Report: Microsoft won't add Start button for Windows 8

It's one of the biggest and most controversial changes in Windows 8; the removal of the familiar Start button. The change has upset lots of traditional Windows PC users. It has also caused many to search for alternatives, such as Stardock's recently launched free Start8 app.

However, it looks like Windows 8 PC users will have to continue to find alternate means to create a Start button for the OS. The Seattle Times states that according to a report from the investment banking firm Nomura, Microsoft has no plans to add their own Start button menu in future versions of Windows 8.

Nomura claims it held meetings this week with Tami Reller, who doubles as Microsoft's head of marketing and the CFO of Windows and Windows Live. According to what Reller said at the meetings, Microsoft won't budge from its position of eliminating the traditional Start button in Windows 8.

However, the company will apparently be offering users a tutorial "to show keyboard/mouse users the new commands that they need to orient themselves with in the new OS so they are not lost when they first encounter the product."

It remains to be seen if a simple tutorial will placate the many Windows 8 users who will likely still want the Start button. We will bet that third party companies such as Stardock will offer up their own solutions if Microsoft does not act.

Report a problem with article
Previous Story

Report: Used Xbox 360 consoles still have credit card info [Update]

Next Story

FreedomPop plans to let wireless users trade data usage

237 Comments

Commenting is disabled on this article.

However, the company will apparently be offering users a tutorial "to show keyboard/mouse users the new commands that they need to orient themselves with in the new OS so they are not lost when they first encounter the product."
Too late for me, I'm afraid. I encountered the product, realised I couldn't do anything (slight exaggeration) without spending more time trying to find the options, and got put off. I won't be buying Windows 8.

A Desktop Mode which does not have a native method to start applications does not serve any purpose. Whats the point of having a Desktop Mode if there is no Start Menu? Is it needed for backward compatibility for the folks who keep all their personal files unorganized in the desktop only? Or is the User expected to create Shortcuts for every application they use on the desktop for launching?

Microsoft, Either remove the desktop mode entirely or restore the start button.

Why does the app launcher need to be considered part of "Desktop Mode"? What's wrong with clicking the corner of the screen to load a full screen list of apps to load on the desktop?

The Windows Metro UI is great the way it is and DOES NOT need Classic Shell. Hopefully hacks like Classic Shell will not work after Windows 8 goes RTM!

Good, why the hell would I need a start button? I'd click the one in Windows 7 about once a month, the only time I really use it is on a fresh install machine before pinning all my frequent apps.

Business & power-users will just have to stick with Win 7. This poorly thought-out attempt to copy Android & IOS's Micro-payment "APP" system & monetarise the windows desktop will fail on the traditional computer. And as so many already have access to both Apple & Android Touchscreen products, i can't see Microsoft competing successfully on price per unit either. Difficult to compete when the cost of an MS license on top of the unit price will make using even a basic handheld system more expensive than the competition. It is sad, as some of the refinements that WIn8 demonstrates would work so much better within Win 7s environment. But this forced addition of "Metro" will only appeal to those who want to play "Angry Birds" & its ilk on a hand-held device - a dumbed down UI for the dumbed down generation.

Why do they insist on ****ing off more people?
Unless all computers are coming out in mobile touch screen forms there is no point to this change. In fact it is counter to the operation of a PC even those optical "touch" all in ones. In fact in talking to customers that have bought the "touch" all in ones only about 5% actually use the touch because all they wanted was the space saving.

I still want to see them "restrict access" to the desktop by conventional means and let it open "only" when a program is launched (or file explorer) "FROM" the start screen. Going into the desktop to launch a program is silly and redundant now that the start screen does it all. They need to bring in functions like "installing programs and adding shortcuts" from the start screen. The desktop should close itself once the last program has been closed. I'd like to see desktop icons disappear, and their old features such as adding -x to the string, need to be available with new tiles and start shortcuts.

Please except my apologies if I offend anybody. But guys does it really matter if the Start Button is remove altogether. I can see the logic behind Microsoft's decision to remove the Start Button and completely understand their actions and reasons for doing so. This will cheer up some EU and hopefully bring an end to misery for some Die Hard Windows Users who like their Start Button and should be left were it is. Thanks to the guys a Stardock they've developed an app which brings the Start Button back. It Works very well indeed.

Full Article: http://news.cnet.com/8301-1080...his-app-will-bring-it-back/

Download App: http://www.stardock.com/products/start8/

Like others said.. this too will be the first one a pass on
long gone are the days of using RC's and beta's.
I'm disgusted with Microsoft and the fanboys.
Many people like the ways things are and do not want to be told what we want.
Taking things to an extreme is deleting the code for the start menu entirely.
Forcing users to look for alternative hacks wich will surely comes in force.
Microsoft is known for fpr leaving support in for many things such as the quick launch shortcut i setup on my windows 7 that works just like it did on my xp install.
I use that And the start menu and the taskbar icons.. ALL with extreme customization.
And that right there is my point.. customization vs you have no options.

I hope this puts out the Microsoft engines and they hurdle into the dirt nose first at terminal velocity into a fiery steaming pile of operating system !
I will point and laugh and have a fondle in my pants with that money of mine their not getting.

Hey Microsoft, learn to listen to your customers and since you don't know..
IF IT AIN"T BROKE DON"T FIX IT !

I am Not PCyr said,
Like others said.. this too will be the first one a pass on
long gone are the days of using RC's and beta's.
I'm disgusted with Microsoft and the fanboys.
Many people like the ways things are and do not want to be told what we want.
Taking things to an extreme is deleting the code for the start menu entirely.
Forcing users to look for alternative hacks wich will surely comes in force.
Microsoft is known for fpr leaving support in for many things such as the quick launch shortcut i setup on my windows 7 that works just like it did on my xp install.
I use that And the start menu and the taskbar icons.. ALL with extreme customization.
And that right there is my point.. customization vs you have no options.

I hope this puts out the Microsoft engines and they hurdle into the dirt nose first at terminal velocity into a fiery steaming pile of operating system !
I will point and laugh and have a fondle in my pants with that money of mine their not getting.

Hey Microsoft, learn to listen to your customers and since you don't know..
IF IT AIN"T BROKE DON"T FIX IT !

