Windows 8.2 Will Make Start Menu An Option?

griffinhart said:
What exactly is better about it? And Metro is not a desktop. In fact, that is metro's primary problem for me. A desktop is a place where you can store links or file for quick access and organization. It's a workflow metaphor. Much like my desk at work has all relevant materials on it to accomplish my current projects, I then file the material in drawers when I am done with them. It is the same thing with the windows desktop. I have files and folders on the desktop for easy access and organization. Once they are no longer relevant to my current needs they get filed away. It's simply a better work flow.

And let's not forget, Metro is extremely limited in how it displays multiple apps at once. Only side by side, not over and under. Not good when working with something that has a lot of columns like a spread sheet. There is also the fact that you can't span the metro UI across multiple screens.

There is simply nothing superior about metro on a no touch, desktop environment.

I use 8.1 on my surface with no mod fine as that touch device lends itself to metro. On the other hand, I just can't use 8 or 8.1 on a touchless desktop without start8 or similar.
Click to expand...
You are right, I erred in my terminology. But this explanation is exactly why you should like Metro. You can use it to file all your programs neatly while keeping your real deskstop for workflow. Like I wrote earlier, I found myself to migrate all my programs icons to Metro and using the deskstop, well, as a deskstop with crap getting mixed in with programs. I'm on 7 at work, and I get frustrated having to minimize everything or click Start, All programs, then navigate to open a program while at home I just "side mouse click, click program" When I think about it, Metro reminds me a bit of Windows 3.1, where you had actual windows of programs neatly sorted. It is baically having this http://www.google.ca/imgres?imgurl=...a=X&ei=MWinUsSKPIPesASz4oGgDA&ved=0CDgQ9QEwAw popping up lighning fast a click away instead of wasting time navigating though trees.
 
I just double checked on my Surface tablet too. Metro still only supports two visible applications. merely split screening two apps is FAR, FAR, FAR less useful than the windowing capabilities of the traditional desktop.
 
Why do people think Microsoft, or even Apple of Google, even care about the desktop anymore. People bought desktop OSes because it wasn't the command line (type 'win' into DOS) and now people are buying touch OSes because they're not the clumsy desktop.

This is not about Windows 8 or MacOS or anything that granular. The real problem here is the older users getting upset about the desktop, as we've come to know it, being sidelined for newer interfaces. The same exact thing happened and still continues to happen to people who preach about using the command prompt for everything. It's bullshit. I don't like the command prompt and in light of touch and sensory interfaces I think the desktop is just as old and broken as well.
 
It's mostly a launcher and organizer. Apps are fun for the previews if you have a multimonitor setup but out of that it isn' really meant to provide any real workflow capability.
 
Dekarx said:
You are right, I erred in my terminology. But this explanation is exactly why you should like Metro. You can use it to file all your programs neatly while keeping your real deskstop for workflow. Like I wrote earlier, I found myself to migrate all my programs icons to Metro and using the deskstop, well, as a deskstop with crap getting mixed in with programs. I'm on 7 at work, and I get frustrated having to minimize everything or click Start, All programs, then navigate to open a program while at home I just "side mouse click, click program" When I think about it, Metro reminds me a bit of Windows 3.1, where you had actual windows of programs neatly sorted. It is baically having this http://www.google.ca/imgres?imgurl=...a=X&ei=MWinUsSKPIPesASz4oGgDA&ved=0CDgQ9QEwAw popping up lighning fast a click away instead of wasting time navigating though trees.
Click to expand...

But you don't need to click start then all programs, etc. You have the nice search feature that both versions have WITHOUT the jarring swapping to a full screen menu. I can search for files or apps and still see the desktop, which is useful for me when I need to match spelling properly.

I do agree that Metro reminds me of windows 3.1. But I also remember buying Norton Desktop to give me that desktop functionality and being thrilled when it was adopted in windows 95. So Metro, in this respect among others, is a step backwards.
 
I have to say, for all the times I've just clicked the Windows key and started typing for a program, it's come up every time... Not sure why everyone is bitching about start menu
 
Terminus said:
Why do people think Microsoft, or even Apple of Google, even care about the desktop anymore. People bought desktop OSes because it wasn't the command line (type 'win' into DOS) and now people are buying touch OSes because they're not the clumsy desktop.

