Windows 8 start menu has become cluttered?

[pcjunkie]

Infection proof, as in never in the history of the universe? Or infection hardened, as in orders of magnitude less likely to result in an infection, in my opinion as someone experienced in computer security? Please clarify.

No you please clarify as your statement was pretty bold...please tell us using your expertise?

 

[B00nie]

No problem, I love fulfilling insincere requests. I actually won a trophy for it in my town.

Anyway, Metro Apps are safe, secure, so users can download as many programs as they want, without getting infected. They won't be scared to get things that might help them or entertain them more, alternatively they won't download a bunch of stuff that ends up corrupting of infecting their system. This stuff happens all the time, to noobs and occasionally veterans, it causes massive downtimes and incurs lots of costs, and loss productivity. The fact of the matter, as you so definitively put it, is that Win 8 is more efficient on the desktop, and there is no law of physics that says an OS that runs on a tablet can not be. The user interface is simpler and easier to navigate, there is no benefit to making it harder just so you can say it's not dumbed down because it takes more deliberation and thought to do things, that don't need to be that hard. I don't search for things I didn't search for before, and of course you can't specify so don't know what to tell you there.

So in other words you couldn't provide any reasoning whatsoever but decided to spew a little cock and bull story about how Metro makes apps safe. I also love how you make stupendously wild claims as 'users being able to install as many programs as they want' when app store covers maybe 0.001% of current software

Now I'm sure you'll also care to explain what the UI has to do with the new app store and content delivery system.

 

[devil22]

Yes for people like yourself I imagine Windows 8 is wonderful until you actually have to find a program other than the 6 or 8 giant icons (sorry apps) on your desktop.

Of course you won't say what you think happens when I can't, so let me say it for you, I will right click, click all apps, then click the program. 4 clicks. And actually 60 apps will fit on my desktop, but I'm sure you'll learn how to count (or at least not be off by an order of magnitude when dealing with a 2 digit number) some day. To launch an App in Windows 7 that is not pinned to the start menu is also 4 clicks at minimum, sometimes more if the folders are embedded. Additionally, I frequently installed programs in Windows 7, and didn't know what folder they were in, necessitating me opening many different folders, and if I forgot the folder, I had to do the same. In Win 8 all apps, you just scroll the mouse wheel till you see your program, much better.

 

[B00nie]

Yea, I called one thing a useless anecdote because it was, and the first thing you do, again, is say I am doing that to everything (everything in the universe, or just everything you write, please clarify or something.) Article count is a poor measurement, I figure users are more likely to post about something they hate then something they get work done with. If all you want is a popular contest to decide what you should think, I think you are posting in the wrong forum.

Quite the opposite. The tech bloggers are the best indication of end-user trends. It's their job to deliver thorns or roses - and oh boy does the 8 get a lot of hate.

 

[devil22]

No you please clarify as your statement was pretty bold...please tell us using your expertise?

Already stated. The apps are vetted and sandboxed. Btw, that's a cute way of saying "I have no idea please tell me" without looking like you're saying it.

So in other words you couldn't provide any reasoning whatsoever but decided to spew a little cock and bull story about how Metro makes apps safe. I also love how you make stupendously wild claims as 'users being able to install as many programs as they want' when app store covers maybe 0.001% of current software

Now I'm sure you'll also care to explain what the UI has to do with the new app store and content delivery system.

Ah, yea no reasoning. Like when I said users can get apps that are safe, secure and don't impact performance, and will thus get more apps, or less problems, that's not reasoning. but you on the other hand, have loads of reasoning, it's just coming out of your ears. The App store is new, how do you propose they get a massive number of apps on the app store without progressing from 0, up through small numbers, until they reach high numbers. To hell with reason, use common sense.

 

[pcjunkie]

Of course you won't say what you think happens when I can't, so let me say it for you, I will right click, click all apps, then click the program. 4 clicks. And actually 60 apps will fit on my desktop, but I'm sure you'll learn how to count (or at least not be off by an order of magnitude when dealing with a 2 digit number) some day. To launch an App in Windows 7 that is not pinned to the start menu is also 4 clicks at minimum, sometimes more if the folders are embedded. Additionally, I frequently installed programs in Windows 7, and didn't know what folder they were in, necessitating me opening many different folders, and if I forgot the folder, I had to do the same. In Win 8 all apps, you just scroll the mouse wheel till you see your program, much better.

