Windows 8 start: can you explain this?


Recommended Posts

I'm using Windows 8 RTM as a sort of duplicate as my main machine for work, everything's ok except a couple of things I still can't understand of the start screen.

Here the first:

http://i46.tinypic.com/soba84.jpg

This is the All Apps portion of my start, and while the second part is basically the start menu with all the folders of the apps installed, I can't understand the first two columns, or simply the first group named just APPS.

There's a strange mix of Metro apps (are these ALL the metro apps I have?) and normal apps, which I pinned to be organinized in the first start screen. They don't even seems to be my most used apps. So what define what's in this group?

Second:

http://i46.tinypic.com/15psl81.jpg

Why the hell Chrome is GREY?

Third:

Some apps, AFAIK just Chrome, always open in Metro style from the Start menu. Which is of course just nonsense, for reasons I don't even have to explain. Solution?

Apps is just all apps installed, Metro + Classic

Chrome is probably just its own Metro app colour, your other tiles are not real Metro tiles, just pinned classic icons using the blue colour scheme, look at the real metro apps to the left, they have their own colours too

1: that shows all apps installed, the first lot you see are not organised into any folders so they just show up in alphabetical order. (hope that makes sense)

2/3. i have not used chrome on my win 8 yet but from what i hear it installed a metro app (or what ever they call it now), that is why it acts as one... im not sure if you can go back to the normal desktop version.

I'm using Windows 8 RTM as a sort of duplicate as my main machine for work, everything's ok except a couple of things I still can't understand of the start screen.

Here the first:

http://i46.tinypic.com/soba84.jpg

This is the All Apps portion of my start, and while the second part is basically the start menu with all the folders of the apps installed, I can't understand the first two columns, or simply the first group named just APPS.

There's a strange mix of Metro apps (are these ALL the metro apps I have?) and normal apps, which I pinned to be organinized in the first start screen. They don't even seems to be my most used apps. So what define what's in this group?

You've basically got it right. The All Apps screen is more or less the equivalent of the All Programs view in the classic Start menu. The first, alphabetical group is a bit different as it consists of all Metro apps, plus all apps not in any folder, plus all pinned tiles - including tiles that aren't actually for apps. Even pinned folders, websites, or for example people from the People app are counted as "apps" on this screen. This is weird, but does provide a handy way to find things once you have a ton of tiles pinned. (They are also included as "apps" in the Search charm).

Second:

http://i46.tinypic.com/15psl81.jpg

Why the hell Chrome is GREY?

Third:

Some apps, AFAIK just Chrome, always open in Metro style from the Start menu. Which is of course just nonsense, for reasons I don't even have to explain. Solution?

Yeah, that's because web browsers, or rather only the web browser you've set as your default, get a special exception from the normal separation between desktop and Metro apps. Your default browser is allowed to have both a desktop and Metro UI mode for the same executable. IE10 works the same way - it is really just one app, not two, just with two UI modes it can open in. Which mode it opens in is up to the browser itself, so if there's a way to change that it'll be in the browser's own settings somewhere, not the OS settings. With IE you'll find it in the desktop Internet Options dialog under Programs, Chrome I'm not sure.

The current implementation of Chrome as a metro app is horrible. Not Windows 8's fault, Google pushed out a half baked attempt at a metro browser and it's a piece of crap. I feel sorry for all of the people out there that are going listen to their tech-head idiot friends that insist IE is a bad browser, install Chrome instead, and get an abysmal experience when trying to browse the web.

Just uninstall chrome and use IE instead, and you won't have to put up with that crap :)

Of course, people are going to blame Microsoft for Chrome's bad performance. You can't fix stupid.

The current implementation of Chrome as a metro app is horrible. Not Windows 8's fault, Google pushed out a half baked attempt at a metro browser and it's a piece of crap. I feel sorry for all of the people out there that are going listen to their tech-head idiot friends that insist IE is a bad browser, install Chrome instead, and get an abysmal experience when trying to browse the web.

Just uninstall chrome and use IE instead, and you won't have to put up with that crap :)

Of course, people are going to blame Microsoft for Chrome's bad performance. You can't fix stupid.

The Metro Chrome is still experimental. It's fine since Windows 8 hasn't been released to the public yet, we'll see what it looks like when it does get released.

