Start menu coming back

[heatlesssun]

Care to quantify that?

The claim has been made that 8 (gui) works better than 7 on small and large screen devices. So surely you must have some data to back that up.

I would be more than happy to discuss the details of 7 vs. 8 on devices varying be screen size and input method. And if you have data discussing this subject that would be helpful. I'm pretty sure there isn't, you won't find too many people that have used Windows on tablets prior to 8 and I can guarantee there is no "data" about how 7 and 8 scale across devices because there aren't that many people who would even understand that question. Here's a fun fact about 7 and 8. Using a touch device that uses a standard Win32 drop down menu in a desktop app, one can press and hold and drag through the menus and then release on the highlighted item and that corresponds to a left click.

I can't say that I have a million of them, and I know that I will get called this and that, but as honestly as I know, when it comes to using Windows for that last four versions across multiple devices across multiple form factors and input methods, I know that pretty well. I get a lot of flack when I mention this, however Windows has always be a general purpose OS that that works on a lot of different devices with a lot of different input methods. So sue me, I spent a lot of time with Windows and different apps across lots of different hardware and input methods.

 

[Dogs]

So how is the windows xp interface making software development more expensive?

It isn't. I never said it was. Reread my post and try again.

Hint: The implication of what I did say is that developing for Windows XP is making software development more expensive.

Because from this developer's perspective, it's easier to develop software for systems I already have the tools and training to accommodate.

Is that what you do, then? Just sit down and pick one system that you have tools and training for and only develop for that one? Do you have a real big 401k to hold you over now that XP is all but out the door? Because it looks like you're going to have to stop developing for Windows XP and start developing for a modern OS.

Real developers have to go where the customers are. If 70% of the customers are on Windows Vista/Windows 7/Windows 8 and 30% of the customers are on Windows XP, you have to either abandon one of these segments and lose out on a sizable amount of customers, or you have to develop for both.

Here's one big problem right away. Some of the APIs on modern operating systems like Windows 7 have been changed compared to Windows XP. The same code will not always work on Windows 7 and Windows XP. This means you have to write additional code to facilitate both versions of the API. Writing more code = more expense. Plain and simple.

 

[XOR != OR]

I would be more than happy to discuss the details of 7 vs. 8 on devices varying be screen size and input method. And if you have data discussing this subject that would be helpful. I'm pretty sure there isn't, you won't find too many people that have used Windows on tablets prior to 8 and I can guarantee there is no "data" about how 7 and 8 scale across devices because there aren't that many people who would even understand that question. Here's a fun fact about 7 and 8. Using a touch device that uses a standard Win32 drop down menu in a desktop app, one can press and hold and drag through the menus and then release on the highlighted item and that corresponds to a left click.

I can't say that I have a million of them, and I know that I will get called this and that, but as honestly as I know, when it comes to using Windows for that last four versions across multiple devices across multiple form factors and input methods, I know that pretty well. I get a lot of flack when I mention this, however Windows has always be a general purpose OS that that works on a lot of different devices with a lot of different input methods. So sue me, I spent a lot of time with Windows and different apps across lots of different hardware and input methods.

So you don't have any data to back up your position.

To be fair; I can see how the ModernUI would be better suited for touch devices. That has never been something I've argued, nor will I.

It's on the desktop where I think the ModernUI is silly. And it would appear that MS is finally coming around to see why.

 

[XOR != OR]

It isn't. I never said it was. Reread my post and try again.

Hint: The implication of what I did say is that developing for Windows XP is making software development more expensive.



Is that what you do, then? Just sit down and pick one system that you have tools and training for and only develop for that one? Do you have a real big 401k to hold you over now that XP is all but out the door? Because it looks like you're going to have to stop developing for Windows XP and start developing for a modern OS.

Real developers have to go where the customers are. If 70% of the customers are on Windows Vista/Windows 7/Windows 8 and 30% of the customers are on Windows XP, you have to either abandon one of these segments and lose out on a sizable amount of customers, or you have to develop for both.

Here's one big problem right away. Some of the APIs on modern operating systems like Windows 7 have been changed compared to Windows XP. The same code will not always work on Windows 7 and Windows XP. This means you have to write additional code to facilitate both versions of the API. Writing more code = more expense. Plain and simple.

Dogs: focus. This is a thread about the UI, and I've already clarified for those confused that I'm referring to the UI. In fact, I even used the term "interface" in my post. That should have been a huge clue for you.

Wanna scratch this post and try again?