I don't think you get it.... Since Vista, the Start Menu was depreciated. Windows 7 sealed the deal. With app pinning and Instant Search, the Start Menu was killed off in favor of a more interactive start screen. To understand why this change was brought about, you have to think about the technological advancements that have come since Windows 95, when the start menu was introduced. Computers aren't the same as they were back then. Windows 8 is the start of "Windows 3.0" that will be used to take computing to the next level. Is 8 perfect? By all means no, but once it matures, you'll forget all about the start button and Windows 95 Start Menu. You just need to open yourself up to the change that is coming.

[quote=Dot Matrix said,]
actually i don't think YOU get it..
Just because MS tells me that a feature is depreciated ?
What did i just say ?
Microsoft TELLING people what they want when they should be listening.
Kinda hard to hear when your mouth is moving
Im not on this topic to bash any feature of Win 8 when its the metro style or whatever.
My take is they should have left support for a start menu tradional desktop style experience and provided some advance way of enabling it.

Looking at my 1080p Samsung syncmaster monitor i have to laugh at this
whole touchsreen bs beeing forced down our throat.. what the hell are thinking ?

If they wanna shoot them selves in the foot then have at 'er ..go hard
Don't be suprised (MS) when you have poor sales and to everyone else i bet a million dollars this is gonna be a seriously fast turn around like after Vista was released, remember how fast Win 7 was developed and went gold / rtm ?
Windows 9 is not far away.. once some morons at MS get fired and they look at their bank accounts Win 9 will be fast tracked.

And to people who like what they have seen so far with windows 8
i really wonder do you people care about the rest of us who don't like what we see ?
Why do we not matter ? Why do i have to be told what i want and "should" have ?
If anything I'd like to see EVERYONE pleased and not a fraction of the people and the rest be given a middle finger.. bad business there

Microsoft should do more to make the Windows Desktop app/mode in Windows 8 look less superficially like the Windows 7 desktop. The relocation of the Start entry point to the lower left-hand corner/Charm bar/rely on Windows key would be a lot less jarring then.
It would also be a simple way to partially resolve the conflicting nature of the desktop and Metro experiences.

The more I look at Windows 8 the more I think it will be like Vista, but not that that will be a necessarily bad thing. Vista introduced HUGE internal changes to Windows that broke a lot of things but laid the groundwork for Windows 7 (and it was claimed the next 'decade of Windows'). Windows 7 is now the most successful desktop OS of all time - and it wouldn't have been possible if it weren't for the engineering work done to create Vista.

In the same vein Windows 8 introduces massive changes that probably will turn out better in the long run - but in much more user-facing areas of the OS, this time breaking a lot of the user experience rather than the OS compatibility etc. I suspect it will fail similarly to to Vista in the marketplace, but will lay the groundwork for a hugely successful Windows iteration to come after it that learns from that feedback.

Windows8 in terms of the "no start button" and metro UI could be a killer to windows 8, like vista was to itself. I'm sure someone out there who creates tweaked UI's like Stardock, could be in for a good cashflow...

ChrisJ1968 said,
Windows8 in terms of the "no start button" and metro UI could be a killer to windows 8, like vista was to itself. I'm sure someone out there who creates tweaked UI's like Stardock, could be in for a good cashflow...

Not just "could be a killer," but "will be a killer." Just what was MS thinking about? There is whole lot more to the personal computer world that "touchy-feely" smartphones and tablets. Why were desktops and laptops "using keyboards and mice abandoned" with the new UI?

I don't know what features Windows 8 offers but still even if it is faster, ergonomic, mind-blowing, the future etc (you get the idea) and it doesn't have a Start button (yes I know there are programs that will add a start button) I will remain a happy Windows 7 user.
For the first time ever, in a MS OS I haven't experienced any problems and I use UltraMon for Dual Screens setups it adds a taskbar extender across monitors but I would like to have a second startbutton as well

OMG, you drama queens!! )

the start button just became a little bit bigger (and more functional) and is know called start screen.... so what?!?!?!?

to access the start menu/screen you know have to got to the same corner as before and click. how difficult is that??! how many times will you have to think about it in real life?!?!

so please stop this silly discussion!!!

yves707 said,
OMG, you drama queens!! )

the start button just became a little bit bigger (and more functional) and is know called start screen.... so what?!?!?!?

to access the start menu/screen you know have to got to the same corner as before and click. how difficult is that??! how many times will you have to think about it in real life?!?!

so please stop this silly discussion!!!

you mean the Metro UI not the Start Menu.

> Still using Start Menu
> 2012
> Windows 7

Ha. Did someone forget to pin all their commonly used software to task bar?
Seriously the Windows 7 task bar is the first step to invalidating a need for a Start Menu.
Think about - Windows 7 introduced a space where you identify your programs by their icon and click a on the icon to open them. Sounds familiar?
Microsoft has been preparing you for Windows 8.

_Heracles said,

Ha. Did someone forget to pin all their commonly used software to task bar?

So where's my 90" taskbar, you know there are people who actually use more than 4 programs regularly…

MFH said,

So where's my 90" taskbar, you know there are people who actually use more than 4 programs regularly…


I don't think you ever used Windows 7 before.

_Heracles said,

I don't think you ever used Windows 7 before.

I don't? Hell I installed it on release… Seems your assumption is wrong…

MFH said,

I don't? Hell I installed it on release… Seems your assumption is wrong…

You just admitted not to use the taskbar, therefore you are not using Windows 7 or using Windows 7 wrongly by not pinning software to the task bar for easy access.

Windows 7 is not meant to be used as Windows XP

_Heracles said,

You just admitted not to use the taskbar, therefore you are not using Windows 7 or using Windows 7 wrongly by not pinning software to the task bar for easy access.

Windows 7 is not meant to be used as Windows XP


Where did I say I don't use the taskbar? Maybe you need some reading exercise…
Matter of fact, the thing I pointed out was that if I pin all my regularly used applications to the task(super) bar I need about 90"…(you know, some of us actually use a PC for a living…)

your point was exactly what?

MFH said,

Where did I say I don't use the taskbar? Maybe you need some reading exercise…
Matter of fact, the thing I pointed out was that if I pin all my regularly used applications to the task(super) bar I need about 90"…(you know, some of us actually use a PC for a living…)

your point was exactly what?

You said "So where's my 90" taskbar," which reads "So where is on my 90s taskbar,"

On the other hand if you meant that you have 90 icons on your taskbar, I am very skeptical. 20 or so can fit without a problem, where the less used ones are placed on Desktop. Your task bar features square buttons with pictures on them... and you click on those pictures to launch applications. Windows 7 Taskbar is a one dimensional (usually one dimensional) version of the Windows 8 start menu. Start menu is no longer useful in Windows 7, let alone in Windows 8 where it is replaced by something that makes sense.

