Microsoft bringing Start menu back in future Windows 8.1 update

Microsoft has announced that the Start menu will be coming back to Windows 8.1 and showed off what it will look when it arrives later this year

This is a huge win for those of you who have wanted a Start menu on Microsoft’s latest version of Windows, and it will likely silence some critics of the platform.

Another new feature that will be coming is that you will be able to run modern apps in a windowed environment too.

The Start menu will be returning to Windows in a future 8.1 update, which is in contrast  where we heard that the Start menu would come to Windows with Windows 9.

When you couple the Start menu with the Windows 8.1 update that was announced today as well, Microsoft is doing a lot for the platform in terms of making it user friendly for mouse and keyboard users and for those who do not enjoy the modern environment.

Report a problem with article
Previous Story

Touch-friendly Office coming to Windows, demoed at BUILD

Next Story

Microsoft officially makes Windows free for devices under 9 inches

379 Comments

Commenting is disabled on this article.

The windowed apps is like modernmix. Too bad modernmix crashes when running Xbox music on every 2-3rd run.

Finally.
I like Win8. It looks nice, and the app store is a great addition. Now that the start menu is back, it deserves to be on more desktops. MS definitely screwed up here. Yes there are those that believe otherwise, but not everyone has fancy touch screens or wants to relearn how to do simple things again with that poxy metro screen. After having downgraded about 20 new PC's at my company to Win7, I think this is a good reason to upgrade them again.
Thank you for listening to us MS. You took your time, but better late than never.

Sh*t, that Start Menu looks even better than the one in Windows 7 (seriously, who needs a permanent "help & support" entry there?)

FalseAgent said,
Sh*t, that Start Menu looks even better than the one in Windows 7 (seriously, who needs a permanent "help & support" entry there?)

Permanent? Ouch.

Looks fine, now MS should need to provide option to get rid of Metro screen floating on right side otherwise StartisBack on win 8 is enough for me.

Simple: Make it an option and everyone is happy.

Like Win8 now? Keep it that way. You're happy.
Want the start menu back. *couple o' clicks* There it's back. You're happy.

It's possible to make most people happy. There will be those that are unhappy about that though. /boggle. :p

With the lack of info about this I'm starting to think this is another april fools prank. still pissed about that kotor sequel prank...


Jokes aside, I still do not understand why there can not be two windows 8's interfaces: With and without the start menu button. Everyone would be happy again. A double install option. It will be so difficult to MS do this?

This is a prime example of why it doesn't matter one iota to haters that the Start Menu is being reimplemented. Modern UI is not going away.

People who actually wanted a Start Menu implemented it a long time ago with excellent free third party apps.

But this waste of resources by Microsoft isn't going to make one hater happy - because the hater's problem is that he hates. And hate he will.

Me like the news. Me like start button menu. Me like microsoft again. Me don't have touch screen.
Me use mouse. Me neanderthal, but me happy

ghuito said,
Me like the news. Me like start button menu. Me like microsoft again. Me don't have touch screen.
Me use mouse. Me neanderthal, but me happy

Me use touchscreen and me cannot use Windows 8. Me thought Windows 8 was touchscreen friendly, but touchscreen not work because of frame and too low resolution. Windows 8 me use like Windows 7 because of this. Me stupid Neanderthal for thinking MS would think about existing touchscreens and not only their stupid tablets. Me not happy. Me sad, because me would like to use Windows 8 on touchscreen.

Using Windows 8.x with a mouse and keyboard is even better than anything previous. Using it with a high res 27" monitor is amazing! Windows 8.x with a large high res monitor and mouse and keyboard works great.

Atlantico said,
Using Windows 8.x with a mouse and keyboard is even better than anything previous. Using it with a high res 27" monitor is amazing! Windows 8.x with a large high res monitor and mouse and keyboard works great.

Me think mouse paths are way longer. But its okay after installing Start8. Even touchscreen works better with Start8 than metro. Sad sad.

coolhund said,

Me think mouse paths are way longer. But its okay after installing Start8. Even touchscreen works better with Start8 than metro. Sad sad.

Mouse paths are longer for everything on a large monitor, especially when using the Desktop. The reason why Modern UI works just fine on large monitors is the same that the desktop works just fine on a large monitor.

Start8 is terrible, like the Start Menu. I don't use touch and probably never will, so I don't care either way what works well there - but after using Windows 7 on a touch tablet, it is clear that the Start Menu is an epic fail on touch. Start8 probably too.

Atlantico said,

Mouse paths are longer for everything on a large monitor, especially when using the Desktop. The reason why Modern UI works just fine on large monitors is the same that the desktop works just fine on a large monitor.

Start8 is terrible, like the Start Menu. I don't use touch and probably never will, so I don't care either way what works well there - but after using Windows 7 on a touch tablet, it is clear that the Start Menu is an epic fail on touch. Start8 probably too.

Another voluntary proof that people like you have never used the startmenu properly nor do they know how to customize it.
I have used Windows 7 on a touchscreen for 4 years and it was more usable than Metro is now. With Start8 or similar Windows 8 is almost the same, it still works for touchscreen, just not the way MS wants to make you believe. I need an extra OSK and some other background programs, but thats it.
I wish Metro would work. I really REALLY hoped it would. It was the sole reason I bought me a license. But it doesnt. It only works for tablets. Making it work on existing touchscreens was not considered, even though it would have only meant putting some optional buttons onto the UI.

And yes, the mouse paths are way longer in Metro. With a startmenu you have to move your mouse only slightly. On the start screen you need to move over almost the whole dimension of the screen. Even from button to button the distance is far bigger than on a start menu.
Its simple logic and FACTS. I know fanboys dont grasp that, but that doesnt make it any less fact.

coolhund said,

I have used Windows 7 on a touchscreen for 4 years and it was more usable than Metro is now.

This, ladies and gentlemen, is how deep in denial some people are about Windows 8.

This claim is actually demonstrably false. In fact it was attempted as a cruel experiment a few years back by third rate computer companies such as Acer on actual tablets.

The result was such a complete trainwreck that people didn't even have time to complain before it flopped so hard on its ass that its colon smashed into the back of its proverbial front teeth.

http://www.technologytell.com/...-wintel-tablets-in-q3-2012/

Atlantico said,

This, ladies and gentlemen, is how deep in denial some people are about Windows 8.

This claim is actually demonstrably false. In fact it was attempted as a cruel experiment a few years back by third rate computer companies such as Acer on actual tablets.

The result was such a complete trainwreck that people didn't even have time to complain before it flopped so hard on its ass that its colon smashed into the back of its proverbial front teeth.

http://www.technologytell.com/...-wintel-tablets-in-q3-2012/

Easy proof for you: Google "Car PC Windows 7".
But think what you want, since youre the one in denial. Nothing I can do against so much ignorance.
I guess I really have just imagined the last 4 years and all the other thousands of people with a Car PC too.

Metro is a joke on the touchscreens I mentioned (with a frame). Essential swipes wont work and thus you will be trapped on screens. This cant happen in Windows 7 or Windows 8 without Metro. Yes, its not perfect, and doesnt look as pretty as Metro, but IT WORKS and doesnt get you trapped.

lol... seriously... this topic is so full of idiot blind fanboys... I really fear I lose IQ points arguing with them...

Edited by coolhund, Apr 8 2014, 3:02pm :

coolhund said,

Easy proof for you: Google "Car PC Windows 7".
But think what you want, since youre the one in denial. Nothing I can do against so much ignorance.
I guess I really have just imagined the last 4 years and all the other thousands of people with a Car PC too.

Metro is a joke on the touchscreens I mentioned (with a frame). Essential swipes wont work and thus you will be trapped on screens. This cant happen in Windows 7 or Windows 8 without Metro. Yes, its not perfect, and doesnt look as pretty as Metro, but IT WORKS and doesnt get you trapped.

lol... seriously... this topic is so full of idiot blind fanboys... I really fear I lose IQ points arguing with them...

Car PC Windows 7, ladies and gentlemen, who doesn't recall the riveting success that the Car PC with Windows 7 was?

I applaud you, sir. You managed to find the one item more obscure and rare than Windows 7 on a touchscreen tablet.

I could not have made the argument better myself. Thank you and goodnight.

Atlantico said,

Car PC Windows 7, ladies and gentlemen, who doesn't recall the riveting success that the Car PC with Windows 7 was?

I applaud you, sir. You managed to find the one item more obscure and rare than Windows 7 on a touchscreen tablet.

I could not have made the argument better myself. Thank you and goodnight.

Oh come on, why be so predictable? Massive ignorance again?
Ignoring a whole market bracket and thousands of people, just because you have never seen it and because it doesnt fit your opinion is stereotypical for fanboys. But I guess I will thank you for confirming me there once again. Though, I wish I would have been wrong there.
Also youre not able to think/research (if you can call a little Google search that) a little further. Those touchscreens are also in use in many other applications in the industry. There was even a mention on this site a few days ago... Japanese banks ring a bell? Those are the exact same ones used in Car PCs. But go ignore everything away, thats what youre so good at. And prolly the only thing youre good at.

Im going to go with Mark Twain/George Carlin on this one, seeing you having no solid arguments anymore, not like you ever did. Have a nice ignorant life.

coolhund said,

Ignoring a whole market bracket and thousands of people

Why yes of course I am going to ignore what you call a "market bracket" and consists of "thousands" of people. Not tens of thousands. Thousands. Huh.

Well, see there are more left handed black single mother transexual lesbians than users of Car PC Windows 7.

Because it sucked. Of course that is no secret which is why literally everyone making Windows touchscreen devices started making, selling and using Windows 8 exclusively.

I found an old tablet and I was so surprised that it had Windows 7 for touch on it that I had to show everyone in the office. Oh how we laughed and laughed. It was so pathetic.

But as I said before; it is really amusing to see you try to justify its unfortunate and forgotten existence. Go right ahead, entertain me please.

Soooooooooo from the comments here and on other sites there seems to still be a lot of confusion as to when this is going to actually come out... Has anybody attempted to contact Microsoft to see if they can't clarify as to when this will actually happen and how it even works? All I can seem to pull up from around the web is "start menu is coming back, here's the same picture everybody's been showing"...

Synthetic said,
Has anybody attempted to contact Microsoft to see if they can't clarify as to when this will actually happen
Can but won't, not at this early stage. Even the UI shown may not be final since they're still gonna be working on it for some time to come.

Robert Wade said,
And the march BACKWARD continues. So sick of people holding onto the past.

Does it hurt you or Windows if the Start menu is available as an option for users who want it? No?

They just showed a prototype mini-Start Screen attached to the Start Button for not even as long as two minutes. The whole BUILD was about the future of the direction of Windows and Microsoft, but apparently, it's not that, but the feature of the PAST that brings out the fanfare. Backwards progress is the only progress around here, I suppose.

PotatoAlchemist said,
They just showed a prototype mini-Start Screen attached to the Start Button for not even as long as two minutes. The whole BUILD was about the future of the direction of Windows and Microsoft, but apparently, it's not that, but the feature of the PAST that brings out the fanfare. Backwards progress is the only progress around here, I suppose.

If they were removing the Start screen for the Start menu, then I could understand why some people are complaining.

Be honest. If the windowed Metro applications and Start menu will be optional for desktop users, then how can it be a step backward? How can having more options for customization be considered a step backward?

It doesn't hurt anyone directly that the Start Menu is being re-implemented, but it is a waste of resources that could be used to otherwise improve Windows, instead of this waste of time.

Why waste of time? Because anyone who wanted a Start Menu has already implemented it ages ago. It's freely available from third parties. The Windows 8 haters will continue to hate.

Actually Terry Myerson wrote in the windows blog that it comes to the "next iteration of Windows". I don't think this means the "next update" or something. And I really doubt it will be a free upgrade for a current Windows 8/8.1 users.

Why wouldn't it be a free update? They want to release it to everyone who hates windows 8. To make everyone pay to fix something they think Microsoft Broke, would be a bad idea.

It is still controversial - in keynote Myerson sad "it will be available as an update to existing 8.1 users" but in the blog - "next iteration of Windows". Not so clear indeed.
Considering why is not for free - an adoption of Windows 8/8.1 is not that big, so there are no any business benefits in consumer area to bring such a drastic update "for free" other then to "please a bunch of moaners". Rather it could be a selling point for those who are skipping 8/8.1 for now (because of bad track in media and communities). Yet I could expect MS is going to do this - make an update to the current OS - probably because there could be big businesses which bought 8 licenses, well, in advance, under some guarantees. I think.

Perhaps they could call Win8 w/ the Start Menu "Windows 8.1 Second Edition"? The jump from Windows 7 to Windows 8/8.1 parallels (in a way) the Windows 95 to Windows 98 jump.
Windows 95 was a solid OS in its day, and Windows 98 added a lot of junk that was not for the benefit of the consumer. A prime example would be the awful "Active Desktop" which no one needed or wanted. This was a revenue-driven decision.
Windows 7, like Windows 95, is a solid OS, but Windows 8/8.1 added Metro junk which is not for the benefit of the consumer. An example is the Windows Store and its Apps which no one needs or wants. This is was a revenue-driven decision which they are now regretting, and wisely backtracking some of it.
Interesting to see how far MS will further backtrack on those dumbo ideas in the future...

mzta cody said,
Perhaps they could call Win8 w/ the Start Menu "Windows 8.1 Second Edition"? The jump from Windows 7 to Windows 8/8.1 parallels (in a way) the Windows 95 to Windows 98 jump.
Windows 95 was a solid OS in its day, and Windows 98 added a lot of junk that was not for the benefit of the consumer. A prime example would be the awful "Active Desktop" which no one needed or wanted. This was a revenue-driven decision.
Windows 7, like Windows 95, is a solid OS, but Windows 8/8.1 added Metro junk which is not for the benefit of the consumer. An example is the Windows Store and its Apps which no one needs or wants. This is was a revenue-driven decision which they are now regretting, and wisely backtracking some of it.
Interesting to see how far MS will further backtrack on those dumbo ideas in the future...