You've basically got it right. The All Apps screen is more or less the equivalent of the All Programs view in the classic Start menu. The first, alphabetical group is a bit different as it consists of all Metro apps, plus all apps not in any folder, plus all pinned tiles - including tiles that aren't actually for apps. Even pinned folders, websites, or for example people from the People app are counted as "apps" on this screen. This is weird, but does provide a handy way to find things once you have a ton of tiles pinned. (They are also included as "apps" in the Search charm).

Ok I got it.

So to sum it up, the first group with no name contains:

-ALL metro apps

-apps inside C:\ProgramData\Microsoft\Windows\Start Menu\Programs without their own folder

-ALL the apps you pin on the FIRST start menu page

Is it weird? Yes.

Is it confusing? Yes.

Thanks for all the replies and also to the guy who explained the exception of the main browser, which seems to be the only app to have this strange dual nature, part metro part normal app.

Thanks for all the replies and also to the guy who explained the exception of the main browser, which seems to be the only app to have this strange dual nature, part metro part normal app.

If you set Internet Explorer as default browser, chrome will loose its metro version (and its grey color). You will see metro version of IE10, which is much better for touch and works better as a metro style app than does chrome. Try it: set IE as default and launch it from the All Apps menu. Once you experiment with that, you can set chrome as default again, if you like.

I'm using Windows 8 RTM as a sort of duplicate as my main machine for work, everything's ok except a couple of things I still can't understand of the start screen.

Here the first:

http://i46.tinypic.com/soba84.jpg

This is the All Apps portion of my start, and while the second part is basically the start menu with all the folders of the apps installed, I can't understand the first two columns, or simply the first group named just APPS.

There's a strange mix of Metro apps (are these ALL the metro apps I have?) and normal apps, which I pinned to be organinized in the first start screen. They don't even seems to be my most used apps. So what define what's in this group?

Second:

http://i46.tinypic.com/15psl81.jpg

Why the hell Chrome is GREY?

Third:

Some apps, AFAIK just Chrome, always open in Metro style from the Start menu. Which is of course just nonsense, for reasons I don't even have to explain. Solution?

Oh, that is the Metro start menu,which is part of the Metro theme, that is on all versions of Windows 8. But if you find it difficult using the Metro start menu,you can install,Classic Shell,Vi Start or Start Menu 7. Like I have done. Which gives you both the start button and Windows 7 start menu.

And yes the grey Google Chrome icon is the metro version of Google Chrome. But you can just use the desktop version of Chrome if you don't like the Metro version.

Well,as I am running Windows 8 on a netbook,the Metro apps don't work. So I just use the ordinary non Metro software. Andrea Borman.

Yes, it's annoying that Chrome always opens in Metro when you set it as the default browser. Hopefully they'll be a option to turn the Metro version off, for now the only solution is to set IE as your default browser.

Oh, that is the Metro start menu,which is part of the Metro theme, that is on all versions of Windows 8. But if you find it difficult using the Metro start menu,you can install,Classic Shell,Vi Start or Start Menu 7. Like I have done. Which gives you both the start button and Windows 7 start menu.

And yes the grey Google Chrome icon is the metro version of Google Chrome. But you can just use the desktop version of Chrome if you don't like the Metro version.

Well,as I am running Windows 8 on a netbook,the Metro apps don't work. So I just use the ordinary non Metro software. Andrea Borman.

they only dont work because the screen resolution is to low, its not to do with your netbook, u may as well stick to windows 7 if ur just gonna put the startmenu back in

they only dont work because the screen resolution is to low, its not to do with your netbook, u may as well stick to windows 7 if ur just gonna put the startmenu back in

But you don't need the Metro apps on Windows 8. You can use all of the non Metro software you use on Windows 7. Most software is non Metro anyway. Andrea Borman.

Yes, it's annoying that Chrome always opens in Metro when you set it as the default browser. Hopefully they'll be a option to turn the Metro version off, for now the only solution is to set IE as your default browser.

For now, yes, but Google will most likely put the option to always open links on the Desktop version (like in IE10) before or slightly after the October 26.

But you don't need the Metro apps on Windows 8. You can use all of the non Metro software you use on Windows 7. Most software is non Metro anyway. Andrea Borman.

He's merely explaining that using a netbook doesn't mean you can't run Metro apps. The screen resolution is the one that determines that. Netbooks can run Metro apps as long as they meet the screen resolution requirements.

<snipped out quote from a removed post>

Edited by Calum

For now, yes, but Google will most likely put the option to always open links on the Desktop version (like in IE10) before or slightly after the October 26.