Windows 7 is really easy...if you actually read the prompts when installing prompts it would ask if you wanted to place a shortcut on the desktop so I've had no issue...seems like a lot of clicking to get apps on the Metro screen don't you think?


PS: Sandbox'd apps are still vulnerable...but I'm sure you are aware of that being an expert?

 

[devil22]

Quite the opposite. The tech bloggers are the best indication of end-user trends. It's their job to deliver thorns or roses - and oh boy does the 8 get a lot of hate.

Confucius say - A lot of hate from people who are ignorant doesn't amount to the love of one person that is not.

 

[devil22]

Windows 7 is really easy...if you actually read the prompts when installing prompts it would ask if you wanted to place a shortcut on the desktop so I've had no issue...seems like a lot of clicking to get apps on the Metro screen don't you think?

No, I don't. The average user is not installing apps all day. Second, doing 4 or 5 extra clicks once, then using the app indefinitely with less clicks is a net gain, for not much initial loss.

 

[B00nie]

Ah, yea no reasoning. Like when I said users can get apps that are safe, secure and don't impact performance, and will thus get more apps, or less problems, that's not reasoning.

You still fail to reveal to us how the UI affects app security. I'll give you a hint: It does not affect it in any form or matter. You're trying to divert the discussion. Despair?

Oh and btw. many developers will never ever publish their software in the app store. They don't want to give a 30% cut to MS.

 

[devil22]

Windows 7 is really easy...if you actually read the prompts when installing prompts it would ask if you wanted to place a shortcut on the desktop so I've had no issue...seems like a lot of clicking to get apps on the Metro screen don't you think?


PS: Sandbox'd apps are still vulnerable...but I'm sure you are aware of that being an expert?

Yes, am I allowed to say more too? How about, they are probably orders of magnitude safer than a non-sandboxed app. In fact, a non-sandboxed app has no safe guard at all from the user account, and probably admin since most of them require admin privileges to install. At least the sandboxed app will hardly ever have a chance to infect the system. You knew *that* I'm sure, or not..

 

[devil22]

You still fail to reveal to us how the UI affects app security. I'll give you a hint: It does not affect it in any form or matter. You're trying to divert the discussion. Despair?

Sure it's despair because I didn't say it did. Makes sense. I wasn't asked about UI benefits, I was asked how Windows 8 helps the user or something similar that I'm not going to bother to go back and look because it's a waste of time in this debate theatre scheme you and pcjunkie are running.

 

[pcjunkie]

No, I don't. The average user is not installing apps all day. Second, doing 4 or 5 extra clicks once, then using the app indefinitely with less clicks is a net gain, for not much initial loss.

LOL...really, your argument is you don't read the prompts and several extra clicks are nothing? I guess Win 8 is perfect for you then!

 

[B00nie]

Sure it's despair because I didn't say it did. Makes sense. I wasn't asked about UI benefits, I was asked how Windows 8 helps the user or something similar that I'm not going to bother to go back and look because it's a waste of time in this debate theatre scheme you and pcjunkie are running.

I'm sorry but the topic of discussion _is_ the Win8 UI .

 

[devil22]

LOL...really, your argument is you don't read the prompts and several extra clicks are nothing? I guess Win 8 is perfect for you then!

It can be perfect whether you read prompts or not, I did not say I don't read prompts so making up stuff again, because you have no argument and are just trying to waste somebody's time.

 

[devil22]

I'm sorry but the topic of discussion _is_ the Win8 UI .

So tell the people who ask me about other stuff, instead of the guy who answers.

 

[B00nie]

So tell the people who ask me about other stuff, instead of the guy who answers.

I asked you specifically for your reasoning behind Win8 UI changes and how you think they would be necessary or beneficial.

You answered with app stores and sandboxing which have nothing to do with the UI. Maybe I expressed myself badly? English is not my native language you know.