I would hardly consider the Metro environment to be junk. Although it seems that a good percentage of desktop users do not like it, the interface is excellent with a touch screen.

Its effectiveness on being an application framework, be that functionality or interface wise being separate from everything is where it truly stands out. Like an entire application taking over the whole desktop and pushing it aside, to serve a specific purpose that the application was designed to fulfill. Curious to see it being more advanced and feature-full as it reaches the Windows Store 2.0 state (the supposed Metro 2.0)

i'm not liking this removing and adding process.

no start button/menu for 8.1 plz

This would make a good weekend public poll topic

I don't understand why people who hate the metro start screen don't just set it to show all apps instead of the tiles. It's more or less the same as the start menu, except it shows a hell of a lot more programs because it takes up the whole screen. Still, I like the look of this new start menu, so I'll welcome the update when it comes. In the meantime I'll continue using Windows 8.1 as I have been, which has pretty much been on the desktop with the start screen as the default to open when I click the start button and with Start8 installed in case I feel like using the start menu, but I can't remember the last time I opened Start8. It really never have understood all the Windows 8 hate. It's different, but it's definitely not worse than previous versions of Windows and it is definitely not another "Vista," which was not nearly as bad as everybody made it out to be, either. I guess everybody just assumed that MS would stick with the Windows 95 interface forever.

So I guess now we'll have:

"Pin to taskbar"
"Pin to Start menu" (icons on the left)
"Pin to Start" (tiles on the right)

I wonder how the transition between windowed modern apps and full screen modern apps will work. Say you have three windowed modern apps open on your desktop and you want to switch to snapped desktop on left and one of the modern apps snapped to the right. How would you do that?

He said "I think there are going to be a LOT of happy people out there" .. indicating AT the moment there are A LOT of unhappy people out there :)

warwagon said,
He said "I think there are going to be a LOT of happy people out there" .. indicating AT the moment there are A LOT of unhappy people out there :)
A lot of us also just want (them) to move on to more important stuff and if this is what is getting in the way, get on with it and do it quick.

Interestingly he also made it a point to say it's what some customers are looking for.

Ahh ok. That sucks. Atleast I didn't pay for the start menu that some companies offer, I just used a free one.

You can't imagine how happy this makes me. This is great news for the PC community as a whole. Also I think adaption of Windows 8.1 for corporate is much more likely to happen. I know that for sure for the company I work for.

Happy happy happy. Now please just keep on this track MS.

jporter said,
Also I think adaption of Windows 8.1 for corporate is much more likely to happen.
Perhaps, but only for those that haven't upgraded recently. Many of the companies I've worked with upgraded to Win7 from XP not too long back, and they'll all probably upgrade to Win9 next.

What a mess. :no:

I really wish Microsoft would pay as much attention to the details as it does the big ideas. Their ideas are always great, but they never see them through fully and we end up with some half-finished mix of varying ideas. This is kind of why I've given up using Windows as my primary OS.

As a developer, the news from BUILD is all good. As a user... *sigh*

Edited by Fourjays, Apr 3 2014, 9:31am :

I still don't see why MS just dosent stick to metro on tablets and phones and does this solely for desktops.

I get their one interface for all devices theory, but its just that a failed theory, they tested it and it didnt work, time to move on.

I love my android phone, but i equally love windows desktop.

in the same way people will love their ipads/surface/iphone/ android tablets but come back to the desktop to do serious work.

Hitman2000 said,
I still don't see why MS just dosent stick to metro on tablets and phones and does this solely for desktops.

I get their one interface for all devices theory, but its just that a failed theory, they tested it and it didnt work, time to move on.

I love my android phone, but i equally love windows desktop.

in the same way people will love their ipads/surface/iphone/ android tablets but come back to the desktop to do serious work.

You do realise that the Metro applications can now be windowed just like a traditional desktop application. Did you even bother reading the article?

Hitman2000 said,
I still don't see why MS just dosent stick to metro on tablets and phones and does this solely for desktops.

I get their one interface for all devices theory, but its just that a failed theory, they tested it and it didnt work, time to move on.

I love my android phone, but i equally love windows desktop.

in the same way people will love their ipads/surface/iphone/ android tablets but come back to the desktop to do serious work.

Because the Windows desktop is dead. There have been no new compelling or consumer "popular" Win32 apps released in forever. Microsoft needs to do something to get developers back, and having one application work across all three of their platforms is the way to go. Unifying their platforms is a long term investment, even after Windows 8 being on the market for two years, things are still coming together. You see the PC as a "work" machine, but the PC is more than just something that opens Word, Excel, and Firefox.

Dot Matrix said,

Because the Windows desktop is dead. There have been no new compelling or consumer "popular" Win32 apps released in forever. Microsoft needs to do something to get developers back, and having one application work across all three of their platforms is the way to go. Unifying their platforms is a long term investment, even after Windows 8 being on the market for two years, things are still coming together. You see the PC as a "work" machine, but the PC is more than just something that opens Word, Excel, and Firefox.

If the desktop is really dead seems it would be better to switch to Android, more apps, I like the interface better and I can still side load programs on it with APK's(being stuck to a "store" is one reason I would never own a itunes only or win RT device.

You are still saying this? What is a popular app that is non existent in the desktop environment? Please, name one MUST HAVE app that IS NOT available AT ALL on the desktop. Facebook/twitter? I can use the browser thanks and yeah we REALLY need those at work. Flappy Bird? WOW, we REALLY REALLY need that at work too! Crappy version of Photoshop? I use Photoshop CC and it has much more functionality and add-in support.

Are you forgetting about Adobe Creative Suite/Cloud, Visual Studio, FL Studio, 3DS Max, Cinema 4D, Blender, Gimp, Office 2010-2013, VirtualBox, new browsers. Not to mention Steam and all these VERY POPULAR games that support Windows 7 even.

xWhiplash said,
You are still saying this? What is a popular app that is non existent in the desktop environment?

Well, nothing now thanks to Windows 8. ;)

xWhiplash said,
Are you forgetting about Adobe Creative Suite/Cloud, Visual Studio, FL Studio, 3DS Max, Cinema 4D, Blender, Gimp, Office 2010-2013, VirtualBox, new browsers. Not to mention Steam and all these VERY POPULAR games that support Windows 7 even.

Those are not applications consumer run out to use. Games are a plus, but are not everything.

Dot Matrix said,

Well, nothing now thanks to Windows 8. ;)

Those are not applications consumer run out to use. Games are a plus, but are not everything.


This very much sounds like no true scotsman. On top of what's been mentioned you can add office, dropbox, gdrive, 7zip, truecrypt, teamviewer, notepad2, notepad++, vlc, mpc-hc, chrome, boxcryptor, and keepass (including chrome integration) from my own personal list. I left anything out that I use for work exclusively or that would get into programming.

snaphat (Myles Landwehr) said,

This very much sounds like no true scotsman. On top of what's been mentioned you can add office, dropbox, gdrive, 7zip, truecrypt, teamviewer, notepad2, notepad++, vlc, mpc-hc, chrome, boxcryptor, and keepass (including chrome integration) from my own personal list. I left anything out that I use for work exclusively or that would get into programming.

Great, so I can download a bunch of specific tools that apply to a minority in the market... I fail to see how those listed, along with programming utilities will draw a crowd back to the Windows OS.

Dot Matrix said,

Great, so I can download a bunch of specific tools that apply to a minority in the market... I fail to see how those listed, along with programming utilities will draw a crowd back to the Windows OS.


You stated the following: "There have been no new compelling or consumer "popular" Win32 apps released in forever."

At some point you have to be reasonable. I gave a general list of applications that fall under numerous categories from word processing, browsing the web, storing files, to watching videos. These are all things that normal consumers do. They aren't very specific or "minority in the market" types of tasks. In fact, a few of them have statistics showing that they are used by huge swaths of the public (Chrome, Dropbox, Office). Then we have gaming applications and games in general (as mentioned by a prior poster). As I said before, you are just dismissing perfectly reasonable examples that run counter to what you said.

Whether you consider the market dead or not is really your own prerogative and opinion; it is not a fact. If it were a fact, MS wouldn't still have a desktop OS and we wouldn't even be discussing this.

Edited by snaphat (Myles Landwehr), Apr 4 2014, 1:20am :

Dot Matrix said,

Because the Windows desktop is dead. There have been no new compelling or consumer "popular" Win32 apps released in forever.

Jeez. And what exactly would you expect to be a "new compelling or consumer popular Win32", pardon my French, "app"? Another Photoshop or Office competitor? Do tell... I've been hearing this nonsense for months now. And guess what - desktop "apps" are still receiving massive updates (as in "major new versions are released")

On another note, I haven't seen ANY "compelling" app released for the tablet market either. Unless games and fart soundboards qualify as such...

agtsmith said,

Jeez. And what exactly would you expect to be a "new compelling or consumer popular Win32", pardon my French, "app"? Another Photoshop or Office competitor? Do tell... I've been hearing this nonsense for months now. And guess what - desktop "apps" are still receiving massive updates (as in "major new versions are released")

On another note, I haven't seen ANY "compelling" app released for the tablet market either. Unless games and fart soundboards qualify as such...

Something that draws a consumer to a specific platform. Microsoft has been bleeding since Apple released iOS. You want consumers talking about your platform, and since the advent of the iPhone, all people have been talking about is Apple, and more recently, Google.

Microsoft has been beating the Windows drum since Vista, but few have listened. That's not good. Photoshop, nor Office was going to save Windows.

Must be a record for replies.
Well I cannot understand why MS removed the start menu in the first place.
I think they were trying to promote 8 for tablets and touch screens.
Well they should had produced two version, one for and one not for tablets and touch screens.

leesmithg said,
Well they should had produced two version, one for and one not for tablets and touch screens.
I hope they never make this mistake. The tablet and desktop UIs can be made switchable as per the hardware and user's convenience (especially useful on convertible devices), but a desktop/mobile OS split like in Apple's case would be the worst possible decision they can make.

This is hilarious! Well done Microsoft! I'm convinced they have no idea what consumers want. At least they came to their senses and brought back what people want for now.

I think they know what consumers want, but decided to force feed them their own ideas for long term goals instead. They stubbornly took how long to make these simple changes? It should serve as a good lesson, but arrogance is a hard habit to break, just look at all the deniers on this site telling you how stupid you are for not loving every little thing about an OS, that's very telling of the corp culture to me.

Thank frack they came to their senses. People hate windows 8 because of no start menu and the full screen apps, I hear it daily from people. This is how it should have been from day one.

Credit is due to Microsoft for listening to their clients.

I am impressed.

jwcom said,
People hate windows 8 because of no start menu and the full screen apps
Many of those same people will still not upgrade, mark my words. MS won't be rejoicing until adoption figures actually see a sharp jump, and I doubt it'll happen.

Wow I like Nadella already! What they're doing here is a lot more sensible than the current Start screen menu is for desktop users, which is what the VAST majority of Microsoft customers use. This will bring some familiarity and productivity back to Windows. Kudos Microsoft! Still going to have to see it but I may actually start recommending Windows 8 to people I know. Heck, I may even roll it out to a few people at work.

Bashing the new improvements is comical, that aside, this was a very smart move, a little late as usual, but a step in the right direction. The Edsel had a lot of innovative new features when it came out, but when the public thinks it looks like a Ford sucking a C**K, it didn't really matter. W8 was and is in many ways a frustrating OS, but it has it's merits, now MS has the huge problem of changing public percption...again.

Hahaiah said,
this was a very smart move, a little late as usual
Maybe, or maybe they can afford to do so now that they've achieved their goal of getting the Store and Metro apps off the ground? :)

Ross Funnell said,
Love how they take away Start menu and then bring it back as a NEW feature .

they never really took it away, they just transformed it into the start screen.

a good answer this its what it needs to drive people out of windows xp.

its good to see that they listen and they are in the right path

Naah, those XP die-hards will not give it up and it will be pried out only from their cold, dead hands. XP forever! :D

Well they were dragging their feet for a while but they finally did it! Kudos Microsoft! This is a fantastic implementation of what third parties have been doing. I'll definitely switch over!

Ely said,
Is there a video of this anywhere? I would like to see this in action.

A video of the Keynote or the menu in action would be nice.

Ely said,
Is there a video of this anywhere? I would like to see this in action.

I second that - I'm looking through the build sessions trying to find it.

They funny thing is that Microsoft has actually achieved its goal! They have now full managed to integrate an appstore with cross platform apps!

You know regardless of whether you liked the Start Menu or the Start Screen, you must at least applaud Microsoft for giving the users the choice (assuming it will be an option).

I can't deny I'm pleased to see the Start Menu come back though it's a bit late for me as Windows 8 was enough to make me jump ship to Mac ownership. I do use it at work though (currently on 8.1) and will welcome the Start Menu back.

Chicane-UK said,
You know regardless of whether you liked the Start Menu or the Start Screen, you must at least applaud Microsoft for giving the users the choice (assuming it will be an option).