This is not about Windows 8 or MacOS or anything that granular. The real problem here is the older users getting upset about the desktop, as we've come to know it, being sidelined for newer interfaces. The same exact thing happened and still continues to happen to people who preach about using the command prompt for everything. It's bullshit. I don't like the command prompt and in light of touch and sensory interfaces I think the desktop is just as old and broken as well.
Click to expand...

This is true, pretty much. Tablets and touchscreen devices are excellent with Modern UI and Windows 8. That's what Win8 was made for. However, the tried and true 'old' desktop is still sitting on many desks. That still needs a desktop OS. If I had an old server without a mouse, I'd be better off with a CLI. Your input method should be a part of the GUI choice. That's why Windows 7 wasn't that great with touch. It wasn't designed for touch, it was an afterthought. DOS wasn't that great with a mouse. Windows was perfect with a mouse. Windows 8 is great with touch, but take that away, and it's not as great.

Try Windows without a mouse (or touch). Yes, it's doable, but it's not easy. Add a mouse and it's great. The GUI needs to work with the inputs given.
 
Exavior said:
I have never found the start menu to be logical or intuitive. it is a worthless feature. I personally am glad it is gone. case in point that it is worthless, Mac OS X doesn't have one and people get along just fine with that OS.
Click to expand...
Yup, all 17 users worldwide are working just great without a start menu. Most popular operating system in the world.
 
Terminus said:
The real problem here is the older users getting upset about the desktop, as we've come to know it, being sidelined for newer interfaces.
Click to expand...

No. This is about using the proper interface in the proper context.

People bitched for years about Windows desktop interface sucking syphilitic donkey crank on touch interfaces.

Now we have Microsoft trying to shove a touch-centric interface down our throats, regardless of whether it's the best tool for desktop productivity or not. Simply because they're too stupid/lazy/unskilled/blind to be able to actually support more than one UI at a time.
 
Dekarx said:
Meh, after forcing myself to at least try Metro I now find the Start menu archaic and clumsy, I've never been so organised nor found and launched stuff so fast in 15 years of heavy PC use, and I'm not even trying to make it convenient. I spent like 30 mins placing icons when I explored it and sometimes add an important program or game. It looks weird but it is just incredibly more efficient.
Click to expand...

just put a damn icon on your desktop if it takes that long for you, there isn't an argument here nothing is more efficient about metro's ui compared to the old way. Show me how you can have less clicks if you have an icon on your desktop for what you need.
 
Addendum: If Microsoft were actually sidelining "obsoleted" UI paradigms, why the FUCK do we have something like PowerShell?
 
griffinhart said:
But you don't need to click start then all programs, etc. You have the nice search feature that both versions have WITHOUT the jarring swapping to a full screen menu. I can search for files or apps and still see the desktop, which is useful for me when I need to match spelling properly.

I do agree that Metro reminds me of windows 3.1. But I also remember buying Norton Desktop to give me that desktop functionality and being thrilled when it was adopted in windows 95. So Metro, in this respect among others, is a step backwards.
Click to expand...

I don't understand why you say it's a step backwards, it gives you both.
And I'm certainly not going to start typing everytime I want to open a spreadsheet, a game or an program. I did that more than I care for in the 80s :p But since you can't multitask while searching in the old start menu, as quitting it and coming back resets what you were typing, I don't see why it is so important to have that background we're not really looking at, while searching, especially since searching for something that won't instantly pop up only opens one more window to manage
 
griffinhart said:
I find this feature less useful than aerosnap. Especially with multiple screens.
Click to expand...

Aero Snap with desktop applications is practically identical to how modern apps snap, the difference being that modern apps will snap to the edge of screens with multiple independent monitors using the mouse, you have to use the keyboard commands to snap desktop apps with multiple independent monitors. Modern apps will respond to the same keyboard commands though as well.

griffinhart said:
I just double checked on my Surface tablet too. Metro still only supports two visible applications. merely split screening two apps is FAR, FAR, FAR less useful than the windowing capabilities of the traditional desktop.
Click to expand...

I think that you can snap up to four and that it depends on resolution and screen size. You can snap up three on a 24" 1080P monitor. Really though, how many windows does the average user use at once? Again, I agree that floating windows are more flexible, but the way modern apps work is more straight forward and simpler for typical cases where a user needs to multitask.
 
butterfliesrpretty said:
just put a damn icon on your desktop if it takes that long for you, there isn't an argument here nothing is more efficient about metro's ui compared to the old way. Show me how you can have less clicks if you have an icon on your desktop for what you need.
Click to expand...