The rest of your sentence doesn't make sense either way...

Good decision. No need of Start button anymore. And those who need it, don't need Windows 8. Stick to 7 please.

Stardock: It looks like you're going to have to re-implement the start menu. ViStart is slow and crappy. But as a baseline, you should implement the whole shebang. Then you can make it better over teh months and years after release.

It does not sound like the hardest thing. We need a menu that tracks recently used programs and allows pinning, some shortcuts to major locations, and a folder view for all the programs.

PS: Would appreciate it if the start orb wasn't cut off when the using small icons.
PPS: I'd pay... $50 for 3 seats.

Let see now, serious PC users and three choices: stick with Windows-7; a third-party vendor will develop Registry hack to restore it; switch to Apple.

Windows 8 is the fastest, most stable, most secure OS that Microsoft has ever made and that is only at the beta stage, why would you not want to upgrade to a faster, stable more secure experience, just because you don't have a start button???????

korupt_one said,
Windows 8 is the fastest, most stable, most secure OS that Microsoft has ever made and that is only at the beta stage, why would you not want to upgrade to a faster, stable more secure experience, just because you don't have a start button???????

How can you know if it's safer and faster if it's not even out yet? New features and new things in an OS generally means new security holes. Metro/WinRT will probably needs a lot of security patches in the first year. Not because it's badly coded, but simply because it's new.

As far as I'm concerned, Windows Vista/7 is probably a safer OS right now cause they're been around for a while.

Faster boot speed? Who cares. I reboot my Windows 7 computer 1 or 2 times in a month, and when I do, it boots fast enough (SSD Raid-0). Slightly faster boot times doesn't worth it if I had to deal with Metro on my desktop computer.

Daniel_Pooh said,
Microsoft is epic failing nobody gives a **** about ******ry tablets they cannot run Crysis!!!

Comment fail.

I'm running Crysis on my Windows 8 PC just fine thank you.

It's a good thing that Windows is changing. I'd be more worried if Windows didn't change, because we wouldn't be using Windows for much longer if that was the case. NOT CHANGING to meet the demand of consumers is how IBM, Kodak, and others have failed. Is Windows 8 perfect? No, but just like Windows 95, it is the start of a new era of computing that will need time to mature. YOu guys really need to stop resisting it, because one way or another, the desktop as we know it IS DEAD.

Dot Matrix said,
It's a good thing that Windows is changing. I'd be more worried if Windows didn't change, because we wouldn't be using Windows for much longer if that was the case. NOT CHANGING to meet the demand of consumers is how IBM, Kodak, and others have failed. Is Windows 8 perfect? No, but just like Windows 95, it is the start of a new era of computing that will need time to mature. YOu guys really need to stop resisting it, because one way or another, the desktop as we know it IS DEAD.

According to Apple's design guru, competitors are too busy trying to do something different instead of trying to solve basic problems.

In a rare interview published by the London Evening Standard today, Jonathan Ive, Apple's senior vice president of industrial design, chatted about how the company goes about the design process, and what he believes competitors fail to grasp when going out on a limb with new products.

"Most of our competitors are [interested] in doing something different, or want to appear new - I think those are completely the wrong goals," Ive told the outlet. "A product has to be genuinely better."


In other words, changing for changing is stupid if it doesn't bring something better.

myxomatosis said,

According to Apple's design guru, competitors are too busy trying to do something different instead of trying to solve basic problems.

In a rare interview published by the London Evening Standard today, Jonathan Ive, Apple's senior vice president of industrial design, chatted about how the company goes about the design process, and what he believes competitors fail to grasp when going out on a limb with new products.

"Most of our competitors are [interested] in doing something different, or want to appear new - I think those are completely the wrong goals," Ive told the outlet. "A product has to be genuinely better."


In other words, changing for changing is stupid if it doesn't bring something better.

Microsoft isn't changing for the sake of change.... The push for change is there. Any long time Windows user knows this change is a long time coming.

Dot Matrix said,

Any long time Windows user knows this change is a long time coming.

We did? When before Windows8 was it apparent that Microsoft gives a f*** about it's (professional) users again? Right after the Vista incident, and the release of Win7 we thought they learned their lesson…

MFH said,

We did? When before Windows8 was it apparent that Microsoft gives a f*** about it's (professional) users again? Right after the Vista incident, and the release of Win7 we thought they learned their lesson…

Why do "professional" users need to be any different? If by you mean "power user", than I hate to tell you, that computers just aren't built for you any more. You are not the target audience computer companies are targeting.

Dot Matrix said,

Why do "professional" users need to be any different? If by you mean "power user", than I hate to tell you, that computers just aren't built for you any more. You are not the target audience computer companies are targeting.

Right, PCs aren't built for those that actually work with PCs, makes perfect sense. What's next?

mranderson1st said,
Yes the mouse and the hot spots for the corners are not perfect. The need to put visual cues, when you get close.

And they will. Don't forget the "click here to begin" bouncy arrow in Windows 95 didn't appear until very late in the beta process. Windows 8 will be no different.

I knew that the opinion of beta testers truely was going to have no impact on the direction and development of Windows 8
As for myself I'm going to install Stardock's Start8 with every computer that I install and service with Windows 8. I understand where they want to go with Windows 8 now, but Start8 also makes more sense.

My brother bought mac after 4 days with it he installed windows 7 on his mba… I used the osx operating system and its feels more difficult than linux… Why cause I have little knowledge of Linux and know how to use windows very well even if there are 100 features I have to learn or don't know they exist... Why will people think they can see an operating system and just use it? why don't you give it to your baby and think she can use it cause you feel its easy... We have to learn something before we know its easy. we all learn 1 + 1 = 2 some people don't know 1 + 1 = 2 as am talking... no matter how easy something is you have to learn it... even the pros using adobe photoshop always read whats new on a new release... metro is a better start menu by far.

Ignorant decision - There should be an option on installation if you wanted it or an option prompted when you first turn on a newly purchased computer with it loaded much like the UAC.

sava700 said,
Ignorant decision - There should be an option on installation if you wanted it or an option prompted when you first turn on a newly purchased computer with it loaded much like the UAC.

No it isn't. Windows 8 still has a start button. Just been moved.

sava700 said,
Ignorant decision - There should be an option on installation if you wanted it or an option prompted when you first turn on a newly purchased computer with it loaded much like the UAC.

