Stardock announces Start10 start menu replacement for Win10

D

DPI

[H]F Junkie
Joined
Apr 20, 2013
Messages
12,885
Why are the third party start menu replacements revving up again, when Windows 10 supposedly has a start menu? I think its obvious - Windows 10's "start menu" isn't the authentic start menu many customers want, and while things started out somewhat promising in the earlier Win10 TP builds, Microsoft seems to be drifting further and further into bad territory in the more recent builds, to the point the "mini start screen" and search mess as it exists in the current TP is turning people off.

So, Microsoft is at a crossroads - re-introduce options for people to run the authentic Start Menu they know and love, or prop up third party start menu replacements for yet another Windows cycle. Personally I'm going to wait for StartIsBack to update for Windows 10 RTM - that developer always had the most authentic start menu for Windows 8.

http://www.neowin.net/news/stardock-announces-start10-a-windows-10-start-menu-replacement

qY5OAZs.jpg
 
Last edited:
Probably has to do with people still not liking the tiles part bloating up the traditional Start Menu. I think people are happiER that Microsoft has re-integrated the traditional Start Menu, but slightly unhappy about the extra crap on the right.

I think we're at a bargaining point right now. Metro and the Start Screen is still there, alas miniaturized, while the Start Menu is good, but not great. Compromises always leave both parties wanting more and I think it's good enough that it'll be a successful operating system. All Microsoft has to do to become successful with any UI changes is to just give people the damn option to go back to what they're accustomed to. This isn't new territory to do that either, they've done it for decades. They talked about how statics showed people hardly used certain features and that's why Windows 8 was built the way it was, well the same statistics should show what people like if they care to listen (and Microsoft historically is stubborn).

DPI said:
Microsoft seems to be drifting further and further into Win8/Metro territory in the more recent builds, to the point the "mini start screen" and search mess as it exists in the current TP is turning people off.
Click to expand...


You're not the only one saying, or noticing this. Microsoft will not give up on Metro. It may go through countless redesigns, but the obvious path Microsoft is on isn't going anywhere. It'll probably be less of a shitty design in the end (whenever that is), but you can clearly see Microsoft's strategy. Go back to the basics, iron out the new features and the traditional interface, then start playing with things on top of that. It's a shame we have to play this game, but at least it keeps Microsoft from going balls to the wall crazy like they did with Windows 8. If you remember Windows 8 did NOT start out with the Metro interface we saw at the end. People questioned it from the beta builds back then and everyone; fanboys, jounalist, and Microsoft included, all ignored the complaints.
 
Liger88 said:
If you remember Windows 8 did NOT start out with the Metro interface we saw at the end. People questioned it from the beta builds back then and everyone; fanboys, jounalist, and Microsoft included, all ignored the complaints.
Click to expand...

The modern stuff was ALWAYS there and the Start Menu had from the beginning of public discussions of Windows 8 always going to not be there.

It's no longer good enough for Windows x86 to only work with keyboard and mouse driven devices. While keyboard and mouse users are the vast majority of current Windows users touch is becoming a bigger mix. If the Start Screen is bad for keyboard and mouse users the Start Menu is much worse for touch users. Microsoft needs to get the right set of options and features to strike a balance that makes Windows 10 work well for both touch and keyboard and mouse users and to make the transition straight forward through Continuum.

Whatever Microsoft does there's going to be some on either side that won't be pleased. What's more important is that however it works out that things be pretty simple and not so many options as to add lots of confusion. It'll be a tough thing to pull off but with everything else that's on the way plus year long free upgrade path 10 is probably going to have a very high adoption rate. And honestly 3rd party support like this only helps. Windows has long been "propped up" by it's deep 3rd party support.
 
Liger88 said:
I think we're at a bargaining point right now. Metro and the Start Screen is still there, alas miniaturized, while the Start Menu is good, but not great. Compromises always leave both parties wanting more and I think it's good enough that it'll be a successful operating system. All Microsoft has to do to become successful with any UI changes is to just give people the damn option to go back to what they're accustomed to. This isn't new territory to do that either, they've done it for decades.
Click to expand...

That's the thing. Microsoft could cut off all the third party start menu replacements at the knees, by providing the simple option for a classic start menu, and ideally, a classic search box. Leave the new mini start screen hybrid thingie default, that's fine, but make classic start menu an option. Then if people don't find the new "start menu" to be any improvement to their way of working over the classic, they can revert. Microsoft seemed to understand this in every Windows version prior to 8 - give the customer choices.