 

[devil22]

I asked you specifically for your reasoning behind Win8 UI changes and how you think they would be necessary or beneficial.

You answered with app stores and sandboxing which have nothing to do with the UI. Maybe I expressed myself badly? English is not my native language you know.

What difference does it make? Do you feel the world will end if I talk about something else once, regardless of the reason? Ok, fine let's get back to the UI and stay there. I have stated many times, but am happy to repeat myself endlessly, that the start screen is fewer clicks, easier targets, and more program launch possibilities (app icons) on screen. You do not need to know what directory a program installed to in All Apps, you can just scroll till you find your app. I am probably not alone in that I have at times installed a program, and tried to find it's install location and had to open many folders to do so, but that's a minor thing. Other than that, my desktop use is the same, so that's why I like the UI more than the start menu.

 

[B00nie]

What difference does it make? Do you feel the world will end if I talk about something else once, regardless of the reason? Ok, fine let's get back to the UI and stay there. I have stated many times, but am happy to repeat myself endlessly, that the start screen is fewer clicks, easier targets, and more program launch possibilities (app icons) on screen. You do not need to know what directory a program installed to in All Apps, you can just scroll till you find your app. I am probably not alone in that I have at times installed a program, and tried to find it's install location and had to open many folders to do so, but that's a minor thing. Other than that, my desktop use is the same, so that's why I like the UI more than the start menu.

That's interesting. How does the new start menu differ from the 'worst practise' use of desktop where it is filled with launch icons and files? I.e. a cluttered desktop which is the true trademark of an inefficient and inept computer user. This is exactly what I'm talking about when referring to listening to inept users feedback and them not knowing what they actually want

Metro UI already since 2002:

 

[MrCrispy]

The security model has nothing to do with Metro apps. You can write desktop apps using WinRT, and the app store can have x86 (i.e. insecure) apps as well. I don't know why we are talking about security when the focus of the thread is UI and usability.

 

[devil22]

That's interesting. How does the new start menu differ from the 'worst practise' use of desktop where it is filled with launch icons and files? I.e. a cluttered desktop which is the true trademark of an inefficient and inept computer user. This is exactly what I'm talking about when referring to listening to inept users feedback and them not knowing what they actually want

Well, some of the reasons are technical and may deviate from our 'strictly UI' talk rules. But strictly UI wise, I would say that storing program shortcuts on the desktop is a very poor user experience, users tend to use that work space for temp. apps, like say unzipping a file containing many icons. Trying to keep temp. and permanent items there would be a cluster-f***, users would delete their program icons constantly, and also program icons can be hard to see depending on the background wallpaper (notice metro backgrounds are clear in the middle where the app icons are, it's for a reason.) Without those downsides, there really is nothing wrong with using the desktop, it's just that those downsides will always be there. The Start Screen is kind of like a desktop without the problems of the desktop, if you want to put it in those terms. Your picture is not of metro obviously, in the since that a picture of a Fiero is not a picture of a Ferrari, though the same people would mistake both comparisons.

 

[devil22]

The security model has nothing to do with Metro apps. You can write desktop apps using WinRT, and the app store can have x86 (i.e. insecure) apps as well. I don't know why we are talking about security when the focus of the thread is UI and usability.

So...add something to the UI discussion? I've already said I'll stick to UI if everyone else does.

 

[B00nie]

Well, some of the reasons are technical and may deviate from our 'strictly UI' talk rules. But strictly UI wise, I would say that storing program shortcuts on the desktop is a very poor user experience, users tend to use that work space for temp. apps, like say unzipping a file containing many icons. Trying to keep temp. and permanent items there would be a cluster-f***, users would delete their program icons constantly, and also program icons can be hard to see depending on the background wallpaper (notice metro backgrounds are clear in the middle where the app icons are, it's for a reason.) Without those downsides, there really is nothing wrong with using the desktop, it's just that those downsides will always be there. The Start Screen is kind of like a desktop without the problems of the desktop, if you want to put it in those terms. Your picture is not of metro obviously, in the since that a picture of a Fiero is not a picture of a Ferrari, though the same people would mistake both comparisons.