Ez as pie. I don't have to minimize with metro. Metro is a second plane of icons that pops up above instead of under your programs. While there is a one button minimize, launching in Metro is a single click, and I don't need to remaximize all my programs after that.
 
butterfliesrpretty said:
just put a damn icon on your desktop if it takes that long for you, there isn't an argument here nothing is more efficient about metro's ui compared to the old way. Show me how you can have less clicks if you have an icon on your desktop for what you need.
Click to expand...

Click once in the hot area or where the faux-Start button is.
Maybe click several more times if the hot area doesn't work properly.
Click and drag, possibly several times with a heavily loaded computer, till you find your app. If you don't see it click again to bring up the All Items button.
Click the all items button.
Click and drag, again, possibly several times, until you see the item you need.

To start most unpinned programs in Win7, I need 4, maybe five clicks maximum.
Start
All Programs
Maybe a click and drag to scroll.
Click on the parent folder
Click on the shortcut.
DONE. All without ever taking my eyes off my desktop.
 
Chas said:
No. This is about using the proper interface in the proper context.

People bitched for years about Windows desktop interface sucking syphilitic donkey crank on touch interfaces.

Now we have Microsoft trying to shove a touch-centric interface down our throats, regardless of whether it's the best tool for desktop productivity or not. Simply because they're too stupid/lazy/unskilled/blind to be able to actually support more than one UI at a time.
Click to expand...

And who told you Windows 8 is for desktop PCs? It's clearly for mobile devices even if Microsoft can't publicly admit to abandoning the desktop.

Nobody is shoving anything down your throat, you just think they are because they took the old codebase and leveraged it for the new interface (to run Windows services that would take years to rewrite, proper desktop apps themselves are no longer a selling point in the current market - not even Desktop Office).

Your argument is complete bullshit, always has been. Windows 7 and Linux are right there in front of you to use on traditional desktops. Windows 8 is for a different kind of machine and a different kind of user.
 
Chas said:
Again, I'm not pinning 50+ apps to my taskbar.
Click to expand...

Then don't. If you're running 50 apps concurrently though they are going to show up the task bar though.

Chas said:
Yes, but I then have to take my eyes off what I'm doing and go hunting through that gigantic waste of space.
Click to expand...

So while looking for a problem in a list, you looking at something else that you can't interact with? There is Windows+S for using the search that doesn't go full screen for keyboard use.
 
OK, a little late but I see how this as going in circles. People's minds are already made up in here so going back and forth is pointless. We're not the majority so I'm out. Take care guys!
 
Chas said:
Addendum: If Microsoft were actually sidelining "obsoleted" UI paradigms, why the FUCK do we have something like PowerShell?
Click to expand...

good question. Powershell feels like a step back to me.
If consumer and business truly is converging, how the hell am i supposed to type those cmdlets from my mobile device? :confused:
 
alexfort93 said:
I have to say, for all the times I've just clicked the Windows key and started typing for a program, it's come up every time... Not sure why everyone is bitching about start menu
Click to expand...

The point is that the new metro interface was completely unnecessary to implement the better search feature. With Classic Start Menu installed, the same search results show up in an old style start menu.

I'm fine with the new "metro" start screens... for tablets, I just don't want it forced down my throat because it's not suitable for mouse and multi-screen desktop users.

For example, to change configuration of something using the metro interface with a mouse this is what I have to do in Win 8:
- Move mouse to top right corner of a screen to activate charms bar (difficult in a multimonitor setup.)
- Move down to bottom right to select the Settings Charm
- Move further down to the bottom right to select "Change PC Settings"
- Move to the left side of the screen to choose one of the setup selections
- Move to center/right of screen to change settings

I've pretty much had to move my mouse pointer to from the top right corner to bottom right corner and the over to the left 1/5 and then back to the center.

With Win 7/Vista/XP:
- Move mouse to bottom left corner to select start button
- Move up and to the right a bit to select "Control Panel"
- Move to the center to select whatever item I want to set.
- Move to window that opened up, (usually in the center of the screen) or configure in the control panel window.

So the movement here is to the bottom left, up a bit towards center, then the mouse pretty much stays near the center.

