Let's hear it: Do you want a Start button in Windows 8.1?

Could this be the future of Windows 8.1?

There has been much debate for and against the removal of the Start menu and button, allegedly also from Microsoft executives as well.

However, there can be no doubt that the missing Start button was one of the most controversial decisions Microsoft made for Windows 8. Research firm IDC said recently the lack of the button was something that Windows 8 users miss "consistently" along with being able to boot Windows 8 into desktop mode. More importantly, a number of third party software solutions have been released that add versions of the Start button back to the Windows 8 desktop, including RetroUIStartIsBackPokki and Start8.

Recently Intel CEO Paul Otellini also admitted it took him some time to learn Windows 8 and that there is an "adoptive curve" to using Windows 8 in desktop mode, which requires more training than Windows 7.

So, it's a simple question. Where do you stand on the issue, should Windows 8.1 include a Start button? You must be logged in to vote, you can register here to make your vote count!

Additionally, you can check out our Windows 8.1 (Blue) coverage here.


Do you want a start button in Windows 8.1?

Report a problem with article
Previous Story

Nokia teases QWERTY phone, likely not a Lumia

Next Story

Windows 8.1 API reveals extended point-of-service support


View more comments

no, the hot corners work just fine.

The only reason I would like it back is because it seems the only solution to get the naggers to shut up!

Needs a "Could go either way" option. I really don't care, as long as it suits the UX.

Technology isn't about these childish little attachments to paradigms. As long as things progress, I'm good.

Well, there you have it, the majority has spoken. Now for the minority, go in a corner and go stick with emo Windows 8 RTM if you like it that much.

I hope they do add in a start button, but only as an option that the user has to turn on. A start button will break the consistency of the interface and it will only confuse users who look for the start button everywhere else besides the desktop. It's obvious that many people love that old button, but I think the interface is more consistent without it. Give the option, but don't turn it on.

What does it say when even more than 1/2 of super computer literate users (like those here on Neowin) want the Start button back?

Gives this poll to the other 99% of generally computer illiterate users. Nevermind, since they're avoiding Windows 8 by the millions, you already have your answer.

To get a start button opening a menu would be a non sense for Microsoft... It would significate a Windows7.8 version... It's an entire negation of all the future Microsoft is trying to bring us... A start menu isn't in a touch scheme. On Windows7, I wasn't using start menu anymore (but only the explorer bar + taskbar).
The only thing people, who want this start menu back, will get is a more complicated Windows. It's a wrong problem, they just don't want to give a try to change.
Once it will be made and once touch devices will be the present of computing, this Windows will be too complicated for touch era devices, so these same people (who wanted this start menu) will be the first to complain about the fact that "Windows is too complicated" and they will leave Windows to others platforms anyway. Microsoft should not listen to them.

I started using Windows 8 with the first community preview -- here is a brief recap:
CP1 - found it very frustrating and pretty much stopped using after a couple of weeks -- too many features not mature enough for steady use
CP2 - missed the start button and start menu -- installed Classic Shell and was very happy using it this way.
Release Candidate build -- same as with CP2 -- Classic Shell
Final Release -- same as above -- for about 2 months. Using on both a non-touch notebook and a touch tablet. After 2 months -- had to re-image the units and decided to try them Microsoft's way - so I did not install classic shell --- and have been using without any embellishments since.
It took a couple of weeks of minor frustration - but after this "getting acquainted" period I have not really missed the button, the menu, or any of the things I was certain that I could not do without.

Once again, this comment is used by the loyalist. 1995 and 2013 has nothing to with an Operating system that isn't very intuitive. 10 years from now BMW might bring back the Ford Pinto engine with enhancements that will blow away any other engine. What will you say then? "It's 2023, move one from this 1970's P.O.S."

The 1995 reference is to Windows 95 and how the first time the start button appeared. There are end less debates over the start button on neowin and it needs to stop. Don't understand why people cant press the Windows Key and then type in what they are after. I have to say Booting to desktop should be a feature!

Yes. There are millions of us who do not have touch-centric devices and don't plan to trash perfectly good hardware and software to get the dubious advantages of the Metro UI. We are struggling to stay in business and remain profitable--needless hardware/software purchases along with retraining makes no sense.

let's choose :
- we keep desktop and say goodbye to all these people who says that desktop era is finished and touch device is the future. So ok, let's keep desktop UI design with Windows, icons and start menu. But be constant, don't buy touch devices and keep your desktop as your main tool.
- Destop is leaving, touch devices are at the corner to be the main face of computing, so let the start menu go and embrace a new UI, or at least try to give a chance to change... and stop complain about it.

Someone who sees the light. All the majority of users want is a choice on their machines. We don't want to download a third party program. Why can't the "owners" of this operating system give us a choice when we do the initial install or a setting in the control panel? The Windows 8 loyalist claim its faster to work in the modern UI. Far from accurate in the real world.

I have to agree there. In the real world, you work in the Desktop, not the Metro UI. Any *Real* application is launched in the Desktop, and there will always be applications that will require the desktop. In fact, I am writing this from the desktop, with a telnet client open in another window on the desktop, and a mail client minimized to the desktop, and a text editor in a fourth window... on the desktop. No flipping back and forth from Start Screen to application to application, just one environment, four windows, no issues.

And yes, I use ClassicShell, and I go straight to the desktop... avoiding Metro as much as possible.

I only used my start menu in Windows Vista/7 to search for apps the same way I use the window button on my keyboard now; to search for apps or documents, etc. So my opinion is I don't see a need for it. I agree with what seems like a lot of others that it should be included as an option but not set as default. Just my two cents.

Yes.. a button and the classic Start Menu (that can be disabled if you don't want to use it)

A Start Button that opens the Start Screen is stupid… it's like using an adhesive bandage to cure a cancer

I want the ability to choose if I want a start button or not!

If I'm on a Windows RT, I don't want a start button because the touch screen works great!


I want a start button on a Windows 8 PC! Because touch does not work well on a desktop.

Commenting is disabled on this article.