Ignorant opinion - Windows 8 is a metro application platform. Don't want metro? Then don't buy Windows 8. I applaud their refusal to pamper a few extremely vocal self-entitled luddites.

(Luddite definition: The Luddites were a social movement of 19th-century English textile artisans who protested - often by destroying mechanized looms - against the changes produced by the Industrial Revolution, which they felt were leaving them without work and changing their way of life.)

Edited by Ryster, Mar 31 2012, 12:59am :

I am also very happy with this decision from MS. There is absolutely no reason why MS should change their decision to go foward with the new UI. Why are so many people so against change. Initially I hated the new UI but after learning it I find the new UI much more user friendly. This reminds me of my job when the company upgrades the computer system and most of the employees do nothing but complain, "why did they have to do this, the old system was so much better.....". I would say to them instead of complaining maybe you should spend the time to learn the new system. I found in the end most of those employees ended up saying that the OS change was good. Many people hate change because the path of least resistance is much easier. I always say embrace change, change is good.

paesan said,
I am also very happy with this decision from MS. There is absolutely no reason why MS should change their decision to go foward with the new UI. Why are so many people so against change. Initially I hated the new UI but after learning it I find the new UI much more user friendly. This reminds me of my job when the company upgrades the computer system and most of the employees do nothing but complain, "why did they have to do this, the old system was so much better.....". I would say to them instead of complaining maybe you should spend the time to learn the new system. I found in the end most of those employees ended up saying that the OS change was good. Many people hate change because the path of least resistance is much easier. I always say embrace change, change is good.

Change in this case is good for us. Why? Because it shows Microsoft is able to change with the market, I would be more worried if they DIDN'T change to meet the demand of consumers. That's how companies die.

This is it...Linux has become mature enough, and Microsoft did the crazyiest move they could ever have done..Time to switch to Linux ! The thing I kept delaying since 2007 when I was first introduced to Ubuntu..Goodbye Microsoft..

kInG aLeXo said,
This is it...Linux has become mature enough, and Microsoft did the crazyiest move they could ever have done..Time to switch to Linux ! The thing I kept delaying since 2007 when I was first introduced to Ubuntu..Goodbye Microsoft..

So you've held off on moving to Linux because you liked the start button so much?

kInG aLeXo said,
This is it...Linux has become mature enough, and Microsoft did the crazyiest move they could ever have done..Time to switch to Linux ! The thing I kept delaying since 2007 when I was first introduced to Ubuntu..Goodbye Microsoft..

And how many years has it been now where it's been said that Linux was mature enough?

TCLN Ryster said,

And how many years has it been now where it's been said that Linux was mature enough?


Many, and apart from the desktop for the "normal" user it's true…

MFH said,

Many, and apart from the desktop for the "normal" user it's true…

So an OS that is matured enough in all areas apart from the desktop UI is ready for folks who don't like the desktop UI in Windows 8? Give me a break.

TCLN Ryster said,

So an OS that is matured enough in all areas apart from the desktop UI is ready for folks who don't like the desktop UI in Windows 8? Give me a break.


I said "normal" users - you know those that have no idea about a PC…
And actually yes, 'cause people that complain about Metro are actually those that understand the desktop UI and can work with Linux - hell Metro is only for those that never understood how to operate a PC…

I cannot tell you how happy I am that Microsoft is standing its ground on this. There is absolutely no reason to add that stupid button back. None. And Stardock, with whom I've been a customer for many years, can kiss my rear. Their days are numbered....and I couldn't be more happy.

My business' 100 PCs won't see Windows 8 then. Such a shame. The full screen start button is so intrusive to what my employees need. Allow us to turn that Metro crap off and give me the rest of the enhancements made to the desktop.

ScottDaMan said,
My business' 100 PCs won't see Windows 8 then. Such a shame. The full screen start button is so intrusive to what my employees need. Allow us to turn that Metro crap off and give me the rest of the enhancements made to the desktop.

Utter nonsense. How is it intrusive exactly? Let's assume for a moment that these 100 fictional computers of yours have Windows 8 on them, but only have classic/legacy apps installed (which in itself is unrealistic, you wouldn't buy an iPad and refuse to run iPad apps on it would you? just as you won't install Windows 8 if you didn't plan on using metro apps). In the above circumstance of a legacy-app only setup, you'd pin all your commonly used apps to the taskbar (Browser, Email, Word, Excel, Powerpoint). Then if anything other than those is needed (fairly rare for most office PCs), they just hit the windows key, tap the first few letters and press enter (just as they do on Windows 7 btw). The start screen is up for a split second.

Now let's assume you use Windows 8 for what it is supposed to be used for, Metro apps. Now your employees have instant access to their emails, calendar and all their other office apps from right there after they log in and never have to see the desktop.

To re-iterate. If you're not planning on embracing Metro apps, then Windows 8 isn't for you. Windows 8 is a Metro app platform. Classic desktop is just there to enable a smooth transition until there are sufficient apps in place. Of course, this change of UI isn't going anywhere. In fact, I'd wager that the desktop will disappear entirely in Windows 9. So you'd probably best starting to invest in upgrading your apps to metro versions quite quickly, and get your app developers working on metro versions too.

Also don't forget that any new UI will take a while to bed in. Just as it took a couple of versions for the UI that Windows 95 introduced to become refined. The new UI concept introduced with Windows 8 is no different, I don't expect the first version to be perfect, just as Windows 95 was not perfect, but it'll evolve over time based on feedback. But with tutorials (which Windows 95 also had btw) there's no reason it can't be useful to the majority of people straight away.

Lastly, just for the record. You people seem to have selective long term memory loss. Windows 95 wasn't widely adopted by businesses the moment it was released either. I know the company I worked for took a couple of years before Windows 95 machines outnumbered the old 3.11 desktop estate.

TCLN Ryster said,

In fact, I'd wager that the desktop will disappear entirely in Windows 9. So you'd probably best starting to invest in upgrading your apps to metro versions quite quickly, and get your app developers working on metro versions too.

What gives you this idea? Microsoft's future productivity software aimed at Windows 8 apparently still requires the desktop. And quite frankly I don't see how it can do otherwise - how would you make Office fit Metro? (For a start the ribbon has to go as it doesn't fit the Metro brief.) And for that matter things like Photoshop, Visual Studio, etc... these are all incredibly complex programs with finicky interfaces, many menus and tiny buttons. There is simply no way they could be made "Metro" without a severe loss in both information and functionality.

