buying their tablets.
 
MrCrispy said:
The problem is not the Start screen. Start isn't Metro, it just uses it. The problem is IT admins and decision makers who already made up their mind they hate it, refuse to train users or even consider it.

For most users, Metro apps and managing Metro vs desktop is a pain. Using the new start screen is not - its in fact more usable and friendly. But god forbid anyone have an open mind.
Click to expand...

You lost me. Why *should* IT admins "train users"? Why should companies waste time and money when Microsoft has not demonstrated a business ROI for slapping a tablet UI front and center on all the non-touch PC's in the company? What compelling business case has Microsoft made with Metro that would benefit businesses enough to make the retraining and lost productivity costs worth it?

These are all questions that every CIO and IT Manager would ask and has asked of Microsoft when MS account managers try to peddle Win8 in enterprise: What's in it for us? And Microsoft has not had an answer.
 
XOR != OR said:
http://www.theregister.co.uk/2013/12/09/microsoft_threshold_start_menu/
Click to expand...
Paul Thurrott's article does not claim what that headline claims, and it's the primary source of the reg article. :p

What Paul Thurrott wrote is his sources tell him that the start menu is coming back in the next version of Windows, *huge speculation and a leap* brought him to claim it's happening in the convergence update of Windows (desktop, Xbone, phone os) called "Threshold". We're in the season for build leaks if it's a so called "Windows 8.2" update*, and there have been no such leaks so far for a UI change so great.

We'll see I guess. But click bait apparently works, so carry on. :p

* future updates (OSR2, etc), like the OSR1 update coming for 8.1, sound more likely than 8.2 since there still seems to be no trace of a Windows 8.2. The next version of Windows is Windows 9. Kind of obvious, I think.
 
stiltner said:
Too little too late.

You either bought Start8 or Classic Shell etc already

Or you hate Windows 8 and have already wrote it off as
"I'll wait till Windows 9"

The consumer populus hates it because the people they refer to hate it.

In other words, they screwed the geek and he told his friends about his hatred. So if HE hates it, they'll hate it.

It was the mantra that killed Vista, and its been that way with 8.
Click to expand...

true, maybe they will learn in future not to f-ed up their biggest product.
 
MrCrispy said:
Using the new start screen is not - its in fact more usable and friendly. But god forbid anyone have an open mind.
Click to expand...

Bullshit, absolute fucking bullshit.

Only Microsoft could design a full screen 'start screen' that was less useful than the start menu. When Windows 8 came out there was no clear way to log off or shut down. Could you click your user name on the big ass start screen to get those options? Nope, they hid the shut down options away on the charms menu. How about pulling up the control panel? Nope, gotta go to the desktop, not the actual desktop of course, you have to navigate to it in an explorer window. Want to organize your apps into folders? Too bad.

But yeah, I guess finding apps on a big ass side-scrolling start screen next to your Bing ads is much easier than something like this:

hz5d.jpg


(I could put a search box on there under run if I wanted to)

Forcing users to use Metro was a poorly thought out marketing gimmick, plain and simple. The new start screen was arguably the center of their marketing campaign for 8 (look at our cool hybrid UI, please buy our touch products!!!). And forcing users to use metro was supposed to drive traffic to their app store. Now you've got Bing search integration to deliver ads right to the desktop. Woohoo!

Users don't like the hybrid UI for good reasons. When I drive a car I want a steering wheel, when I ride a bike I want handlebars. When I'm on my desktop I want a UI optimized for the mouse/keyboard, when I'm on a touch device I want a touch UI. Users are not stupid, they can handle different interfaces for different tasks. The app store never took off because metro apps are stupid on the desktop, Microsoft has little touch market share (they completely missed the boat on cheap touch devices), and they didn't make it easy for developers to make metro apps. How Ballmer and the old Windows team walked into this disaster boggles my mind. It's good to see that the new Windows team is starting to turn things around, but the Windows 8 brand has already been ruined.
 
MrCrispy said:
The problem is not the Start screen. Start isn't Metro, it just uses it. The problem is IT admins and decision makers who already made up their mind they hate it, refuse to train users or even consider it.
Click to expand...

I work in IT, we don't have time or resources to train 700-900 people (just in one building) how to use tablet interface on their desktop PCs.And we are not going to buy 700-900 copies of Start8.