 

[Dogs]

Dogs: focus. This is a thread about the UI, and I've already clarified for those confused that I'm referring to the UI. In fact, I even used the term "interface" in my post. That should have been a huge clue for you.

If you would like to stop discussing non-UI related things, stop asking non-UI related questions.

 

[heatlesssun]

Fascinating.

So users should be forced on to new interfaces, and corporations should be saddled with productivity losses and training costs in order to subsidize the software and OS industry?

I think you might have things slightly confused; The OS and software industry exist to make corporations MORE efficient, not less.

I find it interesting that a number of people love to have it both ways. Microsoft is on its way down, the Windows desktop is dying, mobile is taking over, but no one can figure out the modern UI because everyone is just so used to it, it's like the center of their lives. I'm a Microsoft fanboy, and yeah, the Start Menu isn't the center of people's lives work or play. Last I heard, Linux is the #1 in the world, that doesn't have a Start Menu, especially when you're counting an Android phone as a Linux desktop.

Sure, Microsoft is receiving a loud and clear message from the long term Windows desktop folks that just want a Windows desktop. And in the time these same folks buy 52 Android and iOS mobile devices, they MIGHT buy one Windows laptop or desktop. Maybe.

 

[Tsumi]

Apparently not. All it is *forcing* is many people to hate it, and if they are savvy enough, download a start menu replacement to suppress it. And forced Metro on the desktop becomes associated in their minds with frustration, so when they see a Windows mobile device with Metro they run the other way. That's the opposite effect of what Sinofsky convinced Ballmer would happen: that Metro would create some apple-esque halo effect where the vast installed base of Windows PC users would flock to Metro based tablets and smartphones. The disconnect ofcourse was making Metro work on desktop PC's as a total afterthought.

Microsoft's best play would have been to give users choice to easily opt out of Metro if they didn't want it and it didn't make sense for their way of working, while at the same time focusing on making Metro apps compelling out of the gate rather than the chronic under-construction-zone filled with shovelware as it stands today.

Maybe you should read entire posts instead nitpicking parts of posts.

 

[heatlesssun]

So you don't have any data to back up your position.

To be fair; I can see how the ModernUI would be better suited for touch devices. That has never been something I've argued, nor will I.

It's on the desktop where I think the ModernUI is silly. And it would appear that MS is finally coming around to see why.

Where's you're data that shows that with Windows 7 a device like a Dell Venue 8 Pro would be better across a tablet and desktop experience?

 

[XOR != OR]

Where's you're data that shows that with Windows 7 a device like a Dell Venue 8 Pro would be better across a tablet and desktop experience?

Did I ever say that? Quote where you think I said that, I fear you are deeply confused.

 

[XOR != OR]

If you would like to stop discussing non-UI related things, stop asking non-UI related questions.

says the guy who still hasn't figured out the thread is about guis.

 

[heatlesssun]

Did I ever say that? Quote where you think I said that, I fear you are deeply confused.

Care to quantify that?

The claim has been made that 8 (gui) works better than 7 on small and large screen devices. So surely you must have some data to back that up.

( I have never argued that 8 is a poor interface for mobile, touch-only screens. I can see how it's better for that application )

The point I was making is that 8 works better on a single device with a range of UI capabilities.

 

[XOR != OR]

The point I was making is that 8 works better on a single device with a range of UI capabilities.

Which means what? That on a device that has multiple input options ( touch, keyboard and mouse ), 8 is better? For you, I'm sure that's true. Obviously the general public doesn't agree as evident by ms backing off of modern on the desktop and the lack of touch monitor sales for the desktop ( which, you may recall, was something somethingi predicted ).

 

[heatlesssun]

Which means what? That on a device that has multiple input options ( touch, keyboard and mouse ), 8 is better? For you, I'm sure that's true. Obviously the general public doesn't agree as evident by ms backing off of modern on the desktop and the lack of touch monitor sales for the desktop ( which, you may recall, was something somethingi predicted ).

First of all, how many people are fluent in Windows across multiple versions, form factors and input methods? Even around places like here that's not exactly a typical Windows experience. As far as your point about touch monitor sales, I have no idea and that was never a point of emphasis that I've ever made. I've always highlighted mobile devices, tablets, hybrids and convertibles with emphasis on those devices getting better and cheaper.

The devices that I've mentioned in this forum for some time now are these small Bay Trail devices that seem to be doing well. Maybe they aren't but they are on the cheap side and the Dell Venue 8 Pro doesn't last long on stock priced at $200.