Not to mention the development involved in doing so. Are these software developers really expected to just throw away the last 10 years of UI development and make all their software Metro overnight for Windows 9? And then there is the user retraining involved.

I'm not anti-Metro, I thought the original concepts were awesome. Fluid, task-oriented interfaces, etc - brilliant. I would actually welcome a full-Metro experience, but only if it is done right. At the moment it looks like a poorly thought out method of getting casual users to buy "Windows tablets" so Microsoft can compete with Apple - at the expense of productivity users.

ScottDaMan said,
My business' 100 PCs won't see Windows 8 then. Such a shame. The full screen start button is so intrusive to what my employees need. Allow us to turn that Metro crap off and give me the rest of the enhancements made to the desktop.

When thousands of other companies follow your path, and they will, it will be interesting to see how MS responds to the decline in business.

Fourjays said,

What gives you this idea? Microsoft's future productivity software aimed at Windows 8 apparently still requires the desktop. And quite frankly I don't see how it can do otherwise - how would you make Office fit Metro? (For a start the ribbon has to go as it doesn't fit the Metro brief.) And for that matter things like Photoshop, Visual Studio, etc... these are all incredibly complex programs with finicky interfaces, many menus and tiny buttons. There is simply no way they could be made "Metro" without a severe loss in both information and functionality.

Not to mention the development involved in doing so. Are these software developers really expected to just throw away the last 10 years of UI development and make all their software Metro overnight for Windows 9? And then there is the user retraining involved.

I'm not anti-Metro, I thought the original concepts were awesome. Fluid, task-oriented interfaces, etc - brilliant. I would actually welcome a full-Metro experience, but only if it is done right. At the moment it looks like a poorly thought out method of getting casual users to buy "Windows tablets" so Microsoft can compete with Apple - at the expense of productivity users.

Overnight? No. But Windows 9 isn't coming out overnight is it. Windows 9 is 4-5 years away.

TCLN Ryster said,

Overnight? No. But Windows 9 isn't coming out overnight is it. Windows 9 is 4-5 years away.


Metro won't fit productivity programs any time…

Scarier than Windows 8? The after-Windows 8. Their goal is to kill the "desktop" completely in the future (3-4 years). They want a 100% WinRT/Metro OS for everyone.

Heads will be rolling on the floor at Redmond after the Windows 8 failure because, hopefully, people won't drink this kool-aid.

myxomatosis said,
Scarier than Windows 8? The after-Windows 8. Their goal is to kill the "desktop" completely in the future (3-4 years). They want a 100% WinRT/Metro OS for everyone.

Heads will be rolling on the floor at Redmond after the Windows 8 failure because, hopefully, people won't drink this kool-aid.

I think MS is ready to take another punch at Desktop level, that explains Windows 7 extended support. Main goal with Windows 8 is to be competetive on mobile market (Phones and Tablets) which i don't think will do a trick. Let's wait and see.

myxomatosis said,
Scarier than Windows 8? The after-Windows 8. Their goal is to kill the "desktop" completely in the future (3-4 years). They want a 100% WinRT/Metro OS for everyone.

Heads will be rolling on the floor at Redmond after the Windows 8 failure because, hopefully, people won't drink this kool-aid.

The desktop is dead dude. Metro is the future of computing for Microsoft, and even if Winodws 8 doesn't get a huge following, Windows 9 will make it all the better. Microsoft is transforming the way we interact with computers, and whether you like it or not, the Windows 95 desktop is DEAD.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v...4L3BUOV5QSCYW7WnZvc4O0hhD4I=

Dot Matrix said,

The desktop is dead dude. Metro is the future of computing for Microsoft, and even if Winodws 8 doesn't get a huge following, Windows 9 will make it all the better. Microsoft is transforming the way we interact with computers, and whether you like it or not, the Windows 95 desktop is DEAD.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v...4L3BUOV5QSCYW7WnZvc4O0hhD4I=


Office Metro and Visual Studio Metro will be so much win /s

MFH said,

Office Metro and Visual Studio Metro will be so much win /s

I can tell you this, Office and VS of the future won't resemble what we have today. There will be a lot of automation built into them, to make it easier to work with new methods of input. It won't be long before our apps change with the OS.

Dot Matrix said,

I can tell you this, Office and VS of the future won't resemble what we have today. There will be a lot of automation built into them, to make it easier to work with new methods of input. It won't be long before our apps change with the OS.


sure /s
'cause software development is a task that can easily be fit into metro. The moment Microsoft tries to force a Metro-version of VS onto developers, their developer unit will be in the red figures…

MFH said,

sure /s
'cause software development is a task that can easily be fit into metro. The moment Microsoft tries to force a Metro-version of VS onto developers, their developer unit will be in the red figures…

Go watch the video I posted, they're doing all sorts of things with Metro.

I knew this all this time. I said that not much will change since DP as far as GUI goes. But no worries noone is going to be forced to do downgrade to Windows 8 because Windows 8 doesn't bring any significant changes like Windows Vista did compared to XP therefore just stick with whatever works for you. Windows 7 x64 is a golden at this point and for the next 5 years.

techguy77 said,
I knew this all this time. I said that not much will change since DP as far as GUI goes. But no worries noone is going to be forced to do downgrade to Windows 8 because Windows 8 doesn't bring any significant changes like Windows Vista did compared to XP therefore just stick with whatever works for you. Windows 7 x64 is a golden at this point and for the next 5 years.

Good for you.

techguy77 said,
I knew this all this time. I said that not much will change since DP as far as GUI goes. But no worries noone is going to be forced to do downgrade to Windows 8 because Windows 8 doesn't bring any significant changes like Windows Vista did compared to XP therefore just stick with whatever works for you. Windows 7 x64 is a golden at this point and for the next 5 years.

windows 8 is the fastest OS Microsoft has ever made and that is just the CP (beta) why would you not want a faster and more secure OS, just because it doesn't have a start button???

korupt_one said,

windows 8 is the fastest OS Microsoft has ever made and that is just the CP (beta) why would you not want a faster and more secure OS, just because it doesn't have a start button???

Don't look for logic or sound reasoning in techguy77's comments, you won't find any

korupt_one said,
windows 8 is the fastest OS Microsoft has ever made

Old story, that's the case about every time they release a new OS…

korupt_one said,
why would you not want a faster and more secure OS

'cause in the industry PROGRAMS are far more important than the actual OS…

korupt_one said,

windows 8 is the fastest OS Microsoft has ever made and that is just the CP (beta) why would you not want a faster and more secure OS, just because it doesn't have a start button???