But so far they seem deadset on continuing to beat around the bush trying to crowbar in Metro and all the cortana/bing/online oriented search crap. If Windows 8 should've taught them anything it is that while they may still have a desktop monopoly, they can't necessarily dictate usability built around corporate marketing initiatives and force everyone to go along.
 
Last edited:
Personally, I am very much looking forward to what Microsoft produces in the final build of Windows 10. It does have some rough edges as it is situated now but I am enjoying where they are going with it. As far as the "classic" start menu is concerned, the Windows Vista / 7 menu is not the classic menu, that title belongs the the Windows 95 / 98 start menu.

Basically, it is coming along well but is not perfect.
 
Liger88 said:
Probably has to do with people still not liking the tiles part bloating up the traditional Start Menu.
Click to expand...

The tiles aren't bloat, at least not in the software sense of the word. On whose computer are the tiles affecting performance?

The drama over the Start Menu is comical to me. It's such a terrible UI concept that people cling to simply because they've used it for a few years, not because it's actually a good way to interact with the OS. If the issue is actually with tiles, just unpin them from the Start Menu and go about your life.

But good on Stardock for cashing in on this stupidity.

DPI said:
But so far they seem deadset on continuing to beat around the bush trying to crowbar in Metro and all the cortana/bing/online oriented search crap. If Windows 8 should've taught them anything it is that while they may still have a desktop monopoly, they can't necessarily dictate usability built around corporate marketing initiatives and force everyone to go along.
Click to expand...

How dare Microsoft actually try to implement new features, bring familiar and useful mobile features to the desktop, and actually advance their products. How dare they. Why can't we just use Windows 7 forever?

I feel like I'm in some bizarro [H] every time I read these Windows threads.
 
The start menu thing was a bother for me when 8 was released. However, I have gotten used to it now and don't bother with a start menu replacement.
 
I don't care about how the start menu changes as long as it supports efficient methods of access. For example, type to limit choices/search indexes is good from the Vista/7 start menu. Access to common admin tools and common folders is very handy, which has been around since Windows 95 (because it's very handy). MRU applications and access to the full list is efficient, again something that was around for over a decade because it's both efficient and usable.

Change for the sake of just changing the UI is really stupid, especially when 99%+ of devices running Windows do not have a touch screen.

Something like Start10, extensions to replace the minimal context options of system tray icons for built in functionality with useful actions and restoration of a useful control panel (not one that's even worse than OS X has) would make Windows 10 usable for me. Instead it's still a minimal tablet OS UI masquerading as a full desktop OS. No thanks.
 
The tiles are totally useless mostly because the modern apps they represent are totally horrible. For example the modern UI version of Skype is mindblowingly bad. It's just 10 times more difficult to use than the regular desktop version.
 
Using this makes Win 8.1 bearable, hopefully this will make Win 10 bearable also.
 
DPI said:
Why are the third party start menu replacements revving up again, when Windows 10 supposedly has a start menu? I think its obvious - Windows 10's "start menu" isn't the authentic start menu many customers want, and while things started out somewhat promising in the earlier Win10 TP builds, Microsoft seems to be drifting further and further into bad territory in the more recent builds, to the point the "mini start screen" and search mess as it exists in the current TP is turning people off.

So, Microsoft is at a crossroads - re-introduce options for people to run the authentic Start Menu they know and love, or prop up third party start menu replacements for yet another Windows cycle. Personally I'm going to wait for StartIsBack to update for Windows 10 RTM - that developer always had the most authentic start menu for Windows 8.

http://www.neowin.net/news/stardock-announces-start10-a-windows-10-start-menu-replacement

qY5OAZs.jpg
Click to expand...

That start menu and taskbar look so bland, almost like a toy.

Win 7's menu looks so much better
win7-startmenu.jpg
 
Terpfen said:
How dare Microsoft actually try to implement new features, bring familiar and useful mobile features to the desktop, and actually advance their products. How dare they. Why can't we just use Windows 7 forever?

I feel like I'm in some bizarro [H] every time I read these Windows threads.
Click to expand...

You won't win any points on strawman arguments. I dont see anyone suggesting MS shouldn't try to implement new features or advance their products, I have no problem with them making their frankenstein start-screen-menu-metro-hybrid thingie default. But not giving people the option to run a classic start menu is only going to bolster the third party replacements again - something that's going to cost them in PR and perception ... yet again.