Is the new interface really better for desktop mouse users?


The "old" way required fewer clicks and less cross screen movement.
 
I don't understand people's love of the Start Menu. If you install a lot of stuff it gets to be too long. It's a pain to expand down multiple folders.

The start button in 8.1 with the convenient features in the right click is considerably better than the Win 7 start button, and having it take you to the start screen seems easier to navigate to me.

I have my Windows 8.1 system boot right to the desktop. You can put shortcuts to your most commonly used apps on the desktop or pin them to the task bar. The start screen works well for the rest.

Let the start menu die the death it deserves. The start screen can carry over well between phones, tablets, and PCs.
 
Dekarx said:
I don't understand why you say it's a step backwards, it gives you both.
And I'm certainly not going to start typing everytime I want to open a spreadsheet, a game or an program. I did that more than I care for in the 80s :p But since you can't multitask while searching in the old start menu, as quitting it and coming back resets what you were typing, I don't see why it is so important to have that background we're not really looking at, while searching, especially since searching for something that won't instantly pop up only opens one more window to manage
Click to expand...

My points aren't about what windows 8 gives. but what the Metro UI vs the "classic UI" give. You simply don't have the desktop metaphor in metro. When using the classic desktop, metro is nothing but a start menu replacement. For me, I prefer the small menu because I am often referencing a number or name in an open windows while using the search feature. I am personally terrible with remembering names and numbers. I will easily forget the first 3 digits of a phone number by the 5 number. Swapping to a full screen search means I can't easily reference that number without writing it down. It is simply a loss of function to me. On the other hand, A start screen vs a start menu offers not a single benefit to me over the start menu.

I am not adverse to changes in an OS. I am almost always an early adopter. But every change needs to have a purpose other than change. It needs to give me a benefit over previous versions. This is one reason I embraced Vista's start menu over XP. It had the same function while adding the search feature.

Change for the sake of change is bad. Change for the sake of function is good.
 
Terminus said:
Windows 8 is for a different kind of machine and a different kind of user.
Click to expand...

Nah. W8 is not worth upgrading to if you already have 7, sure; it is basically the same thing but slightly snappier. But if you need a new OS, there is no reason not to go W8. At worse, you will need to take 30 sec to donwlaod a classicshell, and then there is basically no difference. Now some people could whine they shouldn't have to go that extra step, but that would be spitting on a major aspect of PC, which is the ability to adapt to personnalize something to your liking. Classic shell existed way before Windows 8. And you have your pants cut to your size when you buy them. You paint over your nerf gun's awful color for a LARP. You add mods to games, macros to programs. But somehow you need to be spoonfed your OS how you like it and it is blasphemous to change it.
 
bbf said:
The point is that the new metro interface was completely unnecessary to implement the better search feature. With Classic Start Menu installed, the same search results show up in an old style start menu.

I'm fine with the new "metro" start screens... for tablets, I just don't want it forced down my throat because it's not suitable for mouse and multi-screen desktop users.

For example, to change configuration of something using the metro interface with a mouse this is what I have to do in Win 8:
- Move mouse to top right corner of a screen to activate charms bar (difficult in a multimonitor setup.)
- Move down to bottom right to select the Settings Charm
- Move further down to the bottom right to select "Change PC Settings"
- Move to the left side of the screen to choose one of the setup selections
- Move to center/right of screen to change settings

I've pretty much had to move my mouse pointer to from the top right corner to bottom right corner and the over to the left 1/5 and then back to the center.

With Win 7/Vista/XP:
- Move mouse to bottom left corner to select start button
- Move up and to the right a bit to select "Control Panel"
- Move to the center to select whatever item I want to set.
- Move to window that opened up, (usually in the center of the screen) or configure in the control panel window.

So the movement here is to the bottom left, up a bit towards center, then the mouse pretty much stays near the center.

Is the new interface really better for desktop mouse users?


The "old" way required fewer clicks and less cross screen movement.
Click to expand...

the Control Panel is still in 8/8.1. Just right-click the bottom left corner and select Control Panel, boom done.
 
I just want an option to remove the damn start button. This thing is useless and it only takes space from my vertical task bar.