It is not any faster than Windows 7, i did not notice a single difference.

I will gladly skip this version of Windows and keep using Windows 7 as long as it works. I'll then migrate to OS X if Microsoft doesn't learn to respect its users after the Windows 8 commercial failure.

There's one thing I know for sure, I wont' install or recommended this OS to anybody

myxomatosis said,
I will gladly skip this version of Windows and keep using Windows 7 as long as it works. I'll then migrate to OS X if Microsoft doesn't learn to respect its users after the Windows 8 commercial failure.

There's one thing I know for sure, I wont' install or recommended this OS to anybody

More important releases are SP2, IE10 for Windows 7, DX11.1 release for Windows 7. Can't wait for those.

myxomatosis said,
I will gladly skip this version of Windows and keep using Windows 7 as long as it works. I'll then migrate to OS X if Microsoft doesn't learn to respect its users after the Windows 8 commercial failure.

There's one thing I know for sure, I wont' install or recommended this OS to anybody

Just because a few extremely vocal luddites on an a tech forum can't recognise the potential in the new platform that is Windows 8, doesn't mean it'll be a commercial failure. Far from it. I bet most average users once they are shown the basics of Windows 8 (you know like when the iphone first launched, or when Windows 95 first came out), and have it explained that Metro's use will only become clear when apps are available, actually warm to it quite quickly.

wahoospa said,
"The start screen IS the start button."
That's one hell of a big button!

And so many people can't seem to find it so they have to complain that their OS has changed and now they can't use it.

wahoospa said,
"The start screen IS the start button."
That's one hell of a big button!

They obviously meant "The start screen IS the start menu".

The start screen IS the start button. I don't have Photoshop as a short cut on my desktop. What does one do? I mouse over to the corner, click, then click to open PS. It then takes me back to desktop. If anything, it's faster than the old start button.

Obviously I'll shortcut the most common desktop apps but it shows that if they aren't, it's not such a task to just zip back and forth.

The start button is dead, Jim.

laserfloyd said,
The start screen IS the start button. I don't have Photoshop as a short cut on my desktop. What does one do? I mouse over to the corner, click, then click to open PS. It then takes me back to desktop. If anything, it's faster than the old start button.

Obviously I'll shortcut the most common desktop apps but it shows that if they aren't, it's not such a task to just zip back and forth.

The start button is dead, Jim.

Really?

http://youtu.be/AmIYqcjfKlk

myxomatosis said,

I fail to recognise your point (as per usual).

Windows 7 (your video)
Move mouse to bottom left corner
Click 1 brings up the start menu
Click 2 launches Photoshop

Windows 8
Move mouse to bottom left corner
Click 1 brings up the start screen
Click 2 launches Photoshop

What's the difference? If anything, having a larger target (the tile) to aim for and click on with your mouse make it slightly quicker in Windows 8.

TCLN Ryster said,

I fail to recognise your point (as per usual).

Windows 7 (your video)
Move mouse to bottom left corner
Click 1 brings up the start menu
Click 2 launches Photoshop

Windows 8
Move mouse to bottom left corner
Click 1 brings up the start screen
Click 2 launches Photoshop

What's the difference? If anything, having a larger target (the tile) to aim for and click on with your mouse make it slightly quicker in Windows 8.

My point? There's no need to fix something that isn't broken.

If you change, change for something better... changing for changing is useless


Read what Apple's design guru, Jonathan Ive, thinks about it:
"Most of our competitors are [interested] in doing something different, or want to appear new - I think those are completely the wrong goals, a product has to be genuinely better."

Edited by myxomatosis, Mar 31 2012, 12:41am :

myxomatosis said,

My point? There's no need to fix something that isn't broken.

That wasn't your point at all, as evidenced by the title of the Youtube video you linked ("Windows 7 Start Button is faster than that Metro bull****."). You tried and completely failed to demonstrate with that video that launching an app from the Windows 7 start menu was quicker. When in fact at worst they're identical, at best Windows 8 is slightly quicker. Don't try and back pedal now.

I'm not so sure I care about if the start menu is gone for normal desktop use, because you have the hardware boundary to help you find the bottom left edge where the start guy pops up. However, the real pain is doing Remote Desktop into the OS, like with Windows Server 8. You see the desktop exists inside a window itself, and there is no "Hardware edge" to help position your mouse at the right spot, so you end up overshooting the location since it's only 1-pixel in size. That is a major usability issue to me.

I don't really understand why there's so much hate on the "Start menu" leaving. The new "Start Screen" does its job pretty well, including launching apps, pinning and "universal searching".

The only problem I found with Windows 8 is full screen apps. That's not my way of understanding multitasking. Even though you can tile them, they are not "a window within the desktop", and for some tasks that simply makes no use.
I agree with the fact that you cannot focus on everything at once, but one of the things I love about "non full screen apps" is that you can take a look at a different window on a different screen or a different part of the screen without touching any key (alt-tab, Winkey-tab, mouse or whatever method you prefer).
Even worse, advanced features may be even harder to access in Metro, since there are no menu bars. Let's just hope "desktop versions" continue to exist for these kind of tasks.

Another bad point would be that switching between open Metro apps with a mouse is not something I'd call "practical". Your only way is the Start Screen (there's no "Metro taskbar"). With a keyboard, Winkey-Tab works for me.

I think the menu bar is up to the programmer. There's nothing in there to prohibit the programmer from putting a menu bar on the top and/or on the bottom.

Switching between metro app with the mouse from within any app is by going to the top-left corner. When you hit that corner, your previous apps are shown in order of recent use. You can also go to the bottom-left corner to switch app, BUT it'll be in the reversed order (where the OLDEST used is listed first). I consider that to be the "Metro taskbar."

You don't have to go back to the start screen to back to the previous app. In fact it's pretty quick. If I am in Metro IE 10 and I want to back to the previous app that I just used, then I just flick my mouse to the top-left corner and click. That's it. I don't even have to see what's in that list. Likewise, to return to IE 10, just flick the mouse to the corner and click.

SharpGreen said,

Yet another one of those pointless apps. Like Start8.

And no one's forcing you to use it so your post is pointless.

SharpGreen said,

Yet another one of those pointless apps. Like Start8.