I can't deny I'm pleased to see the Start Menu come back though it's a bit late for me as Windows 8 was enough to make me jump ship to Mac ownership. I do use it at work though (currently on 8.1) and will welcome the Start Menu back.

I didn't know stardock makes a start 8 for osx :)

I already know that our resident neophiliac(s) are already in the throes and pangs of anxiety attacks with the notion of such archaic ideas returning. As soon as I read this news, my heart immediately went out to him/her/them lol.....
Seriously though, the return of choice and customization options is a welcome thing in Windows, nice to see a return to increased UI options.

I use desktop windows to run programs, not apps.
Basically I run Windows 8.1 with a Start-menu replacement program and use it like I did Windows 7.
All the modern apps haven't even been touched ("0" cpu / mb / network usage) since I installed Windows 8.1.

Tikimotel said,
I use desktop windows to run programs, not apps.
Basically I run Windows 8.1 with a Start-menu replacement program and use it like I did Windows 7.
All the modern apps haven't even been touched ("0" cpu / mb / network usage) since I installed Windows 8.1.

Apps and programs are the same thing.

Tikimotel said,
I use desktop windows to run programs, not apps.
Basically I run Windows 8.1 with a Start-menu replacement program and use it like I did Windows 7.
All the modern apps haven't even been touched ("0" cpu / mb / network usage) since I installed Windows 8.1.

You must be so proud.

Tikimotel said,
I use desktop windows to run programs, not apps.
Basically I run Windows 8.1 with a Start-menu replacement program and use it like I did Windows 7.
All the modern apps haven't even been touched ("0" cpu / mb / network usage) since I installed Windows 8.1.

Even if you started fully using a ton of the Modern Apps, the CPU/MB utilization would still be tiny. The whole WinRT framework is designed to be very GPU/CPU efficient.

They model of WinRT is also more battery efficient, so you can get more browsing time and more Video playback using modern Apps than even the MS desktop equivalents.

If you think the Live Tiles and Modern Apps consume a lot of CPU or eat resources running all the time in the background, it simply is not true. (The Apps work and run essentially the same way they do on WP8, which is very fast and efficient even on very low end hardware.)


Apps to me, are more like advanced widgets with suspend and resume.
And most sold apps in the windows store are game apps, not programs (or program apps).

http://www.winbeta.org/news/12...op-windows-81-apps-nov-18th

http://www.pcmag.com/article2/0,2817,2415212,00.asp

Even firefox has cancelled development of the modern ui version because only 1000 people tried it.

Typical programs I use are older (not windows 8) so they don't run in the new environment.

I like Windows 8.1 (fast, stable and compatible with all my programs) as an OS, but I use it like I did Windows 7.

Mobius Enigma said,

Even if you started fully using a ton of the Modern Apps, the CPU/MB utilization would still be tiny. The whole WinRT framework is designed to be very GPU/CPU efficient.

They model of WinRT is also more battery efficient, so you can get more browsing time and more Video playback using modern Apps than even the MS desktop equivalents.

If you think the Live Tiles and Modern Apps consume a lot of CPU or eat resources running all the time in the background, it simply is not true. (The Apps work and run essentially the same way they do on WP8, which is very fast and efficient even on very low end hardware.)


Battery efficient, WinRT?
I'm running Desktop PC, I don't care about battery or CPU cycles being spared.
When I'm finished with my work, I turn off my PC and also PSU the standby power.

Tikimotel said,

Battery efficient, WinRT?
I'm running Desktop PC, I don't care about battery or CPU cycles being spared.
When I'm finished with my work, I turn off my PC and also PSU the standby power.

I do. If Microsoft can develop a more energy efficient OS, than I'm all for it. Just because we're on a desktop machine, doesn't mean we need to be spitting out high level of CPU cycles, or cobbling up electricity like it's going out of style.

Tikimotel said,

Battery efficient, WinRT?
I'm running Desktop PC, I don't care about battery or CPU cycles being spared.
When I'm finished with my work, I turn off my PC and also PSU the standby power.

If don't care about battery, why were you bragging that you have had 0% CPU/MB usage consumption?

I must have implied you cared about CPU/MB usage, I apologize.

Mobius Enigma said,

If don't care about battery, why were you bragging that you have had 0% CPU/MB usage consumption?

I must have implied you cared about CPU/MB usage, I apologize.


He never said that, his point was that he didn't use modern Apps and as proof of that his resource usage for them is zero across the board... he never made the claim that they (or Desktop applications) were efficient...

Dot Matrix said,

Apps and programs are the same thing.

You can love MS as much as you want but apps and programs are not the same thing. You can find your "apps" on WP as fart apps, programs are actually things you can work with.

alwaysonacoffebreak said,

You can love MS as much as you want but apps and programs are not the same thing. You can find your "apps" on WP as fart apps, programs are actually things you can work with.


It's been ages since I've heard mainstream users refer to applications as "programs". Applications are the new programs.

I just hope it's optional. Options are nice. I'd give it a go but I'm pretty happy with how Win8 works as it is. Bottom line is that MS is listening and that's a good thing. :)

sjaak327 said,
I personally believe the start menu is old school and it's layered approach nowhere near as easy and quick as the new start screen.

Whilst I think the Start Screen is mostly fine, I could very easily get to programs just as quickly, if not quicker via a start menu. But the start screens search function annoys me more. It is just not nearly as quick & efficient to get to & then into what I want, & I don't mean that the actual search is slow.

I could absolutely live with the Start Screen, it's no big deal, but the I'll most defiantly be using the start menu!

Lamp0 said,
But the start screens search function annoys me more. It is just not nearly as quick & efficient to get to & then into what I want
Not my experience at all but regardless this choice is good.

Looks fine to me. I have no problem with a Start menu that includes Modern apps, and I'm someone who never really had an issue with the Start screen/Modern UI.

They have to. Windows 8 has been DOA from the beginning. We have all been part of an immense beta project that has been an utter failure. Looks like they are finally going to patch the beta into something usable. The big questions should be why did it take so long?

RottGutt said,
The big questions should be why did it take so long?
Obviously there was immense resistance inside from some quarters, but with all the resignations and reorganization and probably the new CEO putting his foot down things have changed now.

I disagree though that Win8 has been "DOA from the beginning"; way too much exaggeration there. But clearly things have changed inside the company and this proposed choice is for the best. Speaking of which, do you plan to upgrade now or still have other complaints?

I was part of both the alpha and beta cycles, and use it on my only PC. I love the "under the hood" improvements over Windows 7, but cannot stand it without Start8.

I never liked Machalani's concept all that much. Anyway it's early days still so UI could very well change, but what they showed looks fine to me.

Wow - although maybe too far a step back, the Windows 9 concepts knocking about made for a nice halfway house that moved forwards, not backwards.

Is there any word on if Microsoft is keeping or changing the right mouse click on the current start button "power menu"?

Nope, no word. Nothing so far beyond a very early few seconds long look at what's possibly beta UI that could change further.

I'm also interested to know, will we no longer be able to run Metro apps full-screen if required (only maximized at most), or will this still be possible somehow?

finally! i knew that it was impossible that they could do something that stupid to remove the start menu but now it is even better.

I guess they will just save this for Windows 8.2? I hope thats the route not Windows 8.1 update 1 as the name

i complained at the start. i used windows 8 regardless and put the start menu back and bought the stardock things to use windowed apps. i've not once used a windows app apart from trying it out. I use win8 in work too, and it's an abomination on a server. I can't believe we had to wait through this obviously flawed UI for them to implement what was asked for on day 1. It was the fault of the idiots they've booted out. What a really annoying waste of time it all was. BTW, windows 8 is much better than win 7 in desktop mode. If you were hating because of the missing bits, it's time to move as this is no VISTA, they just arranged it's arse and face positioning for a while ;)

ZombieFly said,
i complained at the start. i used windows 8 regardless and put the start menu back and bought the stardock things to use windowed apps. i've not once used a windows app apart from trying it out. I use win8 in work too, and it's an abomination on a server. I can't believe we had to wait through this obviously flawed UI for them to implement what was asked for on day 1. It was the fault of the idiots they've booted out. What a really annoying waste of time it all was. BTW, windows 8 is much better than win 7 in desktop mode. If you were hating because of the missing bits, it's time to move as this is no VISTA, they just arranged it's arse and face positioning for a while ;)

It's funny that you perpetuate Vista's negative image, even though it didn't require a third-party Start menu replacement or ModernMix. It also introduced the "Windows 7" Start menu that most users are clamoring for.

Windows enthusiasts are a weird bunch, give them something new/different to upgrade to they'll bitch and moan about it in any way possible!

...oh fffffiddle no, Vista icons, still!!!!?!!! :D

So MS finally came to their senses and listened to the majority. Kudos to them. If only they had listened to the majority when Windows 8 was still in beta, this whole thing would have never been a disaster, and Windows 8 would have been an immediate success. I hope they learn from this horrendous mistake. I also hope that they build the Start Menu in as an OPTION, so that everyone can choose which UI they prefer!

Majority? I'd imagine it's more like a vocal minority. Anyone I have shown Windows 8 to has liked the new Start Screen with the exception of power users.

Skwerl said,
Majority? I'd imagine it's more like a vocal minority.

The sales numbers do not seem to agree.

Either way, a welcome change to suit everyone!

Skwerl said,
Majority? I'd imagine it's more like a vocal minority. Anyone I have shown Windows 8 to has liked the new Start Screen with the exception of power users.
Have you been living under a rock? The minority were actually the ones who loved the Start Screen. There are hundreds of articles and hundreds of thousands of user reviews of pure hate for Windows 8. (I made a rhyme, pure hate for Windows 8)

And the hate for the StartScreen was driven - in their own words - by modal absolutism. Windows 8 actually caught up to where hardware was going (and had BEEN going since way back in 2005) - and users still haven't largely caught up. Those same users see it as actually EASIER to add a device than add capabilities to the operating system that result in a different mode. It's not a Windows-only issue, either - it's just bigger in terms OF Windows. Look at Linux distributions, OS X, etc. - the insistence is still on single-mode usage. No - multimodal operating systems by and large are NOT consistent; they usually can't afford to BE consistent, either.
I can only hope that this wackiness doesn't last long.

Raa said,

The sales numbers do not seem to agree.

Either way, a welcome change to suit everyone!

Recheck what you think the sales/adoption numbers are. Windows 8 is the second fastest selling version of Windows, which is a bit surprising to even Windows 8 fans.

The reason it is surprising...
Windows 7 is solid and locked in a lot of users and there is also a massive non-Windows tablet and phone market that has been taking sales from Windows.

Mobius Enigma said,

Windows 8 is the second fastest selling version of Windows

We've been over this before.
Let's just agree on the fact the majority of users will now be happy with the upcoming changes and leave it at that. :)

Raa said,

We've been over this before.
Let's just agree on the fact the majority of users will now be happy with the upcoming changes and leave it at that. :)

I am willing to concede that it is a welcome change even for users that might not use it. ;)

Mobius Enigma said,

I am willing to concede that it is a welcome change even for users that might not use it. ;)


Aye. But this time consumers are being given the choice. And that is a wonderful thing. (Y)

I use Stardock's "Start8" at home, and "Classic Start Menu" on my laptop.

This one reminds me of one that was done by one of the free companies a while ago.

Modern apps in a window? Hmmm something else that Stardock has done!

Allan® said,
Modern apps in a window? Hmmm something else that Stardock has done!
Although it was more limited I think this (windowed Metro apps) was something RetroUI did before ModernMix.

I've got used to the full screen Start Menu, but this is not a bad idea either. Best of both worlds.

It would be nice to return to the older All Apps view, since the current one is terrible to navigate through when all icons are spilled out without an easy way to peck down folders.

Blast, they shouldn't have announced it at all. Instead of impressive and important things like universal applications, now all attention will go to the silly and redundant start menu.

At least I am assuming it will be an option, it has to be, so I am happy for all the complainers that it returns, I for one will not be using it, it's like going back in time.

Raa said,
I'm sure it'll be an option, so the complainers on the other side will be happy too.

Yeah It has to be an option, that start menu wouldn't work on a touch based tablet.

sjaak327 said,

Yeah It has to be an option, that start menu wouldn't work on a touch based tablet.


I can't disagree with that.

sjaak327 said,
Blast, they shouldn't have announced it at all. Instead of impressive and important things like universal applications, now all attention will go to the silly and redundant start menu.

At least I am assuming it will be an option, it has to be, so I am happy for all the complainers that it returns, I for one will not be using it, it's like going back in time.

the silly and redundant start menu, you mean like the redundant metro IE,Messenger,Control panel, Skype, and all the redundant metro apps that you can have in desktop mode or in a webpage in the desktop browser. So in reality the redundant things are the metro apps that can as easily be done on the desktop.

sjaak327 said,
Yeah It has to be an option, that start menu wouldn't work on a touch based tablet.

why not? all you have to do is open the menu and start typing. the start menu has search too.

So what was the last year? Practice? You force people into a total new interface only to rip it back out again?

I'm not for or against this, Microsoft just needs to get its act together. They can't keep rolling out something only to totally revert it a year later. Lets hope this is the last thing they have to go back on and we can start going forward.

It's not being reverted, it's an option.

They probably should have had an option from the beginning because it was apparent there was going to be lots of complaints even if the new menu was just as usable.

warwagon said,
Microsoft would not have done this for 10% windows disapproval. People who hate windows 8 must be staggering.

It's not the actual percentage who complain but what it looks like in the media and online. That's what hurts sales. Take a look at Vista. Totally fine OS with the right hardware but they had to rebrand it as Windows 7 to get people to stop complaining.