First it's gone and you can't bring it back, then it's back, but you can't make it go away. Talk about stupidity.
 
heatlesssun said:
Aero Snap with desktop applications is practically identical to how modern apps snap, the difference being that modern apps will snap to the edge of screens with multiple independent monitors using the mouse, you have to use the keyboard commands to snap desktop apps with multiple independent monitors. Modern apps will respond to the same keyboard commands though as well.



I think that you can snap up to four and that it depends on resolution and screen size. You can snap up three on a 24" 1080P monitor. Really though, how many windows does the average user use at once? Again, I agree that floating windows are more flexible, but the way modern apps work is more straight forward and simpler for typical cases where a user needs to multitask.
Click to expand...

This is the important part.... Windows 8 doesn't just need to cater to the average user. It needs to cater to all users. The person that only surfs, the people like me that have 3+ monitors managing 100's of VM's Thousands of scheduled jobs, Domino Servers, etc, and everyone between.

Metro just isn't up to the task.

My Surface Pro at 1080p on 8.1 only supports 2 windows even when being pumped to an external 24" 1080p display.
 
flatrock said:
I don't understand people's love of the Start Menu. If you install a lot of stuff it gets to be too long. It's a pain to expand down multiple folders.

The start button in 8.1 with the convenient features in the right click is considerably better than the Win 7 start button, and having it take you to the start screen seems easier to navigate to me.

I have my Windows 8.1 system boot right to the desktop. You can put shortcuts to your most commonly used apps on the desktop or pin them to the task bar. The start screen works well for the rest.

Let the start menu die the death it deserves. The start screen can carry over well between phones, tablets, and PCs.
Click to expand...

Again, you can do all of this with a start menu as well. The start screen offers no benefit over the start menu. And for my needs, the full screen menu makes it less useful.
 
griffinhart said:
For me, I prefer the small menu because I am often referencing a number or name in an open windows while using the search feature. I am personally terrible with remembering names and numbers. I will easily forget the first 3 digits of a phone number by the 5 number. .
Click to expand...

I'd need to check but im pretty sure you can do that with the seach charm. Instead of popping to the buttom left it pops from the right, same way it does on metro but on the deskstop.
 
bbf said:
The point is that the new metro interface was completely unnecessary to implement the better search feature. With Classic Start Menu installed, the same search results show up in an old style start menu.

I'm fine with the new "metro" start screens... for tablets, I just don't want it forced down my throat because it's not suitable for mouse and multi-screen desktop users.

For example, to change configuration of something using the metro interface with a mouse this is what I have to do in Win 8:
- Move mouse to top right corner of a screen to activate charms bar (difficult in a multimonitor setup.)
- Move down to bottom right to select the Settings Charm
- Move further down to the bottom right to select "Change PC Settings"
- Move to the left side of the screen to choose one of the setup selections
- Move to center/right of screen to change settings

I've pretty much had to move my mouse pointer to from the top right corner to bottom right corner and the over to the left 1/5 and then back to the center.

With Win 7/Vista/XP:
- Move mouse to bottom left corner to select start button
- Move up and to the right a bit to select "Control Panel"
- Move to the center to select whatever item I want to set.
- Move to window that opened up, (usually in the center of the screen) or configure in the control panel window.

So the movement here is to the bottom left, up a bit towards center, then the mouse pretty much stays near the center.

Is the new interface really better for desktop mouse users?


The "old" way required fewer clicks and less cross screen movement.
Click to expand...

In windows 8.1 right click on the start button then click on control panel. Very little difference from previous versions of Windows.

I agree that the Charms are poorly implemented at best, but they have little to do with the start screen vs start menu.

With the start menu you are almost always going at least two clicks deep before you can select the app you want, and as you add a lot of apps it gets to be too long and more cumbersome. You either end up organizing things into folders or scrolling off the screen to find the right folder.

With the start screen one click pulls up a screen full of apps. You can customize how they are displayed. You can have it bring up the full list automatically or just a subset.

The only real drawback is that it is unfamiliar.

If Microsoft wants to survive they have to convince people that there is an advantage to having a reasonable consistent interface on all their devices and that they can provide a reasonable experience on all of those devices. Otherwise Google or Apple will do so.

Microsoft has to make changes. They did not get off to a good start with Win 8.0. Win 8.1 is considerably better. It still has a way to go, but a start menu isn't a step in the right direction. Putting it in as optional is probably a good idea to make more people accept the transition. Microsoft really can't afford to drive away customers. They need to balance shifting things to where they need to go for Microsoft to have a future with not alienating existing customers. They usually do a pretty good job after they stumble a couple times.
 