Not really ... Classic Shell offers the best of both worlds. Those that want the classic
style UI with Start Orb and Start menu can have that, and those that like the all new
spangly Metro UI with the Start screen can have that as well. It's fully customisable
and very flexible, so no-one loses out regardless of their Start menu preference.
It certainly doesn't kill Metro, forcing you to only use the classic GUI

Don't knock it 'til you've tried it. Give it a whirl, you might be pleasantly surprised.

xpclient said,

And no one's forcing you to use it so your post is pointless.

Just as nobody is forcing you to use Windows 8 so your post is pointless.

DJGM said,

Not really ... Classic Shell offers the best of both worlds. Those that want the classic
style UI with Start Orb and Start menu can have that, and those that like the all new
spangly Metro UI with the Start screen can have that as well. It's fully customisable
and very flexible, so no-one loses out regardless of their Start menu preference.
It certainly doesn't kill Metro, forcing you to only use the classic GUI

Don't knock it 'til you've tried it. Give it a whirl, you might be pleasantly surprised.


No I can definitely say I won't like it. I've seen the screenshots of it and all the clutter it adds everywhere is definitely not something I'd like. I much prefer the stock/default UI to that of Classic Shell.

timvaldez said,
i find it funny how people call adoption of the removal of a start orb revolutionary

They do? I must've missed them.

You guys are bitching and moaning over nothing, you know that, right? The Start Button exists in two spots on the OS now. TWO. It still exists in the same spot its always been, it's still in the left bottom corner, and now it exists on the Charms bar too.

Power users will be using the Windows key on the keyboard, so I guess that counts as three.

For the record, as much as I welcome the change, I do think IT NEEDS TUTORIALS.

Existing users might figure out the hot corners thing, but we have to consider not only the elderly but also first-time Windows (let alone first-time PC) users... unless we want situations in which a person can't even log in to their system, because one won't figure out that you have to swipe away the lockscreen. (It's really not as obvious as you may think)

I think they would eventually discover that hitting any button on the keyboard would lift up the lockscreen. That way, you don't have to use a mouse to slide it up.

I don't spend much time in Metro on my 17 inch Laptop I put the CP on, but when I actually want to do something, like access the control panel or access my computer, it just feels VERY unnatural. Like opening a PDF, the default PDF viewer just feels wrong. The full screen nature and the clumsiness of actually getting out of the PDF just feels wrong. When i'm full screen all I want to do is go down to the bottom and close it or hit the X in the top Right. There is a reason they have spent the last 7 versions of windows perfecting the desktop. I don't know why they feel the need to murder it on the Desktop and laptops.

I think it feels unnatural is because we've been accustomed to the old methods. The idea is that if you want to bring up the control panel, then it's always in the Charm bar > Setting as opposed to Start Menu > Control Panel. It's a change of idea, but I personally don't think it's VERY unnatural as you indicate.

The idea of metro app is that you DON'T close. We have been SO used to closing programs, that we forget it's just easier to let Windows manage the metro app. When you're done with a game, just click the start screen corner, and everything is automatically suspended and saved for you to return.

The Desktop itself is STILL very much the main multitasking paradigm. The only thing that's been changed is the replacement of start menu with start screen and method to invoke it (button vs hot corner).

PS: In the PDF Reader, there's a semantic zoom function. Hold down CTRL+Scrollwheel to engage it. I have sent MS a suggestion on this app to make semantic zoom more visible.

*shrug* Just another version of Windows I'll skip. I don't mind the lack of a start button if the rest of it works, but to be frank the rest of it doesn't work. The metro interface is pretty useless for anyone beyond a casual user. I used the CP exclusively on my home PC for over a week and it was nothing more than an annoyance and a giant step backwards. Good tablet OS, horrible desktop/laptop OS. Maybe they'll have the kinks worked out by Windows 9? Until then I'm sticking with 7 as are most other professionals that I know. Windows 8 is a productivity nightmare.

Amarok said,
*shrug* Just another version of Windows I'll skip. I don't mind the lack of a start button if the rest of it works, but to be frank the rest of it doesn't work. The metro interface is pretty useless for anyone beyond a casual user. I used the CP exclusively on my home PC for over a week and it was nothing more than an annoyance and a giant step backwards. Good tablet OS, horrible desktop/laptop OS. Maybe they'll have the kinks worked out by Windows 9? Until then I'm sticking with 7 as are most other professionals that I know.

The point of Windows 8 is clearly the Metro apps. Considering the insanely small selection that is currently available, what were you expecting? Windows 7++?

Honestly, I think any criticism of Windows 8 from an end user perspective, both positive or negative is almost meaningless without apps a user would install. Otherwise, you're critiquing an OS, which most people don't care that much about anyway. They care about APPS.

KevinN206 said,
Once you've learned the corners, can you tell me in what ways are they "horrible"?

Because 80%+ of users won't know what to do, won't even think to try, and/or will forget from time to time...because the friggin master controls are INVISIBLE by default.

Amarok said,
*shrug* Just another version of Windows I'lThe metro interface is pretty useless for anyone beyond a casual user.

Of course Metro is going to seem pretty useless at the moment, because it is! Metro is currently an app platform without any apps. What do you expect?

TCLN Ryster said,

Of course Metro is going to seem pretty useless at the moment, because it is! Metro is currently an app platform without any apps. What do you expect?

Even when it does have apps they are going to be for casual users. Just look at Microsoft's future productivity software (Office, their CRM, etc) - it uses the desktop.

Until Microsoft can make their own productivity and business software work 100% in Metro, I have to say there are serious concerns around its usefulness beyond casual users. Does the answer really have to be "use the old UI" as it is now? I personally consider that poor UI design.

Fourjays said,

Even when it does have apps they are going to be for casual users. Just look at Microsoft's future productivity software (Office, their CRM, etc) - it uses the desktop.

Until Microsoft can make their own productivity and business software work 100% in Metro, I have to say there are serious concerns around its usefulness beyond casual users. Does the answer really have to be "use the old UI" as it is now? I personally consider that poor UI design.

It's not an "old" UI, it's the power user UI. Sounds better that way

Metro will basically be a better start menu in your case. You'll spend 99% of your time in the actual desktop mode, and simply use the Start Screen to launch programs. The new Start Screen truly does make it easier to find and start programs.

IMO, the start button has outlived it's usefulness. The only thing I ever did with it was to remove all the crap that built up when you installed programs. good riddance as far as I'm concerned.