Hardware characteristics on the low end of Windows 8 has radically changed in the last two months especially in the tablets space. If you have any data regarding the sale of these 8" Windows Bay Trail tablets I would appreciate it. So far I've seen nothing from anyone about that subject. With these devices being brand new I didn't expect much information on the subject until next month at the earliest.

 

[XOR != OR]

Then obviously we aren't talking about the same thing.

Mobile devices where touch is the only input would do well with Windows 8. I've always said this. I, myself, prefer android, but it's really down to personal preference.

 

[DeathFromBelow]

Mobile devices where touch is the only input would do well with Windows 8. I've always said this. I, myself, prefer android, but it's really down to personal preference.

I'm not even going to concede that much to Heatless. I have a tablet and I never bother with Metro. Its like I said before, the historical problem with Windows on tablets isn't that its hard to launch apps. Its that x86 tablets have poor performance and cost a lot.

Heatless says that Bay Trail can save the day, but the Atom was so slow to begin with that I don't think doubling the performance can bring in customers unless these things are priced below Android products.

 

[heatlesssun]

I'm not even going to concede that much to Heatless. I have a tablet and I never bother with Metro. Its like I said before, the historical problem with Windows on tablets isn't that its hard to launch apps. Its that x86 tablets have poor performance and cost a lot.

The consensus over the years of the Windows desktop on touch is certainly not that it is touch friendly, particularly on small screen devices. 7 was launched with a number of touch enhancements and Microsoft began to tout Windows tablets and there were a lot of rumors at the time that Microsoft was going to launch some kind of touch layer to 7. Of course that never happened. But there were a number of 3rd party attempts to do so.

Yes a lot can be done with touch on the desktop with the right desktop applications. But there are still a lot of complaints even in 8 that the desktop isn't touch friendly. But it is just the desktop, it's also desktop apps. Very few desktop apps have ever been designed with touch in mind. The small toolbars and standard drop down program menus were clearly designed to work a precision pointer, not fingers.

Heatless says that Bay Trail can save the day, but the Atom was so slow to begin with that I don't think doubling the performance can bring in customers unless these things are priced below Android products.

Just take a look at all of the reviews of these Bay Trail tablets or ask one of the owners here of the Dell Venue 8 Pro, a number of members have picked this puppy up when its been on sale or look at one of dozens of YouTube videos demoing the performance of Bay Trail devices.

Bay Trail rewrites the story of the Atom, so much so that many were thinking that Intel should have dropped the Atom name for these new SoCs. And Bay Trail is just the first step as Intel is aggressively pushing development with the 14 nm and 64 bit parts shipping next quarter I believe.

 

[XOR != OR]

First of all, how many people are fluent in Windows across multiple versions, form factors and input methods? Even around places like here that's not exactly a typical Windows experience. As far as your point about touch monitor sales, I have no idea and that was never a point of emphasis that I've ever made. I've always highlighted mobile devices, tablets, hybrids and convertibles with emphasis on those devices getting better and cheaper.

I had to wait until I got home, but I had this little gem saved because I knew it'd come up someday: http://hardforum.com/showpost.php?p=1038611052&postcount=352

 

[ManofGod]

Congrats, you won. For those hoping for the return of the classic start menu, good luck.

 

[DeathFromBelow]

The consensus over the years of the Windows desktop on touch is certainly not that it is touch friendly, particularly on small screen devices. 7 was launched with a number of touch enhancements and Microsoft began to tout Windows tablets and there were a lot of rumors at the time that Microsoft was going to launch some kind of touch layer to 7. Of course that never happened. But there were a number of 3rd party attempts to do so.

I disagree. If we're talking devices smaller than 10", yes, you need a different UI. For larger products the traditional UI actually works well. I think the Metro hybrid UI is more of a marketing gimmick and an attempt to cash in on an app store.

The real problem with early generation flip-screen laptops was that the touch technology itself sucked until capacitive screens became economical. The old resistive screens generally required too much pressure and required a stylus for any sort of accuracy. I don't have any problems using the desktop on a 10" capacitive screen with my finger. You can always increase the DPI setting to make things a little larger, but I haven't had a problem with the GUI. The only aspect of Windows that isn't really good for touch is the flyout menus on the classic start menu/list on the Vista/7 menu, but you have plenty of room to pin apps to the main Start menu and taskbar. Why not replace the useless 'Games' button from the Vista/7 menu with a 'Touch' option or whatever to open a touch-friendly app launcher? I suspect they hoped forcing the radical new Metro Start Screen on everyone would drive traffic to their app store.