I beg to differ. At least on desktop you can group icons and files to folders which is simply not possible using modern UI. Unzipping files save contents by default to a folder (using native tools) so unless the user hamfists real bad he won't end up with a bunch of rogue files on the desktop.

You say that storing icons on a desktop is very poor for user experience but yet seem to think that having the same exact thing in MUI start screen is somehow better. All they do is take up much more space to add insult to injury.

 

[devil22]

I beg to differ. At least on desktop you can group icons and files to folders which is simply not possible using modern UI. Unzipping files save contents by default to a folder (using native tools) so unless the user hamfists real bad he won't end up with a bunch of rogue files on the desktop.

You say that storing icons on a desktop is very poor for user experience but yet seem to think that having the same exact thing in MUI start screen is somehow better. All they do is take up much more space to add insult to injury.

You can group programs in Metro first of all, and if you want an alternative, you get groups in All Apps. I don't know about you, but I frequently just end up unzipping lots of files to my desktop, because it makes an excellent temp working space. And there are many other situations where I end up with lots of temp. files on my desktop, I hardly think I am alone here. I either look at the files, use them, selectively move them to other folders, or whatever, then delete everything on the desktop. Seems to make more sense to me. It would be more painful to have to select around program shortcuts to get rid of them. The Metro UI is not the same because it does not have the bad sides I've listed, like having temp files you delete. The sizing makes them easier to click, and you can still fit 60 on my 1680x1050 screen so I don't see the utility of having them smaller for most users. And what are we arguing exactly? That the start screen should be eliminated, and we just use the desktop? Or that the start menu rocks because the start screen is like the desktop except without some of the downsides, because that makes no sense. If you have to compare the start screen against anything but the start menu, I would say you don't really care about the start menu..

 

[heatlesssun]

Metro UI already since 2002:

Nonsense, this is nothing like Metro, first and foremost being try using that desktop with touch.

 

[Eman D. Rahym]

That's interesting. How does the new start menu differ from the 'worst practise' use of desktop where it is filled with launch icons and files? I.e. a cluttered desktop which is the true trademark of an inefficient and inept computer user. This is exactly what I'm talking about when referring to listening to inept users feedback and them not knowing what they actually want

Metro UI already since 2002:

BOOnie, if that's what your Start Screen looks like then the best of luck to you. Good thing it slides out of the way when you're not using it! Windows has always provided tools for people to use. On the other hand, Windows has never required you to use them. If you choose to ignore them then you've only yourself to blame. You're perfectly free to be a slob if you want. I've chosen a different way to use my PC and I assure you my Start Screen looks nothing like your "example."

 

[Wrench00]

BOOnie, if that's what your Start Screen looks like then the best of luck to you. Good thing it slides out of the way when you're not using it! Windows has always provided tools for people to use. On the other hand, Windows has never required you to use them. If you choose to ignore them then you've only yourself to blame. You're perfectly free to be a slob if you want. I've chosen a different way to use my PC and I assure you my Start Screen looks nothing like your "example."

You know calling people slobs is uncalled for. Its very disrespectful also goes against H forum rules.
He was trying to point out a inherent problem, most people don't know how to manage their desktops what makes you think they can manage a start screen, especially since it needs complex gestures and completely different methods of managing icons.

 

[B00nie]

You can group programs in Metro first of all, and if you want an alternative, you get groups in All Apps. I don't know about you, but I frequently just end up unzipping lots of files to my desktop, because it makes an excellent temp working space. And there are many other situations where I end up with lots of temp. files on my desktop, I hardly think I am alone here. I either look at the files, use them, selectively move them to other folders, or whatever, then delete everything on the desktop. Seems to make more sense to me. It would be more painful to have to select around program shortcuts to get rid of them. The Metro UI is not the same because it does not have the bad sides I've listed, like having temp files you delete. The sizing makes them easier to click, and you can still fit 60 on my 1680x1050 screen so I don't see the utility of having them smaller for most users. And what are we arguing exactly? That the start screen should be eliminated, and we just use the desktop? Or that the start menu rocks because the start screen is like the desktop except without some of the downsides, because that makes no sense. If you have to compare the start screen against anything but the start menu, I would say you don't really care about the start menu..