And your right, Head of IT in the company I work for made a decision that Windows 8 won't touch the company PCs. And were are talking about a company that has about 100,000 workers (in USA, Canada, Mexico, Japan, Brazil, UK, Germany, China, Thailand).

And I'm pretty sure the company I work for is not the only one to make that decision.
 
The problem is they went half ass on the start screen. They didn't have enough Metro apps that didn't suck, they fucked up multi tasking, and they totally screwed things up by having many items and options in Metro open in NON-Metro land. Plus they screwed up the hot corners and when a common question people ask is "HOW DO I TURN THIS OFF" you have completely failed at making a good UI. It was a trainwreck for new people and a trainwreck for people that knew how the to use it. MS couldn't even be bother to remove all mentions of touch controls for the original launch when it was installed on desktop PCs.

Also Metro sucks on some tablets too. People need to stop spouting "OMG it is great on touchscreen" because it isn't. It still has problems on tablets because a one size fits all OS is compromised on every platform.
 
pxc said:
Paul Thurrott's article does not claim what that headline claims, and it's the primary source of the reg article. :p
Click to expand...
The article in question: http://windowsitpro.com/windows-81/microsoft-windows-big-changes-coming

http://windowsitpro.com/windows-81/microsoft-windows-big-changes-coming said:
As I noted in "Further Changes Coming in Windows 'Threshold'," I'm aware of a few of these changes. First, Microsoft will be making it possible to run "Metro" mobile apps—which are typically run full-screen like other mobile apps—in floating windows on the desktop, allowing them to blend more seamlessly with desktop applications. And second, the firm is bringing back the Start menu for those who still pine for it, completely undoing the mess made with the original Windows 8, which replaced this menu with a full-screen Metro-style Start screen.
Click to expand...

So the article does say that the start menu is coming back ( and also points out something I did over a year ago about Modern apps ).

( And apologies for missing the front page headline. my bad )
 
back up there a a little bit...

Paul Thurrott said:
I've not heard anything independently about the product versions in Threshold. But I do know about a few changes that Microsoft is planning for what my sources have described as "the next version of Windows," which I assume is Threshold. (Though to be clear, they never used this name.) And they're big news.
Click to expand...
http://winsupersite.com/windows-8/further-changes-coming-windows-threshold

The "next version of windows" is what we'd call Windows 9. The next release of Windows is whatever update sequence MS is using now, which is apparently some kind of SR series to 8.x. It read more like he's mixing up information.
 
pxc said:
back up there a a little bit...

http://winsupersite.com/windows-8/further-changes-coming-windows-threshold

The "next version of windows" is what we'd call Windows 9. The next release of Windows is whatever update sequence MS is using now, which is apparently some kind of SR series to 8.x. It read more like he's mixing up information.
Click to expand...
Oh, I see the confusion.

Not sure it's important. The overall point being that the start menu is (probably) coming back. Well, ok, no. The overall point is that I was right, because I *am* apparently that petty.

:D
 
It's fascinating how the "every other version of Windows 'sucks'" thing is holding up.
 
nekrosoft13 said:
I work in IT, we don't have time or resources to train 700-900 people (just in one building) how to use tablet interface on their desktop PCs.And we are not going to buy 700-900 copies of Start8.

And your right, Head of IT in the company I work for made a decision that Windows 8 won't touch the company PCs. And were are talking about a company that has about 100,000 workers (in USA, Canada, Mexico, Japan, Brazil, UK, Germany, China, Thailand).

And I'm pretty sure the company I work for is not the only one to make that decision.
Click to expand...

You are right about not needing the tablet interface. My point is that the Start Screen by itself is not such a big change and is far easier to learn.

I said a year ago that the lack of a proper tutorial would hurt MS, and it has. They added a mini tutorial during the install step which barely covers anything.

Let me ask this question - is the Win 7 interface perfect? Won't *any* change require retraining? And if so any change is bad?
 
Biznatch said:
You mean MS realized some people will cry and refuse to change/learn/adapt, regardless of how inefficient they actually are... Then gave in to shut them up? Yea don't pat yourself on the back too hard there.
Click to expand...
You're exactly right, the ribbon UI in office went away. Oh wait ...

:rolleyes:
 
MrCrispy said:
You are right about not needing the tablet interface. My point is that the Start Screen by itself is not such a big change and is far easier to learn.

I said a year ago that the lack of a proper tutorial would hurt MS, and it has. They added a mini tutorial during the install step which barely covers anything.