Well I don't have IE10 on Windows 8 because I uninstalled it. I have Advanced browser and Ace Explorer. Which are Internet Explorer shells for sites that require IE. But when I did have IE10 it was the desktop version, not the Metro version that I used. But that's the same as IE9 and just as horrible as. Andrea Borman.

For now, yes, but Google will most likely put the option to always open links on the Desktop version (like in IE10) before or slightly after the October 26.

I hope so. I want Chrome as my default, but I don't want to use the Immersive version.

the last screen shot show you that you can also look at the apps and programs in alphabetical order.

Yet if you click on the grouping you want, it just dumps you back to the 'full' list with no visual cue of what you clicked on (you just know its on the screen, somewhere).

Hopefully as Metro moves out of Alpha they will make the zoom the default view and allow you to expand 'into' that container, just like in classic.

Hopefully as Metro moves out of Alpha they will make the zoom the default view and allow you to expand 'into' that container, just like in classic.

This would have the disadvantages of:

* Requiring you to know which group an app is in (which is hardly always obvious) or try different groups until you see the one you want

* Requiring an extra click even if you do know the group

* Making it harder to use spatial memory to get a feel for where your apps are

Maybe some users would still prefer it so maybe it should be an option in Settings, but it shouldn't be the default.

This topic is now closed to further replies.
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
  • Posts