You don't get folders in modern UI you only get frames which are called 'groups'. I really don't understand your point about the desktop. Essentially you're saying because you abuse your desktop by unpacking stuff there instead of a temp folder, icons are bad?

 

[B00nie]

BOOnie, if that's what your Start Screen looks like then the best of luck to you. Good thing it slides out of the way when you're not using it! Windows has always provided tools for people to use. On the other hand, Windows has never required you to use them. If you choose to ignore them then you've only yourself to blame. You're perfectly free to be a slob if you want. I've chosen a different way to use my PC and I assure you my Start Screen looks nothing like your "example."

I guess you either didn't read a thing I said or didn't understand. I posted the picture as an example of *worst practises* how a non-power user typically clutters the desktop. The fact that modern UI effectively now looks like that is a testament to the stupidity of MS 'consumer driven' development where non-power users have been asked how they would want the UI to look like. It's like trying to create a F1 racer by arranging door to door polls from laymen. You end up with the dumbest formula ever with bling bling rims, LED eagle eyes, fur seats and 100kg of car audio

Start menu (the old type) was excellent. You could group your apps to several layers of hierarchy and browse through them effortlessly especially after removing the stupid 400ms delay in treeview.

 

[MrCrispy]

Yes, he has a very good point to make which as usual is getting ignored by the Win 8 defenders. Installing programs just clutters up the Start Screen. Sure, you can blather on about how its 'easy' to make tile groups and use semantic zoom and all that nonsense, when the fact is 99% of users will never use these features.

The old start menu automatically organized stuff for you. For those who wanted to search by name as you type, the option was there. For many others, they were quite happy navigating the menu structure to find what they wanted. And in most cases, they had the frequently used programs list.

The new Start abandons every single one of these design cues, just so it can show tiles. Which are of zero benefit for desktop apps, aka the apps most people will use. This just goes to show how Win 8 is entirely focused on touch/Metro apps, and totally ignores the desktop.

The new UI benefits neither the power user nor the casual layman. Power users already had plenty of tricks available to organize Start. And newbies weren't frightened by being confronted by a sea of tiles. MS likes to think because their few standard apps like Mail, Pictures etc have updating tiles (like a phone), that makes it ok to ignore everything else.

 

[MrCrispy]

BOOnie, if that's what your Start Screen looks like then the best of luck to you. Good thing it slides out of the way when you're not using it! Windows has always provided tools for people to use. On the other hand, Windows has never required you to use them. If you choose to ignore them then you've only yourself to blame. You're perfectly free to be a slob if you want. I've chosen a different way to use my PC and I assure you my Start Screen looks nothing like your "example."

Good job insulting him while also ignoring what he said. It's ironic how you accuse him of ignoring something. I can also assure you his desktop looks nothing like his example. What has that got to do with anything? The fact is this - in Win 7, installing programs sometimes spewed icons on your desktop. In Win 8, it spews a lot more crap entries into the Start screen. It's no difference really.

 

[Eman D. Rahym]

You know calling people slobs is uncalled for. Its very disrespectful also goes against H forum rules.
He was trying to point out a inherent problem, most people don't know how to manage their desktops what makes you think they can manage a start screen, especially since it needs complex gestures and completely different methods of managing icons.

Now hold on there, Wrench00. I did not call anyone a slob. I said BOOnie is free to be one if he wants, but that is not the same thing as saying he is. The distinction perhaps is too subtle for you to grasp, but it's there none the less. I also disagree that what he is pointing out is an inherent problem, at least with Windows. It's an inherent problem with users, but that's some thing beyond any version of Windows' ability to solve.

 

[B00nie]

Now hold on there, Wrench00. I did not call anyone a slob. I said BOOnie is free to be one if he wants, but that is not the same thing as saying he is. The distinction perhaps is too subtle for you to grasp, but it's there none the less. I also disagree that what he is pointing out is an inherent problem, at least with Windows. It's an inherent problem with users, but that's some thing beyond any version of Windows' ability to solve.

That's where you're wrong. A truly good software provider gives solutions to the customers. It doesn't ask how the customer wants things done - simply because the customer is not an expert on the issue. If they were they wouldn't need the software provider in the first place.