And why should people have to "use Windows 7 forever"? Another all-or-nothing strawman. Just because many people don't care about phone apps on the desktop doesn't mean they aren't interested in the many under-hood improvements in 8 and 10. It's called middle ground.

I reckon if [H] is the only place you're seeing these sentiments then you really need to get out more - they're not exactly uncommon. For example do you know the #1 most requested feature on Microsoft's uservoice page for Windows 10 suggestions? A return of Aero Glass. https://windows.uservoice.com/forums/265757-feature-suggestions/filters/top
 
Last edited:
DPI said:
I reckon if [H] is the only place you're seeing these sentiments then you really need to get out more - they're not exactly uncommon. For example do you know the #1 most requested feature on Microsoft's uservoice page for Windows 10 suggestions? A return of Aero Glass. https://windows.uservoice.com/forums/265757-feature-suggestions/filters/top
Click to expand...

Ironic in that Aero Glass was introduced in Vista and we all know how everyone flocked to Vista because of Aero Glass, or not. And if you're Microsoft you also might be a little leery about these numbers. The #2 most requested feature is "Cortana with Persian language support"????:confused:

We've not seen the final form of much at this point. My guess is that it won't be until Build in at the end of April before things are pretty well settled for RTM.
 
I'm going to wait until Windows 10 ships before I form a final opinion on the included Start Menu.

It definitely needs to get better. The mixture of folders and modern apps sorted alphabetically looks like butt. Also, the customization is lacking. It forces you to keep the start menu wide even if you don't have any tiles added.
 
bigdogchris said:
I'm going to wait until Windows 10 ships before I form a final opinion on the included Start Menu.
Click to expand...

I think that goes without saying, it's not really an issue until RTM. The takeaway here is its a signal to Microsoft that so far many people aren't happy with what they've done - the start menu started out looking promising in the earlier builds but then they began regressing.

So this is hopefully a wake up call to MS not to go too crazy with the metro stuff again or at least give users options, so they don't have to resort to a third party solution.
 
heatlesssun said:
It's no longer good enough for Windows x86 to only work with keyboard and mouse driven devices.
Click to expand...

Nobody EVER said it HAD to.

The problem is, they keep choosing single interface paradigms that are TOTALLY inappropriate for keyboard+mouse. People running keyboard+mouse want to be able to operate too. They don't want to HAVE to buy a touchscreen just to be able to run Word or their database program.

Windows 8's ass-tastic adoption in industry was one way of telling Microsoft "No, we're not absorbing retraining costs and arbitrary, forced equipment upgrades." And the fact that they implemented this crap in their SERVER product line? Absolute STAGGERING idiocy.

With Windows 10, Microsoft keeps dicking around trying to give us a Metro/Modern interface that simply isn't appropriate for desktop use. It wastes screen real estate, and worse, it wastes TIME. As they've pretty much got the system management split between standard Windows and Metro/Modern. With no rhyme or reason to why anything is anyplace.

The way they're going, they're going to piss away any possible goodwill Windows 10 might garner. And worse, the way Win 10 is right now, there's a VERY good possibility that their big industry players may say "Nope! No thanks!" to a SECOND generation of their Metro/Modern mistake.
 
Chas said:
Nobody EVER said it HAD to.
Click to expand...

Plenty have said that Microsoft should be like Apple in the case, two distinct OSes for tablets and laptops/desktops. It's was for a long time a VERY common theme. It seems to have changed a bit spared on by the failure of Windows RT and some decent growth in the Windows x86 tablet market. In other words, whatever success Microsoft has on tablets will never be devoid of the desktop.

Chas said:
They don't want to HAVE to buy a touchscreen just to be able to run Word or their database program.
Click to expand...

That was never the case when using Windows 8 with desktop software.

Chas said:
Windows 8's ass-tastic adoption in industry was one way of telling Microsoft "No, we're not absorbing retraining costs and arbitrary, forced equipment upgrades." And the fact that they implemented this crap in their SERVER product line? Absolute STAGGERING idiocy.
Click to expand...

I agree partially, but part of if was also people saying things like "You need a touchscreen to use desktop software!" when that simply wasn't true.

Chas said:
With Windows 10, Microsoft keeps dicking around trying to give us a Metro/Modern interface that simply isn't appropriate for desktop use. It wastes screen real estate, and worse, it wastes TIME. As they've pretty much got the system management split between standard Windows and Metro/Modern. With no rhyme or reason to why anything is anyplace.
Click to expand...