    • Again, this is an irrelevant attempt to attack the messenger. The truth does not require any justification.
    • Removed the blue and underline as you did not post a link. This would also  be considered spamming.
    • Why it's almost impossible to produce a smartphone in the United States by Hamid Ganji If you look at the back of some Apple products, you can see the famous phrase “Designed by Apple in California, Assembled in China.” This phrase appears on products from one of the largest smartphone brands in the United States. These products are designed in the U.S., but their manufacturing takes place in China, India, Vietnam, or even Brazil. But why can’t Apple, as one of the largest American tech companies, produce its iPhones on U.S. soil? The idea for this topic came to me after the Trump Foundation launched a smartphone called the T1 and claimed that it was designed and built with American values in mind. However, this claim did not last long, as it was revealed that Trump’s phone was actually a rebranded HTC U24 Pro, with only a gold case and minor internal component changes. You see? Even a phone that is supposed to represent American values is manufactured in China. With a gross domestic product (GDP) exceeding $32 trillion, the United States is currently the world’s largest economy, while China ranks second with around $20 trillion. On the other hand, the United States is by a wide margin the global leader in various technological fields, and American companies spend hundreds of billions of dollars annually on research and development. From Apple and Google to Microsoft, Lockheed Martin, Boeing, and others, American tech and industrial giants lead their foreign competitors in many sectors. The United States also has no shortage of smartphone brands. Apple, Google, and Motorola are among the major brands in the smartphone market, collectively holding a significant share. However, the vast majority of their products are manufactured outside the United States. So why is it that the world’s largest economy, home to the most advanced technology companies and industrial powers, cannot produce a smartphone on its own soil? Let’s explore this question together. Even threats to impose tariffs won’t work After Trump entered the White House as the 47th President of the United States, his administration adopted strict tariff policies. One of these policies was the imposition of a 25% tariff on smartphones manufactured outside the United States. Trump said he “had a little problem” with Apple CEO Tim Cook over producing smartphones outside the U.S. So he thought that threatening a 25% tax on imported phones might force Apple to bring manufacturing back to the United States. “I have long ago informed Tim Cook of Apple that I expect their iPhones that will be sold in the United States of America will be manufactured and built in the United States, not India, or anyplace else,” Trump wrote on Truth Social. Image via The White House Although Apple currently manufactures some of the iPhone’s chips in the United States with TSMC's help, it still shows no willingness to shift full iPhone production to the country. At the time, renowned Apple supply chain analyst Ming-Chi Kuo wrote on X, “In terms of profitability, it’s way better for Apple to take the hit of a 25% tariff on iPhones sold in the US market than to move iPhone assembly lines back to the US.” However, manufacturing a smartphone in the United States is not as easy as it might seem, and many technical and economic barriers are involved. The lack of necessary manufacturing hubs There is a clear reason why many companies prefer to manufacture their products in China. China has established itself as the main global manufacturing hub for international companies, and over the past few decades, large contract manufacturers have emerged there, allowing companies like Apple to outsource production. One such example is Foxconn, which also manufactures some Apple products in India. Building the infrastructure required to produce smartphones in the United States would require tens of billions of dollars in new investment. Factories would need to be built, essential manufacturing equipment would have to be installed, and, most importantly, a skilled workforce capable of operating these systems would need to be recruited and trained. The United States currently lacks the core infrastructure needed to manufacture smartphones, and for this reason, many companies prefer to outsource production to Chinese contractors rather than spend tens of billions of dollars to build that infrastructure, which is significantly more economically efficient. Additionally, building such infrastructure in the United States could take up to a decade, ultimately leading to a significant increase in the product's final price for consumers. Shortage of trained labor in the U.S. compared to China Decades of serving as a global manufacturing hub have allowed China to build a massive talent pool in the production sector that is almost unmatched worldwide. Today, if a company chooses to manufacture its products in China, it can be confident that the workers involved in production have years of experience in their respective roles and are capable of producing high-quality goods with minimal errors. Even if we assume that tens of billions of dollars were invested in building smartphone manufacturing infrastructure in the United States, finding skilled workers would remain highly challenging. Apple CEO Tim Cook visiting the iPhone 6 assembly line in China in 2014. Image: Tim Cook on X In a 2015 interview on CBS’s 60 Minutes, Tim Cook said the main reason Apple isn’t producing in the US is a lack of skills. "China put an enormous focus on manufacturing, in what you and I would call vocational kind of skills. The US over time began to stop having as many vocational kinds of skills. I mean you could take every tool and die maker in the United States and probably put them in the room that we're currently sitting in. In China you would have to have multiple football fields,” Cook said. Also, in 2017, at the Fortune Global Forum in Guangzhou, Cook once again emphasized the importance of highly skilled Chinese workers. “China has moved into very advanced manufacturing, so you find in China the intersection of craftsman kind of skill, and sophisticated robotics and the computer science world. That intersection, which is very rare to find anywhere, that kind of skill, is very important to our business because of the precision and quality level that we like. The thing that most people focus on if they’re a foreigner coming to China is the size of the market, and obviously, it’s the biggest market in the world in so many areas. But for us, the number one attraction is the quality of the people,” Apple CEO said. Higher labor costs in the United States Producing almost any product in the United States is more expensive than in many other countries, and one of the main reasons is the higher cost of labor in the U.S. According to the Bureau of Labor Statistics, median weekly earnings of full-time workers in the United States were $1,235 in the first quarter of 2026. Meanwhile, the average annual salary in China's private sector in 2025 was RMB 71,590 (US$9,961). In many parts of the world, the weekly wage of an American worker is equivalent to several months of income. Another important factor to consider is that in the United States, the workforce capable of working on a smartphone assembly line is highly specialized and therefore commands higher-than-average wages. According to an estimate by Bank of America, producing an iPhone in the U.S. is technically possible, but “iPhone cost can increase 25% purely on higher labor cost in the U.S.” However, this 25% increase applies only if final assembly is performed in the United States while components are still sourced from China or elsewhere. In this case, the price of a base iPhone would rise from $799 to around $1,000. But in another scenario, if Apple were to produce the required components for the iPhone within the United States, production costs could increase by more than 90%. Trump’s dream for a “Made in the USA” iPhone might never come true In a free-market capitalist economy, one of the primary responsibilities of any CEO is to maximize profit. Using Apple as an example, Tim Cook’s role is to maximize the company’s profits so that it can fund research and development for new products and invest in areas such as artificial intelligence, while also keeping shareholders satisfied. Therefore, it is entirely understandable that Apple would choose not to bring its manufacturing back to the United States and instead keep production in countries where labor is cheaper, and products can be manufactured at a lower cost, thereby maximizing its profit margins. What is your opinion about manufacturing smartphones in the United States? If you are an American citizen, would you be willing to pay hundreds of dollars more for a smartphone made domestically in the USA? Let us know in the comments.
  • Recent Achievements

    • Conversation Starter
      jessse3334 earned a badge
      Conversation Starter
    • Reacting Well
      JuvenileDelinquent earned a badge
      Reacting Well
    • One Month Later
      Excellence2025 earned a badge
      One Month Later
    • Week One Done
      Excellence2025 earned a badge
      Week One Done
    • Week One Done
      flexorcist earned a badge
      Week One Done
  • Popular Contributors

    1. 1
      +primortal
      506
    2. 2
      +Edouard
      196
    3. 3
      PsYcHoKiLLa
      153
    4. 4
      Steven P.
      72
    5. 5
      FloatingFatMan
      65
  • Tell a friend

    Love Neowin? Tell a friend!