Vista wasn't a totally fine OS.

Windows 8 figures aren't "bad', but i'm sure Microsoft would like to firm up the numbers, and this is the way to do it.

warwagon said,
Microsoft would not have done this for 10% windows disapproval. People who hate windows 8 must be staggering.

It has more to do with the where they are with the maturity and progress they have been working towards. The original Windows 8 team screwed up a lot of things, including fighting the WP8 team. (Which as we know didn't work out well for them.)

They now have things going in the right direction and the platforms are finally coming together, which has been a work in progress going back to the days of WP7/Win7.

This gives them extra time to add in 'features', especially if it stops the slow bleed of the 10% of vocal users.

Raa said,
Vista wasn't a totally fine OS.

Windows 8 figures aren't "bad', but i'm sure Microsoft would like to firm up the numbers, and this is the way to do it.

Vista was a great OS totally ruined by terrible OEM certification and media slurring.

Raa said,
Now you know what the majority of users have been saying for 18 months.

Choice, is a wonderful thing. (Y)

I've never once claimed it wasn't.
Pretty damn good build conference for everyone.

Microsoft you need to innovate! Don't get stuck in the past!!

WAIT!! WHERE ARE YOU TAKING MY START MENU?!?! I WANT IT BACK!!!

The Start Menu is back?!? Great!! Now get back to innovating!!

Stardock won't be too happy, they kept bringing out apps to replace the bits Microsoft took out, now MS is putting them all back

It's ok. I'd rather they keep Windows relevant than make short term profit.

I am feeling a bit of pain that they're going to make both Start8 and ModernMix 1 obsolete in an update before Windows 8 but better to do it sooner than later.

nothing. people moaned for so long because their opinion was right in terms of the direction of computing in home and business environments. vindication, i think the word is. We were justified in our comments all along, MS just agreed that. It's the lovers that were wrong ;)

ZombieFly said,
nothing. people moaned for so long because their opinion was right in terms of the direction of computing in home and business environments. vindication, i think the word is. We were justified in our comments all along, MS just agreed that. It's the lovers that were wrong ;)
Well said.

As much of a fan as i am of the Win8 Start Screen, it was obvious even to me that the modern/classic jump was to jarring. Slowly MS seem to be rethinking how to go about the same thing and that's all good.

So is this the update we get next week or something thats coming later? Because I didn't see anything when testing this.

"Microsoft has announced that the Start menu will be coming back to Windows 8.1 and showed off what it will look when it arrives later this year

.....

The Start menu will be returning to Windows in a future 8.1 update, which is in contrast where we heard that the Start menu would come to Windows with Windows 9."

All within the article if you read it.

Gotenks98 said,
So is this the update we get next week or something thats coming later? Because I didn't see anything when testing this.

This is a future update to 8.1, probably in the fall not the one we're getting on the 8th.

George P said,

This is a future update to 8.1, probably in the fall not the one we're getting on the 8th.

I know, but we know that its coming and its here

Gotenks98 said,
So is this the update we get next week or something thats coming later? Because I didn't see anything when testing this.

Later, my guess is around October.

Gotenks98 said,
So is this the update we get next week or something thats coming later? Because I didn't see anything when testing this.

Later. It will be a Windows 8.1 update, but is not in Update 1.

wasd- said,
Took them 2 years but finally its here!

If you have been paying attention, a lot of things are progressing and changing at a rapid pace at Microsoft since Joe B. was moved and the new CEO stepped in.

If I had mapped out a list of my wish list for Microsoft changes and where to place people it would look a lot like it does today, which is dang surprising.

After so many years of 'goofs' at the helm or interfering with other brilliant minds, it is nice to see the original Gates vision return to the company and the smart people not be shoved off to a corner because their project didn't have the quick fiscal response as a crap project.

I'll wait to try it out before passing judgement. I was never a fan of the Start Menu introduced in Vista and was glad to see it replaced by the Start Screen, as the latter allows for a lot more customisation and can display a lot more apps. If the new Start Menu is scalable then it should work well, which it appears to be based on the screenshot.

It all comes down to usability.

theyarecomingforyou said,
I'll wait to try it out before passing judgement. I was never a fan of the Start Menu introduced in Vista and was glad to see it replaced by the Start Screen, as the latter allows for a lot more customisation and can display a lot more apps. If the new Start Menu is scalable then it should work well, which it appears to be based on the screenshot.

It all comes down to usability.

It could be crap, but from what I have personally seen, it will appeal to a lot of users, even some of us that are Start Screen fans for occasional use. Even if it sucks, they aren't doing away with the Start Screen.

Hmm. Doesn't really seem useful at all now that I am accustomed to using the Start Screen. I'm sure this will appease a lot of change-resistant people, though.

I'm not a change-resistant person. I'm happy to go with anything but given the choice I prefer the Start Menu over the Start Screen.

I'm not a clicker, I hit the Win key and search for everything but the Start Menu doesn't take over the whole screen and you can still pin things to it.

The Start Screen looks great and works fine, but the Start Menu is fine too. At least people will now have a choice on which one they prefer to use.

a change resistant "Doesn't really seem useful at all --now that I am accustomed to using the Start Screen--" calling others change resistant. That is funny.

What`s being discussed/reviewed here though isn`t the Spring update (update 1). This (i.e. some form of start menu) will most likely be out later this year, possibly called.......update 2 :)

Its about damn time, windows 8.1 just got better. I hope users will be able to unpin the live tiles on start menu to get a clean start menu.

Eins.MY said,
Its about damn time, windows 8.1 just got better. I hope users will be able to unpin the live tiles on start menu to get a clean start menu.

Live Tiles are instant information. To get the same information display in just the Demo they displayed without 'Live Tiles', you would have to open 7-10 Apps and/or Websites.

Why, when you can have all that information appear in one consolidated place?

The Live Tiles are necessary to get users, like yourself, to move forward and become used to having things that are important to you instantly readable.

This is why there are a lot of people that LOVE the Windows 8 Start Screen, as we don't have to open 10 Apps to check the latest headlines, get the weather, see our tweets, etc.

I urge people that hate the Windows 8 Start Screen and Windows 8 Modern Apps, to try using them for just the information tiles alone. They save a lot of time.

Heartripper said,
I use glass8, it works pretty well! http://glass8.berlios.de/

Ugh, that thing sucks. It looked like real aero in 8 but the 8.1 implementation looks totally tacky and out of place. And the annoying dialog box that pop UPS every hour! Uninstalled it immediately.

AsherGZ said,
Ugh, that thing sucks. It looked like real aero in 8 but the 8.1 implementation looks totally tacky and out of place. And the annoying dialog box that pop UPS every hour! Uninstalled it immediately.

I agree that it's pretty unusable if you don't donate, but it's only 3$ and it works great on my windows 8.1 :)

Actually having opaque borders in Windows 8 isn't that bad. Really helps for those people with weak IGPs that hiccup on animations every now and then.

Though they could beef up the shadow by a tiny bit.

What it should have been in the first place, at least on the desktops.. get the new stuff without sacrificing anything. (And you still got the option of the full screen version if that's what floats your boat.)

People will wait for Windows 9.

MS is playing this game for more than 10 years. So they try to make something different when people love windows by some few important things.
XP win, Vista Fail, Windows 7 Win, Windows 8 Fail 8.1 is a SP1, so fail, Windows 9 will be WIN

grik said,
People will wait for Windows 9.

MS is playing this game for more than 10 years. So they try to make something different when people love windows by some few important things.
XP win, Vista Fail, Windows 7 Win, Windows 8 Fail 8.1 is a SP1, so fail, Windows 9 will be WIN

Not sure its an entirely planned cycle or just part of the development cycle that to get to where you are going there's some pain but marketing and consumer mentality more often than not tends to play the leading role in the end.

Vista copped a bad wrap but anyone that ever used it knows that after SP1 it was quite good and for those same users Windows 7 was basically Vista R2. Yet vista is viewed as a failure and Windows 7 fantastic, but without vista windows 7 wouldn't be what it was.

grik said,
People will wait for Windows 9.

MS is playing this game for more than 10 years. So they try to make something different when people love windows by some few important things.
XP win, Vista Fail, Windows 7 Win, Windows 8 Fail 8.1 is a SP1, so fail, Windows 9 will be WIN

I get tired of this argument all the time. Vista was a hog but it also paved the way for the x64 transition, the new driver architecture and forced software developers to stop storing most settings their settings in %programfiles% and HKLM. 7 Succeeded **because** of Vista because by the time 7 was out, software and drivers were 'vista' compatible and install properly on x64 OSes.

betax said,
...

Well said! While Vista worked just fine for some people and was a nightmare for others, it really was the reason 7 was such a success because of the foundation it laid.

I'd also argue that XP was a "win".
XP RTM = fail (really, prior to Vista wasn't this the most hated release?)
XP SP1 = fail
XP SP2 = split decision
XP SP3 = win

zeke009 said,

I'd also argue that XP was a "win".
XP RTM = fail (really, prior to Vista wasn't this the most hated release?)


I think that achievement goes to Windows ME. That was a nightmare coming from 98SE

xWhiplash said,
Can somebody please explain why vista was a fail? I got it when it hit RTM on an existing computer and I had ZERO issues.
You got lucky then. The problems with still early 64-bit apps, unstable drivers, the whole "Vista capable" fiasco, in-your-face UAC, slow file copy due to RDC and other factors etc. are all well-known. However people still complaining about Vista most probably never used it after SP1 (or even at all). Win7 definitely is a refined Vista that built on and benefited hugely from the pain and teething troubles the latter experienced.

ngc891 said,

I think that achievement goes to Windows ME. That was a nightmare coming from 98SE

I beta tested Windows ME, ironically had zero issues with RC0. What I did love about windows ME was the built-in support for USB Flash Drives and the extended media capabilities.

Big win for consumers and businesses. We speak with our money and they will follow. This should quiet the folks who seem to think that most consumers don't want or need a Start Menu. Obviously the majority have spoken, and Microsoft is doing their job as a company to please us.

JHBrown said,
Big win for consumers and businesses. We speak with our money and they will follow. This should quiet the folks who seem to think that most folks don't want or need a Start Menu. Obviously the majority have spoken, and Microsoft is doing their job as a company to please us.

If MS just listened to you guys we'd still be using XP.

Osiris said,

If MS just listened to you guys we'd still be using XP.

Last time I read about XP the market share of the OS was more than double the one of W8 plus W8.1....

Osiris said,

If MS just listened to you guys we'd still be using XP.

Which would be good news for Microsoft considering the marketshare.

Osiris said,

If MS just listened to you guys we'd still be using XP.


Yes, because a 10+ year old operating system is totally related to a design choice on a screen to launch applications. :rolleyes:

JHBrown said,
Big win for consumers and businesses. We speak with our money and they will follow. This should quiet the folks who seem to think that most consumers don't want or need a Start Menu. Obviously the majority have spoken, and Microsoft is doing their job as a company to please us.

A positive comment about Microsoft and Windows 8 from you.. I about spit my tea out. :)

I agree with you, this doesn't hurt anyone, and it still advances the newer model of thinking without a hard break leaving some users behind.

I like how they are making Live Tiles a part of the concept, as more users will find a use for them, that have been avoiding them for information. This is the right way to get users to move forward without whacking them over the head, as Windows 8 did a bit too much.

(I agree with the direction Microsoft is trying to move users, but I wish they would have listened and originally done a more evolutionary process like this. They made the same mistakes with Win95 and Vista by breaking away a bit too far for users to easily accept, even if it was for their own good.)

Mobius Enigma said,

A positive comment about Microsoft and Windows 8 from you.. I about spit my tea out. :)

I agree with you, this doesn't hurt anyone, and it still advances the newer model of thinking without a hard break leaving some users behind.

I like how they are making Live Tiles a part of the concept, as more users will find a use for them, that have been avoiding them for information. This is the right way to get users to move forward without whacking them over the head, as Windows 8 did a bit too much.

(I agree with the direction Microsoft is trying to move users, but I wish they would have listened and originally done a more evolutionary process like this. They made the same mistakes with Win95 and Vista by breaking away a bit too far for users to easily accept, even if it was for their own good.)

Contrary to popular belief, I am a big time Microsoft fan. I've been using Microsoft's products before some of the guys here were born. I've just been vocal about their decisions with Windows 8. I share the same feelings with many "old school" Microsoft fans when it comes to Windows 8. However, It seems with this new CEO, they may be headed back to the Microsoft I once loved. I also agree with your view on the issue.

JHBrown said,
Contrary to popular belief, I am a big time Microsoft fan. I've been using Microsoft's products before some of the guys here were born. I've just been vocal about their decisions with Windows 8. I share the same feelings with many "old school" Microsoft fans when it comes to Windows 8. However, It seems with this new CEO, they may be headed back to the Microsoft I once loved. I also agree with your view on the issue.

I am also from the very old school crowd (at least in terms of technology).

The last paper I wrote as a student was on OS Theory around the time NT was more discussion and theory than a working product. It was a great time and seeing NT go from theory and potential to bits and a working OS was brilliant.

Coming from that world and also having a background in interface and usability design, I try very hard to understand major modality and technical shifts like Windows 8.

I didn't 100% agree with the original Windows 8 team, but I did agree with where Microsoft wanted to eventually take users.


Thank you for the response. It is pleasant to find common ground with people I have often disagreed with in the past.

I look forward to a healthy future debate, take care.

Finally! What a good idea putting this new feature into the Operating System. Why didn't they think of this innovation years ago!