Let me ask this question - is the Win 7 interface perfect? Won't *any* change require retraining? And if so any change is bad?
Click to expand...
No interface is "perfect". XP was around so long, and traits in it have been around even longer, so I'd say that's the interface people are most comfortable with. 7 deviated from xp slightly, but it wasn't a dramatic change so folks were generally able to cope with the new OS. Still, as minimal as those changes were, they still generated a non-trivial amount of confusion among the user base ( as anyone that has been a part of the upgrade in a corporation will tell you ).

Anything that results in a loss of productivity or an increase in training costs is bad...or perhaps it's more accurate to say it's a negative should be offset with a positive. Corporations moved to 7 because they had to; EoL on xp is coming, and for a lot of companies that will mean they're falling out of compliance with one regulation or another, among other reasons ( hardware compatibility, licensing, ect... ). While not a fun positive, those reasons are enough to offset the costs.

Where's the benefit to 8?
 
XOR != OR said:
Where's the benefit to 8?
Click to expand...

Its a faster, lighter OS.
Its built with more modern technologies.
It enables the move to a central app store, which will be a big deal for both consumers and corporations.
It provides sync for user settings across devices.
It has support for future hw/sw standards and is more future proof.
It has more management features for enterprises.

Take away the Start/Metro controversy, and its a better OS in every way.
 
MrCrispy said:
Its a faster, lighter OS.
Its built with more modern technologies.
It enables the move to a central app store, which will be a big deal for both consumers and corporations.
It provides sync for user settings across devices.
It has support for future hw/sw standards and is more future proof.
It has more management features for enterprises.

Take away the Start/Metro controversy, and its a better OS in every way.
Click to expand...
Those aren't benefits that will appeal to IT departments OR users. Future proof? Really? Built with more modern technologies? App store?

The only one that has any appeal is the last one, and even that is practically meaningless for most corporations out there that are already managing 7 desktops just fine.

So if that's the list, there is effectively no benefit that offsets the training costs and productivity drop.
 
XOR != OR said:
So if that's the list, there is effectively no benefit that offsets the training costs and productivity drop.
Click to expand...

Fair enough. Which is why I'm dubious when it's said that with a Metro off switch, Windows 8would be selling better in the enterprise. Maybe a little bit, but it wouldn't be dramatic as many enterprises were planning their XP to 7 migrations long before 8 and they weren't going to change those plans no matter how 8 turned out.
 
MrCrispy said:
Its a faster, lighter OS.
Its built with more modern technologies.
Click to expand...
It's NT 6.1 (7) vs NT 6.2 (8) or NT 6.3 (8.1), but you get an additional FULL SCREEN tablet interface grafted onto the OS in 8.x.

I did get a good laugh out of your list though, especially the future-proofing*. :p

* Starting with NT 6.0 (Vista), MS moved the video driver and direct 3d feature models into something that can best be described as planned obsolescence. Plus with the shortening term of full software support, Windows OSs quickly become 3rd class citizens losing the ability to upgrade many other MS software products.
 
If people think a faster OS with support for more future hardware and standards is nothing special, they should just go back to XP or even better NT, and forget about things like device support, USB, UEFI etc etc.

The cynicism never ceases to amaze me. People want the latest OS technologies, and at the same time discount them as a 'laugh'. Meanwhile Apple shouts '500 new features !!' and people lap it up like obedient kids.

Is it really that hard for you guys to appreciate the engineering work without constantly muddling the discussion up with the Metro side of things? I was asked about 'what's better' and provided a list off the top of my head, and its just childish responses about how none of it matters?
 
DPI said:
You lost me. Why *should* IT admins "train users"? Why should companies waste time and money when Microsoft has not demonstrated a business ROI for slapping a tablet UI front and center on all the non-touch PC's in the company? What compelling business case has Microsoft made with Metro that would benefit businesses enough to make the retraining and lost productivity costs worth it?

These are all questions that every CIO and IT Manager would ask and has asked of Microsoft when MS account managers try to peddle Win8 in enterprise: What's in it for us? And Microsoft has not had an answer.
Click to expand...

Windows 8 was never going to be deployed in a large scale in corporate and businesses. Never. Not unless it was some miracle OS that cut operating costs in half. That's what it would take for businesses to upgrade to 8, not a Metro off switch.
 