Dekarx said:
I'd need to check but im pretty sure you can do that with the seach charm. Instead of popping to the buttom left it pops from the right, same way it does on metro but on the deskstop.
Click to expand...

After finding the hot corner, which is a pain. Especially on mutil monitors where you can overshoot the corner easily. It's ugly.
 
This is great news! Something that MS should have done from the very start. No pun intended. Now I'm wondering if we'll see a surge in new PC sales next year.

Slice it or dice it anyway you want...Win8 in its current form is a tablet/touch OS. The start screen is hardly anything useful to a tech-savvy multitasking power user, especially those in an office environment.

Win8 provides a simple application launch interface meant for the simple minded. See sig for details.
 
DejaWiz said:
This is great news! Something that MS should have done from the very start. No pun intended. Now I'm wondering if we'll see a surge in new PC sales next year.
.
Click to expand...

I think PC sales will remain mostly flat. We are now in a phase where PC's last 5 to 8 years before being replaced rather than the 2 to 3 year cycles of past. There just isn't a need to upgrade hardware as much anymore.
 
How I am productive in 7 and 8.1. Goal is to rarely touch the start menu by using quick launch. Combining windows doesn't work for me either. At least its still customizable. I tried to get use to Metro but it was pretty worthless, I use it even less than the start menu.

0f49be5a7dc167f1c8da325bf0f14986.jpg


342371f3a1f56a35ee42b6fc907b32cb.jpg
 
flatrock said:
I don't understand people's love of the Start Menu. If you install a lot of stuff it gets to be too long. It's a pain to expand down multiple folders.

The start button in 8.1 with the convenient features in the right click is considerably better than the Win 7 start button, and having it take you to the start screen seems easier to navigate to me.

I have my Windows 8.1 system boot right to the desktop. You can put shortcuts to your most commonly used apps on the desktop or pin them to the task bar. The start screen works well for the rest.

Let the start menu die the death it deserves. The start screen can carry over well between phones, tablets, and PCs.
Click to expand...

Whether or not you "understand it" is irrelevant. If you enjoy an interface of giant tiles like the idiot boxes they give fast food workers to place your drive-thru order, that's great! But plenty of other people appreciate the compact, hierarchical Start Menu - it just works, and doesn't rip you out of your workflow with a jarring transition.

And why should the start menu "die" if most people still prefer it on the desktop where it makes sense? By the way, THIS is why the Start Menu *will* come back, and why MS is being dragged into it by the Enterprise segment, kicking and screaming. Adoption of Win8/8.1 has literally stalled while Win7 continues to grow.

2kkUR26.jpg
 
griffinhart said:
After finding the hot corner, which is a pain. Especially on mutil monitors where you can overshoot the corner easily. It's ugly.
Click to expand...

Come on you know there is a shortcut :) Really W8 does what the other OSs did and more. It just needs some adapting. I've found it well worth it, some might be more resistant or it might just really not be for them, but I found most of the gripe unfounded. I'm no die hard M$ fan, but I hate misconceptions more than I hate looking like a fanboi.
 
griffinhart said:
Again, you can do all of this with a start menu as well. The start screen offers no benefit over the start menu. And for my needs, the full screen menu makes it less useful.
Click to expand...

It offers a considerable benefit. It offers a consistent interface between devices. While you may see no value in that, it's something Microsoft must have to survive into the future. Microsoft's current market is shrinking while the tablet and phone markets are growing quickly. They simply can't afford to not change.

Why does being a full screen menu make it less useful. A menu is something that pops up so you can select something, then goes away. Do you really need to see the rest of the screen when selecting a new app to run?

For my purposes the start screen is mostly just different. I think it is possibly better on a system with a ton of apps. It's main drawback is that it's now what I was used to.
 
Dekarx said:
XP was full of articles saying how slow it was to take off. And I won't start on Vista. I'm not worried.
Click to expand...

Keep in mind that with XP Microsoft still understood the importance of giving users a choice and they could restore the classic UI elements if they didn't initially like the XP elements.

Windows 8 marked the first time Microsoft willfully crippled choices and options to allow users to make the transition at their own speed, not Microsoft's. And now its costing them.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top