Now we can see how bad end result can be when you develop interfaces by doing a customer survey.

 

[Eman D. Rahym]

I guess you either didn't read a thing I said or didn't understand. I posted the picture as an example of *worst practises* how a non-power user typically clutters the desktop. The fact that modern UI effectively now looks like that is a testament to the stupidity of MS 'consumer driven' development where non-power users have been asked how they would want the UI to look like. It's like trying to create a F1 racer by arranging door to door polls from laymen. You end up with the dumbest formula ever with bling bling rims, LED eagle eyes, fur seats and 100kg of car audio

Start menu (the old type) was excellent. You could group your apps to several layers of hierarchy and browse through them effortlessly especially after removing the stupid 400ms delay in treeview.

I read everything you said. If I didn't "understand it" it's because it did not make sense. For example, in this post you say your picture is an example of "worst practices," and is how a user "typically" clutters the desktop. That doesn't make sense. Which is it, "worst practices" or "typical clutter?" It can't be both, unless you are arguing that "worst practices" are "typical," in which case I can only say that those words don't mean what you think they mean.

You post things that are not alike and say they are and I'm somehow supposed to be persuaded by that?

You obviously disagree with what Microsoft is doing, but then say that what they are doing is "stupid." Sorry, just because you dislike something does not make it "stupid." Others like it and seem to be able to use it perfectly well. It seems to me more likely that the problem is one of user error than any fault within Windows.

You say the "Start Menu" was excellent. It surely didn't do anything to help the person's whose desktop you posted! But wait, Windows 8 still provides the tools to make you happy! If you want to be able to browse through hierarchical folders then make a task bar toolbar that points to your Start Menu Folder. Bingo. You've got your hierarchical menu of folders of the contents of your Start Menu Folder. You've also got the new Start Screen. You have the best of both worlds, so what's the problem?

 

[Eman D. Rahym]

Good job insulting him while also ignoring what he said. It's ironic how you accuse him of ignoring something. I can also assure you his desktop looks nothing like his example. What has that got to do with anything? The fact is this - in Win 7, installing programs sometimes spewed icons on your desktop. In Win 8, it spews a lot more crap entries into the Start screen. It's no difference really.

BOOnie is the one who made the absurd comparison. If calling him on it is an insult then so be it. BOOnie is saying that mess of a desktop is what the Start Screen looks like. I'm saying he is wrong, but if that is what his Start Screen looks like then he's free to have it that way if he likes.

How do you know his desktop doesn't look like that? Is he in the cubicle next to yours?

Ironically, I agree with what people are saying here about the sloppy installer practices and the resultant clutter in the Start Screen. It is irksome to have to go in and unpin much of the junk that gets installed. So what? It's also irksome to do laundry, or wash dishes. Does that mean we should run around nude and eat out of pots using just our hands? Does that mean I should expect people to think I'm rational if I post on the internet complaining about how I dislike doing laundry and dishes?

I agree: the problem with unwanted clutter on the Start Screen is there. I also think it's a pretty minor problem, especially for "power users." It occurs exactly once, when you install a program or suite of programs and it gives you literally a minute or two of work to unpin the stuff you don't need. Further, I think the problem will go away to a great extent as legacy programs learn to clean up their act and start running smarter installation routines. Until that time this is just one of those irritations that early adopters will have to deal with. If unpinning tiles from the Start Screen is truly too much for you then you would be better off with Windows 7. Leave the new OSes to those of us with more of an expeditionary mindset.

 

[MrCrispy]

It may be a minor issue for power users, but a big problem for non techies. And compared to the old start menu, its worse. The problem is of Microsoft's own making, and their own products are some of the worst offenders.

If unpinning tiles from the Start Screen is truly too much for you then you would be better off with Windows 7. Leave the new OSes to those of us with more of an expeditionary mindset.

This is the sort of elitist mindset that maybe was also present in the Win 8 design team. Windows does nothing to solve the problem, all they did was 'lets make it easy to show pretty tiles, screw everything else, its the users own damn fault. Big colorful tiles look better in press demos!'.