I'm here at the show with Brad Sams. As soon as that image came up, I yelled "Brad! Get a pic of that!"

Stardock will need to focus on other things as I think this effectively will obsolete Start8 and the current ModernMix. I think ModernMix 2 will matter more in Windows 8.1 but I think Start8's mission will come to a close.

ModernMix is what Microsoft should have done from the beginning. Including a Start Menu and the ability to run Metro apps on the desktop would have avoided virtually all the criticism directed at Windows 8.

It wouldn't surprise me if Microsoft allows Metro apps to run on the desktop sooner rather than later.

I think Start8 will still have a market, it'll be MUCH smaller since this will work for most users but like Classic Shell that's existed since Windows Vista as a start menu alternative I expect Start8 to continue as some users won't want/care about the tiles on the set and prefer the variety of conventional options on the right side.

For the users that don't use Modern apps at all, they'd probably prefer the shotcuts/drop down menus to access whatever in there from the Win7 styled start menu.

You can't please everyone unless you allow considerable customizability and I don't think MS wants to go down that route.
So third party alternatives will continue to cater to a niche.

Looks great!!

I like the idea behind the Start screen but on a non-touch device, like a desktop, a Start menu is just the ticket, specially if you use desktop apps more than Modern apps.

I'm really liking this year's BUILD keynote.

The ancient looking menu/submenu system with the Windows Vista icons looks awful next to those live tiles. Microsoft should have never added that outdated system back. It's not 1995 anymore.

Whatever, people can stop complaining about such silly things now. Anyone who likes 7 should like 8.1 update 2.

Dot Matrix said,
The ancient looking menu/submenu system with the Windows Vista icons looks awful next to those live tiles. Microsoft should have never added that outdated system back. It's not 1995 anymore.

Well, hopefully there will be an option to remove what you dont want.

mrp04 said,
Whatever, people can stop complaining about such silly things now. Anyone who likes 7 should like 8.1 update 2.

Yes, but I feel Microsoft can't innovate when people complain forcing Microsoft to add back in ancient compatibility. Windows would be so much more fast and slim if we could finally ditch these outdated paradigms.

Dot Matrix said,
.....

I thought your head was going to explode over this.

(I agree btw, but people are slow to change and we'll catch them up to us over the next decade).

I'm scratching my head trying to figure out how colored squares are somehow more impressive now. All these fancy programs like Illustrator and Photoshop, and all we needed was Paint with the bucket tool. :laugh:

Dot Matrix said,
The ancient looking menu/submenu system with the Windows Vista icons looks awful next to those live tiles. Microsoft should have never added that outdated system back. It's not 1995 anymore.

Don't use it then :)


Does this answer remind you something?

Dot Matrix said,
The ancient looking menu/submenu system with the Windows Vista icons looks awful next to those live tiles. Microsoft should have never added that outdated system back. It's not 1995 anymore.

LOL!!

dead.cell said,
I'm scratching my head trying to figure out how colored squares are somehow more impressive now. All these fancy programs like Illustrator and Photoshop, and all we needed was Paint with the bucket tool. :laugh:

Live tiles offer better and dynamic functionality. It's not about the colors, it's about what's displayed in them. Desktop icons are a dull, and outdated bit.

I'm not going to argue that, but the only information I look at that I find to be relevant is unread messages, which a simple little bubble on an icon as my phone does is plenty enough. Or maybe otherwise a notification center like phones and OSX has for that matter. It's all neat and organized really.

On my Windows 8, I don't really get enough information off live tiles to make it worth it. :/ Not saying they aren't useful, but that I just don't personally find them amazing for the live information just yet.

There has been options to remove what you wanted since vista start menu, of course you can customize it.. duh! ;D

You have to admit that even the current Start Screen still has its flaws compared to the older Start menu - particularly the All Apps view. You're seriously implying All Apps is easier to use with a mouse than the All Programs view which didn't explode all folders right off the bat?

Dot Matrix said,

Live tiles offer better and dynamic functionality. It's not about the colors, it's about what's displayed in them. Desktop icons are a dull, and outdated bit.

Unless you propose we ditch Win32 apps by 2015, we still need space for app icons and it'd be ludicrous to expect every single app to have a live tile. Why would something like Photoshop or CCleaner require live tiles?

Denis W. said,

Unless you propose we ditch Win32 apps by 2015, we still need space for app icons and it'd be ludicrous to expect every single app to have a live tile. Why would something like Photoshop or CCleaner require live tiles?

The Windows 8 Photoshop app shows off the images I was last working with. It's a nice way to display your work. As for CCleaner, it wouldn't be too hard to develop a live tile that shows system information, last run time, stats, etc.

Denis W. said,
You have to admit that even the current Start Screen still has its flaws compared to the older Start menu - particularly the All Apps view. You're seriously implying All Apps is easier to use with a mouse than the All Programs view which didn't explode all folders right off the bat?

What's wrong with it? Whether I'm using my mouse or a finger, they still work the same, I click the icon, and carry on. How is that any harder in Windows 8.1 than in Windows 7?

Dot Matrix said,

Yes, but I feel Microsoft can't innovate when people complain forcing Microsoft to add back in ancient compatibility. Windows would be so much more fast and slim if we could finally ditch these outdated paradigms.

Innovation does not mean putting some crap on the computer screen. Give customer what they want rather than forcing them what MS wants. Their $0.99 app chase with their flawed Metro vision make them lost more money and goodwill than what they could have made by not messing with what was working flawlessly. MS should have experimented their touch fad on tablet and should have left Desktop alone. Sinofsky firing was the first right step taken by MS and then Ballmer and his stooges.

Dot Matrix said,

What's wrong with it? Whether I'm using my mouse or a finger, they still work the same, I click the icon, and carry on. How is that any harder in Windows 8.1 than in Windows 7?

Let's take this example. If I were to open MPC-HC under the MPC-HC folder, I would:
- open Start
- Click on the down arrow
- hold down CTRL and scroll down to zoom out
- click on MPC-HC
- Option 1: visually scan for the actual MPC-HC folder which is, in reality, a couple of dozen pixels BELOW my pointer (or above, depends on where it is)
- Option 2: Visually look through the entire list of exploded icons, trying to figure out where the MPC-HC folder is, then click on the icon

Now if this were Windows 7:
- hit Start
- hit All Programs
- use mouse wheel and search for the MPC-HC folder
- Click to expand the folder, then click the app icon right beneath it.

Yes I know you can just type for MPC-HC.
Yes I know you can pin the icon.
That still doesn't excuse the reduced speed in trying to find for a peculiar app icon in All Apps compared to the way it was. And it's mainly because they chose to put every possible icon in a linear fashion.

Denis W. said,

Let's take this example. If I were to open MPC-HC under the MPC-HC folder, I would:
- open Start
- Click on the down arrow
- hold down CTRL and scroll down to zoom out
- click on MPC-HC
- Option 1: visually scan for the actual MPC-HC folder which is, in reality, a couple of dozen pixels BELOW my pointer (or above, depends on where it is)
- Option 2: Visually look through the entire list of exploded icons, trying to figure out where the MPC-HC folder is, then click on the icon

Now if this were Windows 7:
- hit Start
- hit All Programs
- use mouse wheel and search for the MPC-HC folder
- Click to expand the folder, then click the app icon right beneath it.

Yes I know you can just type for MPC-HC.
Yes I know you can pin the icon.
That still doesn't excuse the reduced speed in trying to find for a peculiar app icon in All Apps compared to the way it was. And it's mainly because they chose to put every possible icon in a linear fashion.

The All Apps menu on Windows 8 is separated. I know right now, I could find your folder at the very back, if your Start is configured in default setup (by name). Also, why are you still using All Apps? Win+S, and you have what you need without hunting for it like it's still 2001. I personally haven't dug for anything since the XP days. Search has radically altered the way we work, why not take advantage of that?

Dot Matrix said,

The Windows 8 Photoshop app shows off the images I was last working with. It's a nice way to display your work. As for CCleaner, it wouldn't be too hard to develop a live tile that shows system information, last run time, stats, etc.

But perhaps not *every* app requires a live tile. Simple tools definitely don't need it. Would you propose we put a live tile for Disk Optimizer, the Event Viewer, Windows Firewall, the Command Prompt, Services, Notepad...? These are all currently "desktop" icons residing inside my Apps view.

I would instead prefer that they unify the icon set in Windows 8 to match the Metro style.

Denis W. said,

But perhaps not *every* app requires a live tile. Simple tools definitely don't need it. Would you propose we put a live tile for Disk Optimizer, the Event Viewer, Windows Firewall, the Command Prompt, Services, Notepad...? These are all currently "desktop" icons residing inside my Apps view.

I would instead prefer that they unify the icon set in Windows 8 to match the Metro style.

That's why you can set the tile size as "small". I agree that the icon set needs updated, but Live Tiles are a get API to utilize.

Dot Matrix said,

The All Apps menu on Windows 8 is separated. I know right now, I could find your folder at the very back, if your Start is configured in default setup (by name). Also, why are you still using All Apps? Win+S, and you have what you need without hunting for it like it's still 2001. I personally haven't dug for anything since the XP days. Search has radically altered the way we work, why not take advantage of that?


Win+S isn't an excuse for the terribleness of the All Apps menu. There are cases when you legitimately may want to use it (you can't remember the name of the app you want to open, you need to open some specific shortcut that came with the main application, etc.)

Dot Matrix said,

The All Apps menu on Windows 8 is separated. I know right now, I could find your folder at the very back, if your Start is configured in default setup (by name). Also, why are you still using All Apps? Win+S, and you have what you need without hunting for it like it's still 2001. I personally haven't dug for anything since the XP days. Search has radically altered the way we work, why not take advantage of that?

Again, I'm well aware of search. But let's assume we're, as snaphat mentions, hunting down for a shortcut I'm unaware of. Or let's say I want to open up help documentation stored inside a folder and don't want to guess which "Help" is the one I'm looking for, in case there are duplicates.

The reason why it's slower in Windows 8.x - if you use Option 1, on top of having your eye scan for the folder in the first place - just like Windows 7's All Programs - you then need an additional eye scan in either direction. And you won't know which direction it would be due to how All Apps is organized.
Option 2 is worse, since you'd have to scan the entire list in an inverted N zig-zag.

Whereas in the All Programs view in Windows 7, your eyes make small movements when scanning, and you're almost guaranteed the app you're looking for opens *below* the Programs menu so you're sure to look downwards.

... But I digress, we're getting both options soon so use whatever fits your workflow best.

snaphat (Myles Landwehr) said,

Win+S isn't an excuse for the terribleness of the All Apps menu. There are cases when you legitimately may want to use it (you can't remember the name of the app you want to open, you need to open some specific shortcut that came with the main application, etc.)

I'm at a loss how people claim to forget what they are looking for. If you're forgetting things, maybe it's time to cut some applications loose...?

Dot Matrix said,
The ancient looking menu/submenu system with the Windows Vista icons looks awful next to those live tiles. Microsoft should have never added that outdated system back. It's not 1995 anymore.

I would love a compilation on the front page of all the occasions where you said the Start Menu is never coming back. This must really feel as if Microsoft's personally giving you the finger.

snaphat (Myles Landwehr) said,

Win+S isn't an excuse for the terribleness of the All Apps menu. There are cases when you legitimately may want to use it (you can't remember the name of the app you want to open, you need to open some specific shortcut that came with the main application, etc.)

The All Apps screen in Windows 8.1 rocks. You ARE aware you can organize by name, date installed, recently used, and "categories", right? And it's really easy to flip between the ordering? If you just installed something, just flip to "date installed" and voila, there it is right up front. If it's something you used recently, just flip to "Most recently used".

The "Categories" mode can be set to show desktop items first as well... and in that mode, it's exactly like an already-exploded version of the old Windows 7 Start menu. Everything is in the same order, grouped by the same headings.

So I'm really not sure what you're complaining about. It's every bit as efficient to use.

Exactly. Plus the search function negates hunting in folders. If looking for help, type "help" plus whatever info you do know about what you are looking for.
Or if you really don't know, I don't see how the old Start Menu helps, you'll just hunt around various menus. If anything in that case I'd hit Windows Key+E and open up Explorer and go through the file structure.

Dot Matrix said,
The ancient looking menu/submenu system with the Windows Vista icons looks awful next to those live tiles. Microsoft should have never added that outdated system back. It's not 1995 anymore.

This is a prototype build, if you really hate the look, send them feedback, they are listening.

.Neo said,

I would love a compilation on the front page of all the occasions where you said the Start Menu is never coming back. This must really feel as if Microsoft's personally giving you the finger.

This is the funniest thing I read on Neowin :)

.Neo said,

I would love a compilation on the front page of all the occasions where you said the Start Menu is never coming back. This must really feel as if Microsoft's personally giving you the finger.

He said/meant the old start menu from Win 7 wasn't coming back. Which he was right.

techbeck said,

He said/meant the old start menu from Win 7 wasn't coming back. Which he was right.

... In a sense. I'd really love for Microsoft to forget the ancient menu/submenu and just focus on the live tiles. They bring more to the OS than 32x32 icons, and endless digging for apps.

Dot Matrix said,

... In a sense. I'd really love for Microsoft to forget the ancient menu/submenu and just focus on the live tiles. They bring more to the OS than 32x32 icons, and endless digging for apps.

I am sure things will change more down the road. MS just changed way to much at once and should of known better. Users don't like change.

Should be interesting to see if this update increase Win8 usage...and by how much.

.Neo said,

I would love a compilation on the front page of all the occasions where you said the Start Menu is never coming back. This must really feel as if Microsoft's personally giving you the finger.