No full screen elements in Windows 10 to this point and even modern apps run in a window. The complaint you have is about the Start Menu which isn't final. Let's see how that turns out.

Chas said:
The way they're going, they're going to piss away any possible goodwill Windows 10 might garner. And worse, the way Win 10 is right now, there's a VERY good possibility that their big industry players may say "Nope! No thanks!" to a SECOND generation of their Metro/Modern mistake.
Click to expand...

Unlikely. You're saying things that just aren't like they are in 8.x in that nothing is full screen which was the biggest UI issue, it wasn't tiles. And the Start Menu isn't final. 10's adoption rate will be very high on the consumer side simply because of the free upgrade. Business as usual will be well behind and I don't expect much adoption of 10 early on but will accelerate as organizations begin to move beyond 7 which is starting to get old though many migrations to it from XP are still very new.
 
That was never the case when using Windows 8 with desktop software.
Click to expand...

No, but they forced a tablet paradigm into the UI and stripped out vast amounts of desktop functionality to make the whole thing more tablet-like. Never mind that the LAST thing desktop productivity needs is tablet features.

I agree partially, but part of if was also people saying things like "You need a touchscreen to use desktop software!" when that simply wasn't true.
Click to expand...

The main issue is that people felt forced into a tablet/touchscreen usage paradigm.

Can they navigate with keyboard and mouse? Sure. But the whole experience just became orders of magnitude more kludgy.

The complaint you have is about the Start Menu which isn't final.
Click to expand...

People said that about the removal of the start menu in 8. Right up until RTM...

And the new "Start MenuScreen" hasn't significantly changed in a couple of builds now. And people HAVE been complaining about it. Just like they did with the start menu removal in 8 pre-release builds.

] <-- Wall
] <-- Writing?

Unlikely. You're saying things that just aren't like they are in 8.x in that nothing is full screen which was the biggest UI issue, it wasn't tiles. And the Start Menu isn't final. 10's adoption rate will be very high on the consumer side simply because of the free upgrade. Business as usual will be well behind and I don't expect much adoption of 10 early on but will accelerate as organizations begin to move beyond 7 which is starting to get old though many migrations to it from XP are still very new.
Click to expand...

And what you're missing is that industry is where Microsoft's bread is buttered. Sure, the giveaway will help adoption numbers in the consumer space. But without hearty industry adoption, the product still fails.

And the big issue here is that, Windows 8 has show the industry it doesn't need to stay bleeding edge. And that previous release of Windows can be "good enough" for extended periods.

And adoption of Windows 7 is STILL very high even to this day.

You have people and smaller businesses FINALLY upgrading from XP now, today, in early 2015. Are they going to Windows 8? No. They're going to Windows 7 still.

Why? Because Windows 7 gives them what they want and need. Windows 8 doesn't.
Plain and simple.
 
bigdogchris said:
I'm going to wait until Windows 10 ships before I form a final opinion on the included Start Menu.

It definitely needs to get better. The mixture of folders and modern apps sorted alphabetically looks like butt. Also, the customization is lacking. It forces you to keep the start menu wide even if you don't have any tiles added.
Click to expand...

Really? Get it together Microsoft. I mean, come on, its not like the Start menu was the number one issue with Windows 8 or anything... If they can't get that right then I'm already done with 10.
 
I find it sad, hilarious and infuriating that the Start menu/screen has been the single biggest source of controversy/ridicule ever since Windows 8.

It's not that its not important, but it overshadows any discussion of other things in the OS that matter just as much.

Sometimes I think the best option is for Microsoft to just offer X different start menu options (ranging from original Win 7, Win 8.1 and every single variant they have ever tried) and let the user choose.

But of course even that won't be enough for some zealots who won't be happy until everything thats actually new in 8/10 from Win 7 is gutted and erased.

And there'll be those who'll complain about MS backing down to pamper to the Luddites.

And there'll be those who'll complain about 'too much choice'.

Summary - MS is screwed, no matter what they do. We had endless threads on the bloody Start screen ever since the first build of Win 8 was shown, and nothing will change with Win 10.
 
MrCrispy said:
I find it sad, hilarious and infuriating that the Start menu/screen has been the single biggest source of controversy/ridicule ever since Windows 8.

It's not that its not important, but it overshadows any discussion of other things in the OS that matter just as much.

Sometimes I think the best option is for Microsoft to just offer X different start menu options (ranging from original Win 7, Win 8.1 and every single variant they have ever tried) and let the user choose.