Yes a lot can be done with touch on the desktop with the right desktop applications. But there are still a lot of complaints even in 8 that the desktop isn't touch friendly. But it is just the desktop, it's also desktop apps. Very few desktop apps have ever been designed with touch in mind. The small toolbars and standard drop down program menus were clearly designed to work a precision pointer, not fingers.

Ok? How many people are using those apps on touch devices? People want cheap toys for pulling up a web browser, reading, looking at maps, and watching video. Throw in a touch-friendly Office suite and you have a competitive tablet device. Niche apps will follow. The ability to run traditional Windows apps is just gravy, much like most of the crap you can get for iOS and Android from their app stores. The issue is cost and performance, not the UI/apps. Hopefully Bay Trail and future products can address that, but this whole Metro disaster didn't help bring in consumers. I think they're going to have to undercut Android to get serious market share.

 

[Megalith]

Only problem with desktop is that the keyboard/tablet input doesn't show automatically when you tap on a text entry field.

 

[heatlesssun]

I disagree. If we're talking devices smaller than 10", yes, you need a different UI. For larger products the traditional UI actually works well. I think the Metro hybrid UI is more of a marketing gimmick and an attempt to cash in on an app store.

The larger the screen the better the Windows desktop UI works. But let's take a real example. Office 2013, overall that suite is the finest example of a desktop application that works well with touch. One something larger than 10" at 100% desktop scaling, it's a piece of cake for me. That was never the consensus for the suite in general except perhaps OneNote, which is the single finest example of desktop application that can work equally well with touch, even on an 8" device with 125% scaling.

The real problem with early generation flip-screen laptops was that the touch technology itself sucked until capacitive screens became economical. The old resistive screens generally required too much pressure and required a stylus for any sort of accuracy. I don't have any problems using the desktop on a 10" capacitive screen with my finger. You can always increase the DPI setting to make things a little larger, but I haven't had a problem with the GUI. The only aspect of Windows that isn't really good for touch is the flyout menus on the classic start menu/list on the Vista/7 menu, but you have plenty of room to pin apps to the main Start menu and taskbar. Why not replace the useless 'Games' button from the Vista/7 menu with a 'Touch' option or whatever to open a touch-friendly app launcher? I suspect they hoped forcing the radical new Metro Start Screen on everyone would drive traffic to their app store.

Resistive screens have been around forever, however first mainstream Windows tablet devices running XP Tablets were about digital pens, which worked very well. I got my first multitouch capacitive Windows device in 2008, an HP 2500xz I think was the model number. Not a good piece of hardware with that AMD CPU. This Dell Venue 8 Pro with an Atom and no fan runs circles around it as a tablet.

Ok? How many people are using those apps on touch devices? People want cheap toys for pulling up a web browser, reading, looking at maps, and watching video. Throw in a touch-friendly Office suite and you have a competitive tablet device.

Which is kind of what the point is of these 8" Bay Trial tablets, though as pointed out before, desktop Office 2013 isn't renowned for its touch friendliness. Indeed there are many waiting for the modern version of Office, and that will be one of the critiqued pieces of software ever created.

Niche apps will follow. The ability to run traditional Windows apps is just gravy, much like most of the crap you can get for iOS and Android from their app stores. The issue is cost and performance, not the UI/apps. Hopefully Bay Trail and future products can address that, but this whole Metro disaster didn't help bring in consumers. I think they're going to have to undercut Android to get serious market share.

Being able to run well the bulk of my desktop apps on a $300 tablet is a little more than gravy.

 

[heatlesssun]

Only problem with desktop is that the keyboard/tablet input doesn't show automatically when you tap on a text entry field.

This is an issue among Windows tablet old timers like myself. Windows 7 would automatically pop up the keyboard based on text input APIs. The problem with that is that the keyboard would constantly popup when not wanted. 8 requires desktop apps to specially request the keyboard to popup and I think that's the better approach. And again that's the problem with desktop apps on a tablet. Some work well and most just don't have any consideration for non-keyboard and mouse driven devices. Which or course why should they?

 

[Ur_Mom]

This is an issue among Windows tablet old timers like myself. Windows 7 would automatically pop up the keyboard based on text input APIs. The problem with that is that the keyboard would constantly popup when not wanted. 8 requires desktop apps to specially request the keyboard to popup and I think that's the better approach. And again that's the problem with desktop apps on a tablet. Some work well and most just don't have any consideration for non-keyboard and mouse driven devices. Which or course why should they?