Hey, let's not make this into a personal attack shall we. In essence he was right... he said the old start menu as it appeared in Windows 7 was never coming back. What's been announced today does not make his statement false, as techbeck says. Also, one might argue that A start menu of whatever form never actually went away, it just went full screen.

Let's not kid ourselves... the disorganised mess that was "All Programs" in Windows 7 was not the nirvana some of you are making it out to be. With stupid developers being allowed to dump their icons wherever they felt like, even at the root of the All Programs folder (I'm looking at YOU Adobe), it became a jumbled mess on any long established PC.

Now I'm not saying that Windows 8's implementation of a start menu was any better. But the point I'm making is that many (even most?) people had migrated to using the start menu's search function to launch apps, or had them pinned, or had shortcuts on the desktop. Microsoft's own published telemetry showed this to be the case, as they explained back when Windows 8 was first being unveiled. So, given that many, or most, people had migrated to using start menu search... what really changed for them going from 7 to 8? Using keyboard, the functionality was absolutely identical..no different whatsoever. Granted mousing to the search function was obscured in the charms bar, which some argue was a backward step, but that's now been resolved with the return of a search button on the start screen itself.

Anyway, I welcome options and I'm glad those that DO want a desktop focussed start menu now have that option on the way. If it encourages more people onto the platform, this can only be good for the rest of us, as a greater potential audience can only help spur app development. Personally, I've fully adapted to Win 8 and I'm happy without such additions, so I hope they are not forced upon me and there is an option to disable it. (and to pre-empt those who might say "why should you get an option? the start screen was forced on me when Windows 8 was released", then please shut up and go away. Microsoft did not force you at gunpoint to buy Windows 8).

/novel

Dot Matrix said,

... In a sense. I'd really love for Microsoft to forget the ancient menu/submenu and just focus on the live tiles. They bring more to the OS than 32x32 icons, and endless digging for apps.

I don't understand the whole "digging for apps" thing...

TCLN Ryster said,

Hey, let's not make this into a personal attack shall we. In essence he was right... he said the old start menu as it appeared in Windows 7 was never coming back. What's been announced today does not make his statement false, as techbeck says. Also, one might argue that A start menu of whatever form never actually went away, it just went full screen.

Let's not kid ourselves... the disorganised mess that was "All Programs" in Windows 7 was not the nirvana some of you are making it out to be. With stupid developers being allowed to dump their icons wherever they felt like, even at the root of the All Programs folder (I'm looking at YOU Adobe), it became a jumbled mess on any long established PC.

Now I'm not saying that Windows 8's implementation of a start menu was any better. But the point I'm making is that many (even most?) people had migrated to using the start menu's search function to launch apps, or had them pinned, or had shortcuts on the desktop. Microsoft's own published telemetry showed this to be the case, as they explained back when Windows 8 was first being unveiled. So, given that many, or most, people had migrated to using start menu search... what really changed for them going from 7 to 8? Using keyboard, the functionality was absolutely identical..no different whatsoever. Granted mousing to the search function was obscured in the charms bar, which some argue was a backward step, but that's now been resolved with the return of a search button on the start screen itself.

Anyway, I welcome options and I'm glad those that DO want a desktop focussed start menu now have that option on the way. If it encourages more people onto the platform, this can only be good for the rest of us, as a greater potential audience can only help spur app development. Personally, I've fully adapted to Win 8 and I'm happy without such additions, so I hope they are not forced upon me and there is an option to disable it. (and to pre-empt those who might say "why should you get an option? the start screen was forced on me when Windows 8 was released", then please shut up and go away. Microsoft did not force you at gunpoint to buy Windows 8).

/novel

Thank you.

.Neo said,

I would love a compilation on the front page of all the occasions where you said the Start Menu is never coming back. This must really feel as if Microsoft's personally giving you the finger.

I wish I could remember who it was that kept saying that the start button wasn't coming back either.

Dot Matrix said,
I'm at a loss how people claim to forget what they are looking for. If you're forgetting things, maybe it's time to cut some applications loose...?

Some folks need a large body of applications to do work. I have ~250 icon entries in my all applications menu (a little more). Many applications drop in 5+ icons. For example CCCP drops 10! Certainly no-way you are going to memorize the ones you don't use often. For example, "Module Docs" for python.

pmbAustin said,

The All Apps screen in Windows 8.1 rocks. You ARE aware you can organize by name, date installed, recently used, and "categories", right?

See above: I have 250+ icons. I have to swipe about 10 times just to get to the end. It takes a huge amount of time and is rather annoying. Thankfully, I rarely use it.

pmbAustin said,

And it's really easy to flip between the ordering? If you just installed something, just flip to "date installed" and voila, there it is right up front. If it's something you used recently, just flip to "Most recently used".

If it is something I recently used: then I'll type it. If it isn't, anything but organizing by category is useless.

pmbAustin said,

The "Categories" mode can be set to show desktop items first as well... and in that mode, it's exactly like an already-exploded version of the old Windows 7 Start menu. Everything is in the same order, grouped by the same headings.

Showing desktop icons isn't helpful. Every application I use is a desktop application. And no it isn't the same as the Win7 start menu. I have to swipe a bunch of times and scan from top to bottom, then left to right just to find the matching folder; instead of just scanning top-down to find what I want out of a much smaller list. It's the difference between 250 vs 30 items. (See Denis's comment -- he makes much the same point).

pmbAustin said,

So I'm really not sure what you're complaining about. It's every bit as efficient to use.

Certainly not. There are numerous ways in which is less efficient to use than the start menu.

Sekyal said

Exactly. Plus the search function negates hunting in folders. If looking for help, type "help" plus whatever info you do know about what you are looking for.
Or if you really don't know, I don't see how the old Start Menu helps, you'll just hunt around various menus. If anything in that case I'd hit Windows Key+E and open up Explorer and go through the file structure.

I don't understand this sort of thing, saying who cares because of the search function is just being apologetic to bad design. Search functionality certainly doesn't excuse the pitfalls of using the All Applications menu. And this a straw-man argument because people generally know the application, they just don't know all of the entries for applications. The old start menu works better than the "All Applications" portion of the start screen because it organizes entries into a logical and easy to scan hierarchy. Slightly nested hierarchies are great for organization. Showing me every entry for every program I have installed is little better than if I threw them all on my desktop and manually organized them or pushed every single icon to the main start-screen.

Edited by snaphat (Myles Landwehr), Apr 3 2014, 5:38am :

techbeck said,

He said/meant the old start menu from Win 7 wasn't coming back. Which he was right.


Semantics really. It goes without saying they're not copy pasting exactly the same Aero menu back. From the pictures above its clear old functionality is largely restored.

snaphat (Myles Landwehr) said,

Some folks need a large body of applications to do work. I have ~250 icon entries in my all applications menu (a little more). Many applications drop in 5+ icons. For example CCCP drops 10! Certainly no-way you are going to memorize the ones you don't use often. For example, "Module Docs" for python.

See above: I have 250+ icons. I have to swipe about 10 times just to get to the end. It takes a huge amount of time and is rather annoying. Thankfully, I rarely use it.


If it is something I recently used: then I'll type it. If it isn't, anything but organizing by category is useless.


Showing desktop icons isn't helpful. Every application I use is a desktop application. And no it isn't the same as the Win7 start menu. I have to swipe a bunch of times and scan from top to bottom, then left to right just to find the matching folder; instead of just scanning top-down to find what I want out of a much smaller list. It's the difference between 250 vs 30 items. (See Denis's comment -- he makes much the same point).


Certainly not. There are numerous ways in which is less efficient to use than the start menu.


I don't understand this sort of thing, saying who cares because of the search function is just being apologetic to bad design. Search functionality certainly doesn't excuse the pitfalls of using the All Applications menu. And this a straw-man argument because people generally know the application, they just don't know all of the entries for applications. The old start menu works better than the "All Applications" portion of the start screen because it organizes entries into a logical and easy to scan hierarchy. Slightly nested hierarchies are great for organization. Showing me every entry for every program I have installed is little better than if I threw them all on my desktop and manually organized them or pushed every single icon to the main start-screen.

Here is the thing, you can use a menu from the taskbar with all your program folders, just like the older Windows start menu. (Right Click - New Toolbar) then dock it so that the folders are hidden and the chevron appears. Click the chevron, and behold, a fold out menu of all your programs, just like the good old days.

The thing is, Windows 8 didn't take this away from you, you can still do this stuff on Windows 8. Heck even make a toolbar with shortcuts on it for Computer, Run, Search, Control Panel, Printers.

This should be obvious and easy for someone that is a developer like yourself. The built in features of the Taskbar allow you to recreate the Hierarchical modality easily, without even resorting to third party software.

As for dismissing the 'search' feature, you are wasting your time if you aren't fully using the search, especially if you have a lot of development code and documents. if you have 100 programs, like I often do, pin the important things and learn to pop open search and type the name to find things you use less often.

This is what is good about Windows, you aren't limited to just what Microsoft gives you. If you don't like it, you can usually make it work like you want with the built features. Heck, use a few folders and recreate the feel and look of Program Manager, you can even do this with the features of Explorer.

However, even if using the features of Explorer fails you, use a 3rd party application or even replace the Shell completely, like you would on an Android device. Windows has allowed the shell to be replaced completely or augment for over 20 years now.

(I understand why you are comfortable with hierarchies and folders; however, it truly is a dated information model. This is why Microsoft has been trying so hard to push users to a newer model, where 'location' and 'structure' are no longer necessary. If you studied CIS, how Microsoft wants users to learn to work is the 'Holy Grail' of IS, as information can be dumped and easily retrieved, sorted, and filtered. Again, if you are a programmer, why aren't you using SQL-Like expressions in Windows Search, because it really is that powerful. )

Mobius Enigma said,

Here is the thing, you can use a menu from the taskbar with all your program folders, just like the older Windows start menu. (Right Click - New Toolbar) then dock it so that the folders are hidden and the chevron appears. Click the chevron, and behold, a fold out menu of all your programs, just like the good old days.

...


To sum up your post, you just suggested that people should work around the issues with the UI. That's really neither here nor there. Defining that the UI has issues was the purpose of my post. Side stepping the issues doesn't mean that they don't exist.

Mobius Enigma said,

(I understand why you are comfortable with hierarchies and folders; however, it truly is a dated information model. This is why Microsoft has been trying so hard to push users to a newer model, where 'location' and 'structure' are no longer necessary.

If you studied CIS, how Microsoft wants users to learn to work is the 'Holy Grail' of IS, as information can be dumped and easily retrieved, sorted, and filtered.


I'm not going to get into an opinion based discussion of the datedness of UI models or into a discussion of what MS is trying to do, etc. It's a tired and largely meaningless discussion.

Mobius Enigma said,

Again, if you are a programmer, why aren't you using SQL-Like expressions in Windows Search, because it really is that powerful. )

I'm an ECE. Please stop implying that I don't use search and suggesting that I do random XYZ workaround. The point is, I am thinking as an engineer: defining the problem.

Instead of arguing that there isn't a problem, you are just going to a tangentially related topic of workarounds for the problem. Moreover, you are suggesting that MS wants to fix users instead of fix the issues with their design...

Sooooo the start menu had Vista icons in 1995? It had a search bar in 1995? Who. The. Hell. Cares when the system was FIRST INTRODUCED. It has been improved and is a nice thing to have.

snaphat (Myles Landwehr) said,

To sum up your post, you just suggested that people should work around the issues with the UI. That's really neither here nor there. Defining that the UI has issues was the purpose of my post. <snip>

Actually it was demonstrating that YOUR problems with the UI don't actually exist.

Nothing that was in the Flyout Start Menu is beyond reproducing if you personally can't adapt.

Mobius Enigma said,

Actually it was demonstrating that YOUR problems with the UI don't actually exist.

Nothing that was in the Flyout Start Menu is beyond reproducing if you personally can't adapt.


... a workaround is not demonstrating that the problem doesn't exist. What it is avoiding the functionality that exhibits said issues. I'll repeat for posterity: this was simply suggestions of avoiding using the All Applications screen and not a denial that the All Applications screen has issues. If you actually are denying the All Applications screen has issues, then why are you suggesting workarounds for it?

Your line of argument can be taken to a logical absurdity: What's the purpose of the start-screen/menu? To access applications. Since you can replicate application access and searching without start altogether or via the install 3rd party replacements, it is unneeded. Ergo, there isn't an issue if MS removes the start-screen/menu altogether since workarounds exist. Similarly, you can work around issues with Windows console by installing Linux, ergo, the problem doesn't exist.

dead.cell said,
I'm scratching my head trying to figure out how colored squares are somehow more impressive now. All these fancy programs like Illustrator and Photoshop, and all we needed was Paint with the bucket tool. :laugh:

yeah, and apparently the Gap logo was created in paint too!
...what's your point?

FalseAgent said,

yeah, and apparently the Gap logo was created in paint too!
...what's your point?

You're taking it out of context. I was making a jab at the fact that he wants to call one design ancient, as if colored squares are so sophisticated...

Edited by dead.cell, Apr 6 2014, 4:31am :

THAT is has been my point all along. Instead of going BACKWARD with the legacy start menu we SHOULD have been pushing Microsoft harder to expand the usability of live tiles. Live tiles could easily take the place of a lot of the open windows that some people puke all over their screens. They keep them there purely to observe what the program is doing. Very few are they directly interacting with. Because they were expanding the possible tile sizes I thought surely they were heading in this direction. instead, they bent over and went backwards.