 

[MrCrispy]

BOOnie is the one who made the absurd comparison. If calling him on it is an insult then so be it. BOOnie is saying that mess of a desktop is what the Start Screen looks like. I'm saying he is wrong, but if that is what his Start Screen looks like then he's free to have it that way if he likes.

Why is he wrong? If you don't spend time deleting entries and making your own groups, that is exactly what it will look like. No one is talking about what your screen looks like, we're comparing what it looks like by default, and you even agreed its a mess.

 

[Eman D. Rahym]

It may be a minor issue for power users,

Are you sure about that? There seem to be a lot of power users on this board complaining about it!

but a big problem for non techies.

I disagree. Unlike "power users," I'll bet most non techies have little problem with "right click on tile(s), choose Unpin from Start."

And compared to the old start menu, its worse.

No, it's different. The old Start Menu is just as packed full of useless junk as you claim the Start Screen is, the only difference is it's hidden inside of folders. However, to USE the Start Menu you still have to rummage through all that junk to find what you want. An organized and tidied Start Screen is much easier to navigate to find the 5% of the stuff you use 95% of the time.

The problem is of Microsoft's own making

No, the problem is in your refusal to recognize that this version of Windows 8 is different from other versions of Windows and to adapt yourself to the new reality.

and their own products are some of the worst offenders.

Yup. Microsoft needs to get their act together on installing into the new Start Screen. You know what? I bet they will.

This is the sort of elitist mindset that maybe was also present in the Win 8 design team. Windows does nothing to solve the problem, all they did was 'lets make it easy to show pretty tiles, screw everything else, its the users own damn fault. Big colorful tiles look better in press demos!'.

LOL!!! As opposed to the "defeatist mindset" that asserts the typical user won't be able to grasp right clicking on some tiles and then choosing "Unpin from Start?" I'm sorry, I have a lot more faith in my fellow humans than you seem to have. It's the user's Start Screen. Microsoft has provided the tools with which to manage it. I'm betting the vast, vast majority will quickly figure out how to do so.

Why is he wrong? If you don't spend time deleting entries and making your own groups, that is exactly what it will look like.

If you don't pick up your house it will soon look like that too. Surely you are not saying this is a surprise to you? I'd guess the vast majority of people on this board and in the world don't have Moms to pick up after them so they understand the need to clean up clutter. I don't think they'll have any trouble making the conceptual leap to creating and labeling groups and deleting unneeded tiles. It takes literally seconds to do so and sure as heck is a lot easier than doing housework.

No one is talking about what your screen looks like, we're comparing what it looks like by default, and you even agreed its a mess.

No, I said unpinning unneeded junk is an annoyance, albeit a minor one. You seem to be asserting that the worst case scenario is going to be the default, that most users will sit there and fume and complain but do nothing else as their Start Screen is taken over by stuff they never use. I say that they typical user is far too sensible to allow that and will learn how to organize their start screen and how to unpin the stuff they don't want there. This isn't rocket science.

We can all relate an anecdote about "that guy" whose PC is complete chaos, but the reason we find these stories amusing is because they are the exception and not the rule. How many years old is that screen shot BOOnie posted? You don't run across stuff like that everyday. Windows 8 is changing the way we interact with our PCs, but after a small amount of initial turbulence things will settle down into a new routine.

 

[B00nie]

I read everything you said. If I didn't "understand it" it's because it did not make sense. For example, in this post you say your picture is an example of "worst practices," and is how a user "typically" clutters the desktop. That doesn't make sense. Which is it, "worst practices" or "typical clutter?" It can't be both, unless you are arguing that "worst practices" are "typical," in which case I can only say that those words don't mean what you think they mean.

You post things that are not alike and say they are and I'm somehow supposed to be persuaded by that?

You obviously disagree with what Microsoft is doing, but then say that what they are doing is "stupid." Sorry, just because you dislike something does not make it "stupid." Others like it and seem to be able to use it perfectly well. It seems to me more likely that the problem is one of user error than any fault within Windows.