That's why I couldn't use Windows 7 on a touch screen - because they weren't built with a touchscreen in mind. Only a mouse keyboard combo. That's also why Windows Mobile wasn't such a hit (I loved it). It was Windows desktop on a touch screen device. But, Windows Phone 7/8 is amazing. Same with Windows 8. On a touch screen, it's damn near perfect.

It's like using Windows without a mouse... Doable, but WTF?!

 

[B00nie]

Who on earth would want to type anything longer than SMS messages using a tablet? Usability is pretty much at zero and you're reduced to hunt&peck style typing.

 

[heatlesssun]

You have to consider the size and portability of a tablet. The idea isn't to replace a keyboard and mouse where those input methods work well but they aren't nearly as portable as touch or pen is with a tablet. Also pen input can achieve things not possible with a pen.

There is no perfect input method that works for everything in all situations. Touch and pen are simply other tools that expand the capability of computing devices.

 

[Ur_Mom]

Who on earth would want to type anything longer than SMS messages using a tablet? Usability is pretty much at zero and you're reduced to hunt&peck style typing.

My wife typing on a small cell phone keyboard (touchscreen) would prove you wrong with usability and hunt and peck. Me? I'd agree with your statement. But, some people are damn fast.

I want a tablet that snaps on to a keyboard (Helix, for example). So, for the little things, I can use the on screen keyboard. If I really need to type something longer, it's extremely easy to pop out that keyboard, snap it on, and get back to work. I wouldn't type on the on screen keyboard that much myself. Just basic things.

 

[Mak54291]

Maybe their doing that because they are afraid linux and steamos take over.
It's a good news, I hope it will look and be like windows 7 plus metro. Than maybe I could use windows 8.

 

[MrCrispy]

Who on earth would want to type anything longer than SMS messages using a tablet? Usability is pretty much at zero and you're reduced to hunt&peck style typing.

People in Japan write whole books on tiny phones. Everyone uses their smartphone for routine email. And with a Surface type/touch cover, its perfectly usable for lots of text entry.

 

[Tsumi]

Maybe their doing that because they are afraid linux and steamos take over.
It's a good news, I hope it will look and be like windows 7 plus metro. Than maybe I could use windows 8.

Linux, maybe. SteamOS isn't going to do anything for desktops, as it is entirely aimed at being a console replacement, not desktop. SteamOS and Steambox's primary competitors are the Xbox One and PS4, and to an extent, Windows HTPCs.

 

[DPI]

Maybe their doing that because they are afraid linux and steamos take over.
It's a good news, I hope it will look and be like windows 7 plus metro. Than maybe I could use windows 8.

I'm sure SteamOS is a word thats known at MS but I'm also sure management doesn't take it seriously, and won't until its too late again. Its just what MS does.

No, the Start Menu is under consideration for a return ONLY because Enterprise has universally rebuffed it, because for various reasons its not conducive to a business environment and Microsoft has not made a business case for Metro, the Metro apps aren't relevant for business, and there are retraining costs and lost productivity issues. Not to mention 99.9999% of Enterprise desktops do not have touchscreen monitors and Metro was optimized for Touch.

Unfortunately I doubt the Start Menu will return 1:1 like Windows 7's start menu, they'll yet again make sure that's not even an option for people that want it, instead it will be a pseudo-Start Menu which will really just be a "mini Metro" or "mini Start Screen" with blinking live tiles. Maybe that'll be good enough for some people.

 

[rudy]

MS often takes a threat very seriously, they do not however make it publicly known what they are really saying inside. Like all companies they speak negatively about competition in hopes it will reduce sales. What do you think they are going to do come out in front of everyone in the world and say OH shit sorry investors we are way behind and don't have an answer right now. That would also be used as a weapon by their competition to say, he look our product is so good buy ours. Just doesn't make any sense.

 

[heatlesssun]

Unfortunately I doubt the Start Menu will return 1:1 like Windows 7's start menu, they'll yet again make sure that's not even an option for people that want it, instead it will be a pseudo-Start Menu which will really just be a "mini Metro" or "mini Start Screen" with blinking live tiles. Maybe that'll be good enough for some people.

Live tiles don't blink, they scroll vertically when transitioning and that's controllable for each app on the Start Screen. The #1 complaint by far of the Start Screen from Windows 8 opponents is that it is full screen. The functionality of the Start Menu can be replicated in a mini-Start Screen and at this point it makes sense to extended the capability of the Start Screen and modern UI and it's integration on the desktop that to simply keep implementing at nearly 20 year old UI.