Robert Wade said,
THAT is has been my point all along. Instead of going BACKWARD with the legacy start menu we SHOULD have been pushing Microsoft harder to expand the usability of live tiles. Live tiles could easily take the place of a lot of the open windows that some people puke all over their screens. They keep them there purely to observe what the program is doing. Very few are they directly interacting with. Because they were expanding the possible tile sizes I thought surely they were heading in this direction. instead, they bent over and went backwards.

At this point, it is hard to say what MS is doing. All we've seen is a random mockup in terms of their new start menu.

From what I've seen of live tiles, they have appeared to be effectively useless for most things beyond simple status notifications. Beyond weather and email updates I've never really found them to be used effectively by applications. For example, displaying my pictures randomly or some song that I listened to at some point isn't really a great use for a live tile. Further if you consider that the differences in platform (from that of a phone) means you aren't really pulling up the start screen often, that makes them a less than ideal place for the said information. I liked the idea initially, but it hasn't panned out in practice for me.

But, but, the Start menu will never ever return to Windows :p

Personally i couldn`t give two hoots about it, but it certainly look like a step in the right direction...

Riggers said,
But, but, the Start menu will never ever return to Windows :p

Personally i couldn`t give two hoots about it, but it certainly look like a step in the right direction...

Technically, the Start Menu never left, it just became full screen.

Sraf said,
I was kinda hoping that if they put the menu back in that they would do it this (or similar) way

There was no way they'd just put in the old Windows 7 menu, I always had a feeling it would be a mix of old and new and support tiles in some way, looks like it will.

It'll be an option. No reason to set it as a group policy and force everyone in the company to use it or not use it.

TPreston said,
I hope theres a group policy to disable it, Im never going back to that gimped remnant of 640x480 computing

It'll be an option, for sure. Can't say I'll be personally using it either. I *hated* being cramped up in the tiny, lame excuse of an application launcher.

Dot Matrix said,

It'll be an option, for sure.

You mean like that option they gave us when Windows 8 was released?

Microsoft developed a bit of a habit of recent that does away with giving us options.

I'm glad to see it return, a bit late now for the bad rep it's got. As always every other release is poor. Windows 9 should be excellent :)

sagum said,

You mean like that option they gave us when Windows 8 was released?

Microsoft developed a bit of a habit of recent that does away with giving us options.

I'm glad to see it return, a bit late now for the bad rep it's got. As always every other release is poor. Windows 9 should be excellent :)

I never said options were a bad thing, but too many options, and yes, at that point, they become a hassle.

TPreston said,
Im never going back to that gimped remnant of 640x480 computing

Enjoy your superior grid of full screen icons on your 29" monitor in glorious 1440p? Seriously.... I see nothing 'gimped' about a small unobtrusive menu which acts as a common program starter. Better than pinning them all to the taskbar -now that's gimped. When I want to launch an app (a desktop one) I do not need to be dragged into a full screen menu to do so....

I can't believe people are now finding a way to complain about choice lol. I think people mistake all change for good change. Why change something that works? Why replace something that works and is productive, for something less productive, just because 'lul this is new so better' ? Has anyone reinvented the wheel lately? It's been around waaay too long IMHO. We should totally try something else.

TPreston said,
I hope theres a group policy to disable it, Im never going back to that gimped remnant of 640x480 computing

That is what people want to do with your beloved metro so it is both ways ...

Joswin said,

I can't believe people are now finding a way to complain about choice lol. I think people mistake all change for good change. Why change something that works? Why replace something that works and is productive, for something less productive, just because 'lul this is new so better' ? Has anyone reinvented the wheel lately? It's been around waaay too long IMHO. We should totally try something else.

That's a whole lot of straw man right there. TPreston said he hopes for a choice to disable it because he finds the old menu limiting. How does that translate to him "finding a new way to complain about choice", as you put it?

You say replacing the start menu with the start screen was not productive. You left out "for you". The start screen is much better for me on my desktop. I like having all my shortcuts available on one screen. I like live tiles. I like deep links to apps. I like organizing my shortcuts into groups. I like having shortcuts of various sizes. I like semantic zoom. Personally, I want the start screen on my desktop and no one is complaining about this new menu as long as they can keep using Windows 8 they way they have been.

And for the record, yes, the wheel has been reinvented many times. Try putting a wagon wheel on a race car and tell me how that goes.

ModernMech said,

That's a whole lot of straw man right there. TPreston said he hopes for a choice to disable it because he finds the old menu limiting. How does that translate to him "finding a new way to complain about choice", as you put it?

You say replacing the start menu with the start screen was not productive. You left out "for you". The start screen is much better for me on my desktop. I like having all my shortcuts available on one screen. I like live tiles. I like deep links to apps. I like organizing my shortcuts into groups. I like having shortcuts of various sizes. I like semantic zoom. Personally, I want the start screen on my desktop and no one is complaining about this new menu as long as they can keep using Windows 8 they way they have been.

And for the record, yes, the wheel has been reinvented many times. Try putting a wagon wheel on a race car and tell me how that goes.

^ This.

How on earth is pinning your most-used apps to the task bar "gimped"? That's the way you're SUPPOSED to use the OS. It's not gimped at all.

And the start screen is fully customizable... it seems most of the complainers don't seem to realize that. They look at the stock screen and hate on it. Well? CHANGE IT. Unpin all the crap you won't use, and then pin (and group and name and organize) the stuff you will use.

With your most-used stuff on the taskbar already, you only ever need to hit the Start Screen to launch less frequently used stuff (stuff that doesn't warrant task-bar prominence). It works well, it's efficient, and I think almost all of the bitching about it is way, way over-done.

ModernMech said,
And for the record, yes, the wheel has been reinvented many times. Try putting a wagon wheel on a race car and tell me how that goes.

So has Madonna

Dot Matrix said,
It'll be an option, for sure. Can't say I'll be personally using it either. I *hated* being cramped up in the tiny, lame excuse of an application launcher.

WHAT DID YOU DO WITH DOT MATRIX - did you kidnap him and post under his account?

That is about as stupid as it gets. The horse and buggy "worked". And there were people scared to death of the automobile and they held on tightly to their horse & buggy. That's how I view all these people who demanded the old start menu back.

Wow! Windowed modern apps and small start menu option!
Finally people can stop complaining! This is awesome!

Faber Mago said,

Are you sure?

The start menu was what 99% of the complainers were complaining about. There's even POWER OPTIONS! GASP!

mrp04 said,

The start menu was what 99% of the complainers were complaining about. There's even POWER OPTIONS! GASP!

They will start with ribbons.... and then with the task manager and with other 1000 things... people wants only to complain about Windows in general.

mrp04 said,

The start menu was what 99% of the complainers were complaining about. There's even POWER OPTIONS! GASP!

This^

mrp04 said,
Wow! Windowed modern apps and small start menu option!
Finally people can stop complaining! This is awesome!

Its probably what it should have done in the first place... But it looks nice and still metro =)

When this update comes out, I'll finally upgrade from 7. Metro and the lack of start button severely slows down my workflow. Yeah it's easy to install one of those start button programs, but I prefer something native.

Dot Matrix said,
The one good thing about these Windows updates, is that they bear similarities to Jay Machalani's Windows 9 concepts: http://jay-machalani.squarespa...2013/12/12/fixing-windows-8

Actually although I do not like his Modern design, his looks much better IMO. Look at the start menu they showed off, it looks like half of it is Windows 7 style, and the rest is a start-screen view attached. I kinda had higher hopes that Microsoft would've pulled off a more complete polished look better than most concepts out there.

I know it is not ready for release, but the update looks as though it is feature complete and is simply pending on Microsoft to get other things in order first before rolling it out. I don't know, I hope they redo the whole desktop in Windows 9 and make everything look fresher.

mrp04 said,
Wow! Windowed modern apps and small start menu option!
Finally people can stop complaining! This is awesome!

I just built a system and got Windows 7 for it instead of 8. I can't stand Windows 8 (original) and while 8.1 is much improved I still prefer Windows 7. Windows 8.1 Update launching on the 8th closes the gap even more and adding back the start menu and allowing Modern Apps to run in Windows would be enough to push Windows 8.x over 7 for me. While they are much desired features (by me at least) if they don't show up until "later this year" they're just too late. Supposedly Windows 9 "Threshold" is coming out in April 2015 so at this point it just seems better to wait and go from Windows 7 to Windows 9 skipping Windows 8.x completely. I definitely think they are moving in the right direction though.

mrp04 said,
Wow! Windowed modern apps and small start menu option!
Finally people can stop complaining! This is awesome!

Hey, if it wasn't for us complainers, Microsoft would be far off gallivanting into Metro-land and improvements to the desktop wouldn't have even been on the agenda. Raising a stink over the design of Windows 8 was absolutely necessary.

And of course, I think it still looks ugly as hell, but at least they're gradually getting back on the right track.

Chugworth said,

Hey, if it wasn't for us complainers, Microsoft would be far off gallivanting into Metro-land and improvements to the desktop wouldn't have even been on the agenda. Raising a stink over the design of Windows 8 was absolutely necessary.

And of course, I think it still looks ugly as hell, but at least they're gradually getting back on the right track.

Windows 8.0 brought a ton of improvements to the desktop. 8.1 didn't, it was just an update to pacify complainers a bit, same with 8.1 update 1 and update 2. None of them seem to be adding to the desktop experience like 8.0 did, they're just wasting time pacifying the complainers.

[Astra.Xtreme said,]When this update comes out, I'll finally upgrade from 7. Metro and the lack of start button severely slows down my workflow. Yeah it's easy to install one of those start button programs, but I prefer something native.[/quote]

you cant hit the windows key and type what you need?

Astra.Xtreme said,
When this update comes out, I'll finally upgrade from 7. Metro and the lack of start button severely slows down my workflow. Yeah it's easy to install one of those start button programs, but I prefer something native.

you cant hit the windows key and type what you need?

xbbdc said,

you cant hit the windows key and type what you need?

Using the start menu is quicker. Flipping back and forth between Metro is wasted time. Not to mention having 2 different control panels is embarrassing.

Of course "power options" already exist in Windows 8.1 ... you just have to RIGHT click the start button to get to them.

People still complaining about shutdown/restart need to be slapped.

It is actually exactly the same just visually you think it is slower because it is showing the Start Screen. In fact the Start Screen will give you more options, but to each their own.

Astra.Xtreme said,
When this update comes out, I'll finally upgrade from 7. Metro and the lack of start button severely slows down my workflow. Yeah it's easy to install one of those start button programs, but I prefer something native.

The start screen has made me more productive. I was a doubter at first, but once you get used to it, it's great...

I hope there's an option to keep the Start Screen...

Astra.Xtreme said,

Using the start menu is quicker. Flipping back and forth between Metro is wasted time. Not to mention having 2 different control panels is embarrassing.

Nobody said you had to use both.

Anthony S said,

Nobody said you had to use both.

But there's no reason to have both. It's pointless and just straight up bad design work. There's no reason why 1 can't work on both interfaces.

Anthony S said,

Nobody said you had to use both.


You do. Without a real start menu you have to flip back and forth between the Start Screen (which is Metro) and the Desktop. You can't just stay in the desktop if you want. Adding back a real start menu resolves that and allows those who want to stay away from Metro to do so. What's the problem with that? If you like Metro, use it. If you don't, you'll finally be able to avoid it instead of having it thrown in your face every time you try to launch an program.

Except I know you're wrong. Because I use Windows 8.1 all day every day, on a non-touch desktop with keyboard and mouse (both at home and work) as well as a touch laptop and tablet.

And I'm never flipping back and forth. I can and do stay in the desktop.

Sounds like you haven't figured out how to use Windows 8 to me. The number of times I see the start screen in a week is vanishingly small.

When I want to launch a program, I just click it on my task bar. Because I took the effort to customize it. Or just tap Windows-S and start typing the name of the app.

On those rare occasions when I don't have the app handy or don't want to type it in, it's there on my start screen, which I made the small effort to actually customize. I unpinned everything I never will use, and pinned exactly what I do use, I organized it, grouped it, named it... and now it's a very efficient personalized "home screen" for launch less-used apps. It doesn't take long to learn where things are on the screen, so I can actually start mousing to that area on the screen, tap the windows key, click, and have the app launched without ever really seeing the start screen for more than a fraction of a second. I can launch more apps more efficiently with Windows 8 than I ever could with Windows 7.

It takes about a week to get used to, and only a few minutes to tweak a few configuration options to be more to your taste. You refuse to make the effort, and end up spending tons of time complaining. I made the effort, and now I'm loving it, and am very efficient. Which one of us is smarter?

Asmodai said,

You do. Without a real start menu you have to flip back and forth between the Start Screen (which is Metro) and the Desktop. You can't just stay in the desktop if you want. Adding back a real start menu resolves that and allows those who want to stay away from Metro to do so. What's the problem with that? If you like Metro, use it. If you don't, you'll finally be able to avoid it instead of having it thrown in your face every time you try to launch an program.

Why are you looking at Start and the Desktop as two different things? Using Start doesn't force you to use Metro apps in any way, shape, or form. If you don't want into Start, then use Search, or you can still pin applications, or folders to the taskbar.

dvb2000 said,
Is Microsoft "back on track" now?

Sinofsky gone, Ballmer gone, Metro all but gone, Gates back. :)

It's pretty clear at this point, Metro isn't going anywhere. The Start Menu is still based off Live Tiles.

pmbAustin said,
Except I know you're wrong. Because I use Windows 8.1 all day every day, on a non-touch desktop with keyboard and mouse (both at home and work) as well as a touch laptop and tablet.