MrCrispy said:
If people think a faster OS with support for more future hardware and standards is nothing special, they should just go back to XP or even better NT, and forget about things like device support, USB, UEFI etc etc.
Click to expand...
Gee, that's the only other reasonable alternative. NT 4 all! :rolleyes:

You may not understand it, but Win 7 supports all the things you listed, except for the artificial limitations MS puts on DXGI (software) and WDDM (software). Realize that Windows 8.x isn't a long lived OS either; MS will drop support for it relatively quickly just like it did for Win7.

Also, Win8.x is just as fat and bloated as Win7, both in system requirements and memory footprint. The ability to save OS state is a neat trick for shortening boot time, but TBH I don't see a significant difference between Win7 and Win8 on a SSD equipped system. Other than that, Win8 is kind of ugly on the desktop side, crazy annoying with Metro and the dumbing down of options which make many tasks much more complicated than they should be.
 
Hold on! Let's back this up really quick and address what should be the giant glaring elephant in the room. This article introduces nothing new. It's a headline. It's a hit-grabber. It just pulls together a bunch of straws and slaps a really trendy headline on it.

The only sources in the article are other articles, which herald only rumors. There is nothing official here. No statements from Microsoft, no press releases, no insider blogs. Just rumors and speculation. This is about as far from official as pluto is from the sun. Please...I am urging you people to start reading things before you start posting them/sharing them/believing their headlines. The only mention of the return of the start menu from the author's biggest source, Mary Jo Foley, is simply an 'update' at the end of the article saying that Paul Thurrott had heard rumors of the start menu returning. So with all of Mary Jo Foley's credible sources, and all of the information she was given by them, she heard nothing of the start menu returning. So it's all down to Paul's rumors about what we don't even know to be Threshold that the start menu could return. Literally everything in these articles hinges on the validity of a rumor.


I'm not even going to touch the discussion on whether or not there should be a start menu, because we've been over this thousands of times. I'm just letting you guys know that this isn't what you expect, so that you don't get your hopes up and proceed to knot your panties when the start menu doesn't actually return.
 
Last edited:
MrCrispy said:
Is it really that hard for you guys to appreciate the engineering work without constantly muddling the discussion up with the Metro side of things? I was asked about 'what's better' and provided a list off the top of my head, and its just childish responses about how none of it matters?
Click to expand...

I think that this is part of what's behind the "bad release, good release" phenomenon of Windows. Sure Microsoft will make its blunders but still do a lot of good engineering even in a "bad" Windows release. Then they go back, clean up the blunders, further refine the engineering and then a product that wasn't that well received becomes popular even though much of engineering in the "bad" release carries forward. Of course then the point is made "They should have done that in the first place." but hindsight is 20/20 and you didn't have years of feedback and telemetry on which to base the engineering decisions.

One thing about 8.1, and much of that is based on the hardware, but for the first time, the lowest end Windows devices not only don't run like crap, they are pretty zippy, pretty light, inexpensive and get great battery life. To me these things are FAR more important than the UI issues, Microsoft will get that straightened out overall. But good cheap hardware, particularly tablets and touch, that's what's going grow Windows if there is any growth there. All the Start Menus in the world can't change the computing device market place that simply isn't but as many desktops and laptops.
 
pxc said:
You may not understand it, but Win 7 supports all the things you listed, except for the artificial limitations MS puts on DXGI (software) and WDDM (software). Realize that Windows 8.x isn't a long lived OS either; MS will drop support for it relatively quickly just like it did for Win7.
Click to expand...

Windows 7 doesn't support the new Atoms and would have to probably have a new kernel to support the power features.
 
Dogs said:
Hold on! Let's back this up really quick and address what should be the giant glaring elephant in the room. This article introduces nothing new. It's a headline. It's a hit-grabber. It just pulls together a bunch of straws and slaps a really trendy headline on it.
Click to expand...

I agree, however it is pretty obvious that there's a lot of pushback on the desktop side with the current UI, some of deserved, some it probably not. Microsoft will have to address it somehow in the next major release, it's pretty obvious with the changes to 8.1 that they are plenty aware of the issue.

I don't see the old Start Menu coming back but more desktop refinement to the modern UI, which is needed and that can be done I think without really having to change a lot, certainly there's no need for a Metro off switch. But a Start Screen that can be configured to not be full screen, windowed modern apps, those things fix the issues will still retaining the basics of what already in 8.x. These things can be accomplished today with 3rd party tools anyway.
 
if you don't like micros*** OS learn linux and never look back for home users its a no brainer dump MS
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top