 

[brncao]

About time they start bringing back the start menu

 

[Mak54291]

deleted

 

[MrCrispy]

Live tiles don't blink, they scroll vertically when transitioning and that's controllable for each app on the Start Screen. The #1 complaint by far of the Start Screen from Windows 8 opponents is that it is full screen. The functionality of the Start Menu can be replicated in a mini-Start Screen and at this point it makes sense to extended the capability of the Start Screen and modern UI and it's integration on the desktop that to simply keep implementing at nearly 20 year old UI.

I suggested the same earlier - half screen start screen.

We have 2 extremes right now -

1. The old start menu - can become a nightmare with 20 nested levels, endless scrolling, little context and not much information

2. Start screen - throws away too much (recent lists), disrupts your work, very hard to organize, live tiles only make sense for a small handful of apps, doesn't tailor itself for desktops

There has to be a happy medium between the 2, I don't think MS has any desire to actually find it though. They are committed to 'everything will be a tablet in a few years and we must train users for it' meme, which of course is not true at all.

 

[heatlesssun]

I suggested the same earlier - half screen start screen.

We have 2 extremes right now -

1. The old start menu - can become a nightmare with 20 nested levels, endless scrolling, little context and not much information

2. Start screen - throws away too much (recent lists), disrupts your work, very hard to organize, live tiles only make sense for a small handful of apps, doesn't tailor itself for desktops

There has to be a happy medium between the 2, I don't think MS has any desire to actually find it though. They are committed to 'everything will be a tablet in a few years and we must train users for it' meme, which of course is not true at all.

One thing that gets missed in the UI debate is that almost everything in the Start Menu can be done elsewhere on the desktop. For instance, Recent Places and Items are simply folders and shortcuts to them can be placed on the Start Screen, there's lots of things like that get missed. I'm not trying to make apologies for Microsoft however we get tons if critiques of the new UI and not so much plain and simple technical details.

I've long advocated a mini-Start like you mention as I do understand the point of full screen being "jarring", at least initially and with something as old well known as the Windows desktop, keeping things familiar is important. However, keeping things familiar does have a price as the world changes and new trends emerge.

Windows as a desktop only OS has little future in the consumer space, and that in time would also pose a lot of risk to Windows clients in the enterprise as consumer technology often trickles into the business world. I think the hybrid approach is a correct high-level approach for Windows as it does allow people to keep their investments in the desktop and allows for dual-purpose devices that can offer an economic argument by nature of serving multiple purposes if the price point is correct, and a lot of these Bay Trail devices are hitting compelling price points.

 

[bigdogchris]

I don't see a decline in the amount of PC's being used, at least in my sector, we are trying to continue to add more PC's. I also see an increase in the amount of portable devices being used. However, it's not like one device type is going up while one is going down.

Now, I'm not denying PC sales are slowing, but they are by no means shrinking. Should we ignore 1.5 Billion desktop PC's and start focusing on the tablet and multi-function market, even though there's no evidence PC's will be replaced by them?

Tablets and mobile enhances desktop, it doesn't replace it.

There is no evidence that tablets or multi-function devices will replace desktops. If/when tablets take over, then I would understand the point of view of having primary touch OS.

The PC market isn't growing as fast since tablets are able to replace some of the functions we used PC for, but they're not replacing them entirely. The way I see it is some people who traditionally used laptops/PC's to do entertainment things like social media and casual gaming, are now doing those things on their phones. So while they may not be using the PC as much, or buying upgrades as often, they still use them but to a lesser degree.

And if someone is willing to accept all that, then you have the conversation regarding different UI's for different input methods...

 

[jlobue10]

The start screen is not so bad. Many people are just allergic to change and want something to complain about. Between Windows 7 and Windows 8.1, I actually like 8.1 better.

 

[pxc]

Paul Thurrott's article does not claim what that headline claims, and it's the primary source of the reg article.

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.

* 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.

Just bumping and quoting this because old Mary Jo finally figured out what "next version of Windows" means. Also, "Windows 8.2" still doesn't exist.

No Microsoft Start Menu for Windows 8 until 2015: Sources

Why does anyone listen to that idiot? Even when she's given information she can't understand it, and just spreads misinformation instead.

 

[heatlesssun]

There is still according to this article another 8.1 update coming. Terry Myerson did say at Build in April that the Start Menu was coming as an update to 8.1. It will be interesting to see how this plays out.