Nope, I'm right and you even prove it yourself below.
pmbAustin said,

And I'm never flipping back and forth. I can and do stay in the desktop.

Perhaps "never" means something different to you? You admit below you don't "stay in the desktop".
pmbAustin said,

Sounds like you haven't figured out how to use Windows 8 to me. The number of times I see the start screen in a week is vanishingly small.

Sounds like you haven't figured out what NEVER means or that "vanishingly small" is not the same as ZERO. I never said you have to use metro OFTEN. I only said you are forced to use it and there are cases where you are. Having a real start menu replacement removes the only remaining situation where you are currently forced to use Metro, however infrequent that may be.
pmbAustin said,

When I want to launch a program, I just click it on my task bar. Because I took the effort to customize it. Or just tap Windows-S and start typing the name of the app.

That's great but it doesn't work in all scenarios.
pmbAustin said,

On those rare occasions when I don't have the app handy or don't want to type it in, it's there on my start screen, which I made the small effort to actually customize. I unpinned everything I never will use, and pinned exactly what I do use, I organized it, grouped it, named it... and now it's a very efficient personalized "home screen" for launch less-used apps. It doesn't take long to learn where things are on the screen, so I can actually start mousing to that area on the screen, tap the windows key, click, and have the app launched without ever really seeing the start screen for more than a fraction of a second. I can launch more apps more efficiently with Windows 8 than I ever could with Windows 7.

And that's where you admit you are wrong. By your own admission you are forced to use it on occasion even with all your customizing setup. Furthermore you go on and on about how to customize the start screen which clearly would not be necessary at all if you didn't have to use it and in no way demonstrates that you can avoid it entirely.
pmbAustin said,

It takes about a week to get used to, and only a few minutes to tweak a few configuration options to be more to your taste. You refuse to make the effort, and end up spending tons of time complaining. I made the effort, and now I'm loving it, and am very efficient. Which one of us is smarter?

The smarter one is the one that knows what never means, doesn't make an argument and then refute their own argument in their post. Being smart has nothing to do with what UI you prefer, that's just an opinion and it's ok for different people to have different opinions than you. People aren't dumb because they don't like the same things as you. Some people prefer the Desktop, some prefer Metro, neither are wrong are stupid because of it. For those that prefer the Desktop it would be nice if you could stay in it without being forced (however infrequently) to the Metro Start Screen. Microsoft is going to provide that option, I don't see the problem. If you like metro and you use it all the time THAT'S GREAT! Use whatever you like. I'm not the one trying to convince metro fans to use the desktop, Microsoft isn't taking Metro options away. They're just giving users the choice not to use it if they prefer not to. Seems like a win-win to me.

Dot Matrix said,
Why are you looking at Start and the Desktop as two different things?

Because they are. Desktop in this context refers to Win32 derived Windows and Metro refers to those derived from their new API. The Start Screen is a Metro app.
Dot Matrix said,
Using Start doesn't force you to use Metro apps in any way, shape, or form.

This doesn't make since. How does using a metro app not force you to use a Metro app. If you are using the Start Screen you are by definition using a Metro App, in EVERY way, shape, and form.

Astra.Xtreme said,

But there's no reason to have both. It's pointless and just straight up bad design work. There's no reason why 1 can't work on both interfaces.

How so? I like to the use metro control panel on my tablet. When I am on my desktop I like to the use original control panel. Right click start button > Control panel. Its so simple. I don't know why you are complaining about this. You have the option to choose which ever one you want to use. Its not like they removed the original control panel and force you to use the metro version.

You're being excessively & extremely pedantic. So I need to go to the Start Screen once a week at most. So? Why is that an issue? It works great. It's efficient. You're still wrong. You're still making massive mountain ranges over what isn't even a mole-hill. Seriously, I have to wonder what the heck is wrong with you?

I think you just like to complain to hear yourself complain. You certainly do enough of it, and almost none of it seems to be justified in any realistic way.

Asmodai said,

Because they are. Desktop in this context refers to Win32 derived Windows and Metro refers to those derived from their new API. The Start Screen is a Metro app.

This doesn't make since. How does using a metro app not force you to use a Metro app. If you are using the Start Screen you are by definition using a Metro App, in EVERY way, shape, and form.

The Start Screen is in no way a Metro app. It's a landing page for your work. It's an extension of the desktop. If you don't want to use Metro apps, unpin them.

Exactly. Just because the graphical styling is "metro" style, doesn't mean it's a "metro app". The ignorance here just confounds me. People are trying SO HARD to hate something that just doesn't warrant any real level of hate at all.

Dot Matrix said,

The Start Screen is in no way a Metro app. It's a landing page for your work. It's an extension of the desktop. If you don't want to use Metro apps, unpin them.

The Start Screen may not be a Metro APP depending on your definition of what an APP is but the original statement I replied to didn't include "APP" anyway, someone added that later in the discussion. The post I replied to said you don't have to use Metro. Metro is a design language, despite what pmbAustin may think it IS a "graphical styling". The Start screen employs that graphical styling and thus it IS metro. You are therefore using metro when you use the Start Screen weather you consider it an App or not. It doesn't really matter though. If you want to say the start screen has nothing to do with Metro go right ahead. The end result is MS is changing it so we aren't forced to use it and I for one think that's a great move on their part.

Asmodai said,

The Start Screen may not be a Metro APP depending on your definition of what an APP is but the original statement I replied to didn't include "APP" anyway, someone added that later in the discussion. The post I replied to said you don't have to use Metro. Metro is a design language, despite what pmbAustin may think it IS a "graphical styling". The Start screen employs that graphical styling and thus it IS metro. You are therefore using metro when you use the Start Screen weather you consider it an App or not. It doesn't really matter though. If you want to say the start screen has nothing to do with Metro go right ahead. The end result is MS is changing it so we aren't forced to use it and I for one think that's a great move on their part.

Ok, but it still doesn't change the fact that the screen is an extension of your desktop. It doesn't in anyway prohibit you from working on the desktop either. If you're *that* concerned with hiding your work for the two seconds it takes to click it open, there are still other ways to launch your applications.

Dot Matrix said,
It's pretty clear at this point, Metro isn't going anywhere. The Start Menu is still based off Live Tiles.

Metro is gone now, but I'm waiting for Windows 9 before I buy windows again, by then it should be totally dead and buried, and I don't want to give Microsoft the ability to say how "succesful" Windows 8 was, because they changed the rules and put back the start menu/desktop by default in late versions.

dvb2000 said,

Metro is gone now, but I'm waiting for Windows 9 before I buy windows again, by then it should be totally dead and buried, and I don't want to give Microsoft the ability to say how "succesful" Windows 8 was, because they changed the rules and put back the start menu/desktop by default in late versions.

Okay you keep living on in dream land. That's exactly why WinRT universal apps are here with the new 8.1 SDK. This is just the beginning. I don't know if you know, but WinRT apps are all Modern UI apps, and these apps are only growing in numbers.

Also, have you even seen the update to Windows 8.1 with the proposed start menu design? The start menu has tiles all over the right-hand side, plus there is no option to disable Modern apps, in fact it allows them to run in windows on the desktop.

I don't know what you're smoking but considering Office for Modern Windows is coming, they eventually might not even have a Office for Win32. They might redesign the Desktop completely and get rid of the existing Win32 apps in Windows like the File Explorer Win32 app, Windows Media Player, Windows Photo Viewer.

And I'm NOT saying oh yeah Microsoft wants to get rid of the desktop and go all full-screen. But they definitely might create universal Modern apps for utilities like File Explorer. Then they could design them for each form factor, such as phone, tablet, or running in a window on desktop or laptop.

It's not a far-fetched idea considering it would streamline development inside Microsoft, and with Project N, they can create Modern apps that utilize native code for faster performance. They would be able to push out more features in app updates, and everyone would benefit from more functional apps.

wingliston said,

How so? I like to the use metro control panel on my tablet. When I am on my desktop I like to the use original control panel. Right click start button > Control panel. Its so simple. I don't know why you are complaining about this. You have the option to choose which ever one you want to use. Its not like they removed the original control panel and force you to use the metro version.

Because, like I said, there is no point to having both. If your car had 2 steering wheels, you aren't forced to use both, but it's still stupid. The best way to go to a section in the control panel on Win 7 is to hit start (key) and then start typing. If you do that in Win 8, you're forced to use the crappy Metro control panel. It wouldn't have been difficult to give the user an option as to what style they want to use. In case you haven't noticed or understood what the uproar over 8 is, it's that Microsoft didn't give the user choice. They've decided what's best for us, and clearly it wasn't a good decision. They're finally reverting some of that mess, but they have a ways to go.

Astra.Xtreme said,

Because, like I said, there is no point to having both. If your car had 2 steering wheels, you aren't forced to use both, but it's still stupid.

There is a point in having both and using the analogy of 2 steering wheels makes no sense because they are the same. You're right it doesn't make sense to have two of the same thing but it does make sense to have two different ways to accomplish the same task. For example you already have keyboard shortcuts that do the same thing as mouse clicks. I can do Alt+F then X to exit a program for example or I can take the mouse and go to the File menu and select exit. They do the same thing but they are two different interfaces one keyboard, one mouse. Touch is the same thing, it's a new interface so having a touch oriented way to do something (Metro) in addition to a mouse oriented one and a keyboard oriented one makes perfect sense.

Metro isn't going anywhere, it's a great touch interface and is only going to get better but it doesn't obsolete all other interfaces. Optimizing something for touch is different from optimizing it for the mouse. People aren't all going to abandon mouse/keyboard in favor of touch so it makes sense for MS to treat both as first class citizens and not try to force everyone to a touch-centric UI.

Asmodai said,

There is a point in having both and using the analogy of 2 steering wheels makes no sense because they are the same. You're right it doesn't make sense to have two of the same thing but it does make sense to have two different ways to accomplish the same task. For example you already have keyboard shortcuts that do the same thing as mouse clicks. I can do Alt+F then X to exit a program for example or I can take the mouse and go to the File menu and select exit. They do the same thing but they are two different interfaces one keyboard, one mouse. Touch is the same thing, it's a new interface so having a touch oriented way to do something (Metro) in addition to a mouse oriented one and a keyboard oriented one makes perfect sense.

Metro isn't going anywhere, it's a great touch interface and is only going to get better but it doesn't obsolete all other interfaces. Optimizing something for touch is different from optimizing it for the mouse. People aren't all going to abandon mouse/keyboard in favor of touch so it makes sense for MS to treat both as first class citizens and not try to force everyone to a touch-centric UI.

I think you missed the part where I mentioned that people should have a choice. If you have a touch device, let the user adjust settings that will work well for it. If you have a keyboard and mouse, adjust settings a different way. Having both enabled is just plain messy and annoying. I much prefer consistency.

Astra.Xtreme said,

Because, like I said, there is no point to having both. If your car had 2 steering wheels, you aren't forced to use both, but it's still stupid. The best way to go to a section in the control panel on Win 7 is to hit start (key) and then start typing. If you do that in Win 8, you're forced to use the crappy Metro control panel. It wouldn't have been difficult to give the user an option as to what style they want to use. In case you haven't noticed or understood what the uproar over 8 is, it's that Microsoft didn't give the user choice. They've decided what's best for us, and clearly it wasn't a good decision. They're finally reverting some of that mess, but they have a ways to go.

You do have the choice. Its a lot easier in Windows 8.1.

1. Right click the start button and most of the important control panel items are in that menu.

2. Another way, windows key + F in settings, lists both metro and desktop versions for "add or remove" etc...

3. Another way, right click the start button, go to control panel > search control panel.

4. Another way, pin control panel shortcuts to your taskbar, desktop, start screen...

There are so many ways...

Dot Matrix said,
The one good thing about these Windows updates, is that they bear similarities to Jay Machalani's Windows 9 concepts: http://jay-machalani.squarespa...2013/12/12/fixing-windows-8

Holy cow... Jay's execution/look is so much more aesthetically pleasing! I'd actually be 100% happy with something like that, between his concepts and actual design.

When I think about it, I don't think I've really ever been happy with Microsoft's designs really. I will give them credit for the look of Vista though, seeing how many people attempted to emulate the design in Windows XP so they could have the look of Vista without the performance hit. Even my Windows 7 desktop though is modified (albeit, slightly), using our own Zain Adeel's Shine 2.0. http://zainadeel.deviantart.co...2-0-for-Windows-7-172671190

I wish Microsoft would put more thought when it comes to design. There's no reason live tiles and the modern UI have to ugly, or "Frankenstein"-ish, as Jay put it. The best thing I can hope for is that Windows continues to be more customizable than the competition. Options are always welcome because at that point, you allow the user to determine which work flow works best for them, and reduce the number of complaints by having arbitrary restrictions.

Dot Matrix: Thank you, I lost the link to his site and wanted to show a friend his work. Whenever I see his mockups I always think Microsoft should hire him as quick as possible. I feel his designs are well thought out and take the current metro feel and then expand the Windows look with a new freshness without going over the top.

mrp04 said,
Wow! Windowed modern apps and small start menu option!
Finally people can stop complaining! This is awesome!

No the start screen is not the same size and the font is different, also the shape of the start button is not the same as before /s

Gio Takahashi said,
People are always going to complain. Even if you fix it, people will complain about it anyway.
Well not many people complains Windows 7 though. This is a really good improvement to the start menu but not sure with the windowed modern/metro application. It looks messy still but well yeah benefits for desktop users but not so for tablet...