But of course even that won't be enough for some zealots who won't be happy until everything thats actually new in 8/10 from Win 7 is gutted and erased.

And there'll be those who'll complain about MS backing down to pamper to the Luddites.

And there'll be those who'll complain about 'too much choice'.

Summary - MS is screwed, no matter what they do. We had endless threads on the bloody Start screen ever since the first build of Win 8 was shown, and nothing will change with Win 10.
Click to expand...

I agree with what you are saying here. Probably the most entertaining part of this conversation is this: The Obfuscation and justification of changing the facts to fit the hate narrative that is occurring on this and other boards. For instance, the Windows 7 is being bought because people hate 8 in the commercial industry when that has never been the case.

Windows 7 was always the upgrade path from XP because it is proven to work with what the industry is using software wise. It takes years to be certified for an OS but hey, why should we let a little thing like facts get in the way of a narrative, amirite? :D
 
MrCrispy said:
I find it sad, hilarious and infuriating that the Start menu/screen has been the single biggest source of controversy/ridicule ever since Windows 8.
It's not that its not important, but it overshadows any discussion of other things in the OS that matter just as much.
Sometimes I think the best option is for Microsoft to just offer X different start menu options (ranging from original Win 7, Win 8.1 and every single variant they have ever tried) and let the user choose.
But of course even that won't be enough for some zealots who won't be happy until everything thats actually new in 8/10 from Win 7 is gutted and erased.
And there'll be those who'll complain about MS backing down to pamper to the Luddites.
And there'll be those who'll complain about 'too much choice'.
Summary - MS is screwed, no matter what they do. We had endless threads on the bloody Start screen ever since the first build of Win 8 was shown, and nothing will change with Win 10.
Click to expand...

Its really not as all-or-nothing as you're trying to paint it. They don't have to please the zealots on either side, the only have to please that overwhelming majority in the middle - including all the business and enterprise customers that didn't even consider Win8 due to lack of proper start menu. So "damned if we do, damned if we don't" is a cop out. And it isn't a valid excuse not to add a little extra customizability to the start menu.

But let's put all the red herrings aside and be honest about why they are really dragging their feet: Because they still have delusions that their desktop userbase will be a shortcut to making the metro app store relevant. Girl rebuffed them outright in Windows 8 so now its "lemme just put the tip in" in Windows 10. It won't work because Metro apps are garbage. Most people will try a metro app or two and quickly realize they offer nothing over desktop or web based counterparts, and quickly become frustrated. For a long time during Win8 many users had trouble just getting out of a metro app - they saw no obvious way to exit - I saw people struggle with this firsthand. And "how do I get this off my screen" isn't exactly the nextgen UI experience needed for wide adoption.
 
Last edited:
DPI said:
But let's put all the red herrings aside and be honest about why they are really dragging their feet: Because they still have delusions that their desktop userbase will be a shortcut to making the metro app store relevant. Girl rebuffed them outright in Windows 8 so now its "lemme just put the tip in" in Windows 10. It won't work because Metro apps are garbage. Most people will try a metro app or two and quickly realize they offer nothing over desktop or web based counterparts, and quickly become frustrated. For a long time during Win8 many users had trouble just getting out of a metro app - they saw no obvious way to exit - I saw people struggle with this firsthand. And "how do I get this off my screen" isn't exactly the nextgen UI experience needed for wide adoption.
Click to expand...

It's more complicated than this. Competition has forced Microsoft to reduce Windows pricing, even to the point of offering it for from to OEMs and at least for one year, free upgrades to Windows 10. Then there's the matter of tablets. Windows RT, the tablet only OS failed. Windows x86 tablets are doing much better especially since Windows licenses for them became free.

It's taken some time and there's still a ways to go but there are some pretty nice modern apps out there. Not of the productivity variety but casual games, content readers, social media apps and such that work better than existing desktop equivalents and web sites where they exist. Having them run in a window should make them easier to deal with for desktop users.

Yes, Microsoft made mistakes with Windows 8 but ultimately the idea is correct, a tablet/desktop hybrid. There's no going back from that idea now. The trick is to get the balance such that it works well enough for both kinds of use.
 
I've pretty much stopped using the Start Menu/Screen completely at this point. Most applications are pinned to my taskbar and for the others I hit the Windows key and start typing.
 
Maximus825 said:
I've pretty much stopped using the Start Menu/Screen completely at this point. Most applications are pinned to my taskbar and for the others I hit the Windows key and start typing.
Click to expand...