You say the "Start Menu" was excellent. It surely didn't do anything to help the person's whose desktop you posted! But wait, Windows 8 still provides the tools to make you happy! If you want to be able to browse through hierarchical folders then make a task bar toolbar that points to your Start Menu Folder. Bingo. You've got your hierarchical menu of folders of the contents of your Start Menu Folder. You've also got the new Start Screen. You have the best of both worlds, so what's the problem?

You seem to fail on so many accounts. What makes you think that typical use of windows isn't the case of worst practises? Are you implying that all those hundreds of millions (or even billions) of consumers who stock up their desktop, download warez from p2p, install every free screensaver and browser extension known to man and never clean up their computer cases are examples of 'best practises' just because they're plentiful? Did you REALLY miss my entire point there? If you ask advice from persons who obviously DO NOT KNOW WHAT THEYRE DOING will lead to Metro type interfaces.

The person who stuffed his desktop in the image obviously was doing it wrong and was either too lazy or stupid to organize his desktop. And that scenario is really common. Now that MS surveyed the users and made an interface based on the lowest common denominator we have Metro. An interface a noob would love to have and an experienced user detest.

Let's imagine you ask your mother how she thinks a computer interface should look like and then compare the answer given by a computer professional the difference would be similar but even bigger than the difference between the traditional UI and Modern UI. Your mother (or mine) would think all those administrative tools and functions 'unnecessary' and she would just want 'internet' and 'facebook' to the 'start' without even understanding the concept of a desktop or applications. This is a typical user case scenario especially in a world where a lot of users are middle aged or older.

If you survey this kind of people and take their opinnions as advice you end up with a F1 car that is heavy, bloated with bling, has every adjustment hidden under a locked service panel only accessible by a brand service company and which has a small eco engine not to consume too much expensive fuel. Pretty much the opposite to the lean mean racing machine a racecar developer would design it as.

 

[YeuEmMaiMai]

If you have nothing useful to contribute, then don't bother even contributing.

Yes, the way the Start Screen works is that you will have to unpin and move stuff when you install new software. The tablet (really, Windows Phone 7) origins of the interface is designed that way, and the OS has no way of distinguishing between the actual program shortcut and the uninstaller shortcut. Still, it only takes about 30 seconds to unpin the uninstaller shortcut (more if the program installs more unnecessary stuff), and drag the tile where you want it to be.

Need a tissue?...........go get bent

 

[Eman D. Rahym]

You seem to fail on so many accounts. What makes you think that typical use of windows isn't the case of worst practises? Are you implying that all those hundreds of millions (or even billions) of consumers who stock up their desktop, download warez from p2p, install every free screensaver and browser extension known to man and never clean up their computer cases are examples of 'best practises' just because they're plentiful? Did you REALLY miss my entire point there? If you ask advice from persons who obviously DO NOT KNOW WHAT THEYRE DOING will lead to Metro type interfaces.

So far as I can see you haven't made any points for me to get. Your baseless assertions are not "points." When you make a point I'll get it.

The person who stuffed his desktop in the image obviously was doing it wrong and was either too lazy or stupid to organize his desktop. And that scenario is really common. Now that MS surveyed the users and made an interface based on the lowest common denominator we have Metro. An interface a noob would love to have and an experienced user detest.

You've got to admit this is ironic coming from someone who is complaining about a new interface and whose nick is an anagram for "noobie."

Let's imagine you ask your mother how she thinks a computer interface should look like and then compare the answer given by a computer professional the difference would be similar but even bigger than the difference between the traditional UI and Modern UI. Your mother (or mine) would think all those administrative tools and functions 'unnecessary' and she would just want 'internet' and 'facebook' to the 'start' without even understanding the concept of a desktop or applications. This is a typical user case scenario especially in a world where a lot of users are middle aged or older.

If you survey this kind of people and take their opinnions as advice you end up with a F1 car that is heavy, bloated with bling, has every adjustment hidden under a locked service panel only accessible by a brand service company and which has a small eco engine not to consume too much expensive fuel. Pretty much the opposite to the lean mean racing machine a racecar developer would design it as.

Yada, yada, yada. Say, did you ever try out my idea of making a task bar toolbar that points to your Start Menu Folder? How did that work out for you?