You can do that with Windows 7 as well, no need for windows 8 for that.
 
pcjunkie said:
I guess none...thought you were defending Windows 8 or actually had a point other than just making a random pointless comment?
Click to expand...

Sometimes it not a matter of defending Windows 8 as much as pointing out how things work. Windows 8.1 Update certainly isn't orders of magnitude more difficult to use than Windows 7 on the desktop. From a desktop perspective it's not that much different, as the point about hitting the Windows key and typing working very much the same between 7 and 8.1 illustrates.
 
heatlesssun said:
Sometimes it not a matter of defending Windows 8 as much as pointing out how things work. Windows 8.1 Update certainly isn't orders of magnitude more difficult to use than Windows 7 on the desktop. From a desktop perspective it's not that much different, as the point about hitting the Windows key and typing working very much the same between 7 and 8.1 illustrates.
Click to expand...

Yeah, I was just pointing that out, no trying to dish on Windows 8. If that wasn't his point I honestly don't know why he posted then? I like using the start menu and desktop icons but I'm not going to just randomly post that I do? :)
 
pcjunkie said:
Yeah, I was just pointing that out, no trying to dish on Windows 8. If that wasn't his point I honestly don't know why he posted then? I like using the start menu and desktop icons but I'm not going to just randomly post that I do? :)
Click to expand...

We've simply reached the end of the Windows 8 debate. Clearly Windows 8 didn't go over well with a ton of people and most Windows 8 fans, such as they are, get that. It's just that when people say things like doing things on Windows 8 is orders of magnitude more complex and the action is actually the same as 7 at least from their perspective, really.
 
The damage to MS was done by bloggers and reviews by so called industry 'experts' who work for rags like pcmag, WSJ etc who don't know the difference between a pc chip and a french fry.

These morons made it their purpose in life to badmouth and blast Win 8 from day one. Couple that with the general tendency to 'hate Microsoft, love Apple/Linux' amongst sysadmins/IT techs who actually influence buying decisions, who were very quick to jump on the bandwagon.

Add in Sinofsky's arrogance to refuse to even address the tidal wave of backlash against his insistence that somehow desktop pc's had vanished overnight and everyone had gone and bought a Surface.

Result - shocking Win 8 sales and even worse perception. MS did damage control by getting rid of Sinofsky, then making the trivial changes to allow windowed Metro apps etc. But the damage was done, they had to eat billions in lost revenue and give away their core product, and are doing the same for Win 10.
 
And btw, Win 8/8.1 is a great OS. Show me another company that ships a modern OS that actually runs faster and has lower hw requirements. OSX, iOS, Android are bloated pigs that run like crap on older hw, in contrast both Windows and WP got smaller and faster.

These are the changes MS needed to make on launch.

- don't make Metro apps the default
- allow users to choose between Start screen/menu (and let them make this choice upon first run)
- allow windowed Metro apps (which is a trivial change as WinRT had this capability from day one)
- include a tutorial

All of this is so mind bogglingly obvious that the only reason it wouldn't happen is an ultimatum from management (i.e. Sinofsky etc) who must've though forcing their users was a good idea.

Make these trivial changes and new users wouldn't get stuck in Metro hell, which was pretty much the only complaint most people had.

And only an idiot would think that shipping the world's most popular OS by far with massive UI changes with no tutorial was a good idea.
 
pcjunkie said:
Yeah, I was just pointing that out, no trying to dish on Windows 8. If that wasn't his point I honestly don't know why he posted then? I like using the start menu and desktop icons but I'm not going to just randomly post that I do? :)
Click to expand...

I commented on how I use the start menu in a thread about start menu usage. I can understand how that went over your head...
 
Maximus825 said:
I commented on how I use the start menu in a thread about start menu usage. I can understand how that went over your head...
Click to expand...

Actually this thread went over your head since you inferred you don't use the start menu. :p

FYI...Nobody cares
 
pcjunkie said:
Actually this thread went over your head since you inferred you don't use the start menu. :p

FYI...Nobody cares
Click to expand...

You really don't need to keep reminding people that you're an asshole. We get it already...
 
Maximus825 said:
You really don't need to keep reminding people that you're an asshole. We get it already...
Click to expand...

OK, next time make some sort of point when posting. And don't start an argument when someone replies because it didn't make any particular point or reference to the OS you're talking about ...and about being an asshole try looking in the mirror. :rolleyes:
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top