I don't care about the start menu at all, it's the task bar I rely on. I haven't even looked at w8 yet, as long as it will run True Launch Bar, Directory Opus and Dtsearch I'm good.

I dont understand why all the hate. Its fine with or without the start menu button. The fact is the start menu is still there and just wonder, hoe mujch does do you actually use it? I loved the beta but had to go back due to driver issues for phone flashing.

Soldiers33 said,
I dont understand why all the hate. Its fine with or without the start menu button. The fact is the start menu is still there and just wonder, hoe mujch does do you actually use it? I loved the beta but had to go back due to driver issues for phone flashing.

Not many. I forget where I read this, but a Microsoft employee stated that Microsoft's own telemetry has shown them that the majority of Windows users now only use the start menu to search, and to shutdown. Nothing more. Only a very small percentage of people use the "All Programs" folder to browse for apps.

We'll they've got the search function in Windows 8 nailed, now they just need to expose the shutdown options a little better (inside of a settings menu for pitys sake? talk about an own goal lol).

I tend to go Log Out then Shut Down. Or else go for hybrid sleep/hibernate using the physical power button on my PC which I think is what they are driving for - they want the PC to be simply turned on and off from standby like a games console or TV.

Why not add a Start Orb to the desktop app (actual windows) and when it's clicked it takes you back to the Start Screen. Much more user friend.

thealexweb said,
Why not add a Start Orb to the desktop app (actual windows) and when it's clicked it takes you back to the Start Screen. Much more user friend.

When clicking that button, people will wonder why there isn't the old start menu. Completely removing it removes that expectation (or gets them to complain more, who knows).

dagamer34 said,

When clicking that button, people will wonder why there isn't the old start menu. Completely removing it removes that expectation (or gets them to complain more, who knows).

Same could be said for when the start button is pressed. I was just pointing out the current situation is a shambles at best.

thealexweb said,

Same could be said for when the start button is pressed. I was just pointing out the current situation is a shambles at best.

The current situation is perfectly fine and there's no need for a button.

thealexweb said,
Why not add a Start Orb to the desktop app (actual windows) and when it's clicked it takes you back to the Start Screen. Much more user friend.

but not consistent, that would mean a different way to go from the desktop to the start menu then from a metro app to the start menu.

thealexweb said,
Why not add a Start Orb to the desktop app (actual windows) and when it's clicked it takes you back to the Start Screen. Much more user friend.

The Start Orb was so successful with Windows-7, why did MS ever decide to get rid of it, just to satisfy the wants of touch-centric smartphone and tablet users?

ok so I made the jump.
im using windows 8 CP as my main OS.. ive gotten used to the desktop part of it quite well. The metro side is full of bugs.. but the apps ofcourse. The OS itself is quite stable.

I need to find a way to search for music like I did with the old start menu. that's only what I miss...

Zain Adeel said,
ok so I made the jump.
im using windows 8 CP as my main OS.. ive gotten used to the desktop part of it quite well. The metro side is full of bugs.. but the apps ofcourse. The OS itself is quite stable.

I need to find a way to search for music like I did with the old start menu. that's only what I miss...

Start typing in the start menu and select the "Music" app. It will search your music library with the query you already had. This works with ALL apps.

Zain Adeel said,
ok so I made the jump.
im using windows 8 CP as my main OS.. ive gotten used to the desktop part of it quite well. The metro side is full of bugs.. but the apps ofcourse. The OS itself is quite stable.

I need to find a way to search for music like I did with the old start menu. that's only what I miss...

yep. Don't forget search is universal. You can search for anything, that's ANYTHING from the Start Screen. Wanna know when a baby needs to be burped? Start Screen. Music in your collection or in the marketplace? Start Screen. And, more.

Also, you can do the same from inside ANY app as well using that app to search or searching a query from another app. Truly magnificent.

Dot Matrix said,
Been telling you guys this for the past month....

Ditto.

Got called a liar repeatedly and yet the people who have been here for years know that I have never been wrong about an internal MS or Apple call.

Why do you need a start button? You can pin the shortcuts to the taskbar or to the Metro screen. The start button is basically useless when you have shortcuts. The problem is always the same when MS changes something. Human are creatures of habit. The problem is, some are simply to stupid to change when things change. They are like those old dogs...right? Can't teach them a new trick.

OMG...we want the start button...for what? Teh start button takes you to your list of installed apps. Its a menu with shortcuts basically. Right? So now you can pin those same shortcuts and make them tiles or pin them to the taskbar.

WHAT MORE DO YOU NEED. Teh start button has been part of Windows since Windows 95. I personally welcome the change. If the no start button is a killer for you, stick with XP and Windows 7. The rest of us who like change can move forward.

TechieXP said,
Why do you need a start button? You can pin the shortcuts to the taskbar or to the Metro screen. The start button is basically useless when you have shortcuts. The problem is always the same when MS changes something. Human are creatures of habit. The problem is, some are simply to stupid to change when things change. They are like those old dogs...right? Can't teach them a new trick.

OMG...we want the start button...for what? Teh start button takes you to your list of installed apps. Its a menu with shortcuts basically. Right? So now you can pin those same shortcuts and make them tiles or pin them to the taskbar.

WHAT MORE DO YOU NEED. Teh start button has been part of Windows since Windows 95. I personally welcome the change. If the no start button is a killer for you, stick with XP and Windows 7. The rest of us who like change can move forward.

I never used the shortcuts on the taskbar. I have a lot of opened tasks there all other were waste of space. The other point is, where is the problem to let the people the choice? Why the force?

TechieXP said,
Why do you need a start button? You can pin the shortcuts to the taskbar or to the Metro screen. The start button is basically useless when you have shortcuts.

I can see that you don't use more then 5-6 apps at a time, currently my task bar is running over with apps (ADUC, Group Policy Manager, VMWare, Outlook, IE (Only for sharepoint sites), firefox, putty, hyper-v admin with 4 consoles open, remote desktop with 20 connections open and a lot more proprietary apps), this whole "pin to the taskbar" argument is a joke for anyone who uses more then office and a few small games, in my case some of these apps are not apps that I use every single day and what is running at one day is not necessary running on the next day so "pinning" is not an option unless i want rows of shortcuts and don't even start on the Metro shortcuts, I don't need an 8x10 icon for my apps when i simple small list like in Windows 95-Windows 7 is sufficient.

thekim said,

I never used the shortcuts on the taskbar. I have a lot of opened tasks there all other were waste of space. The other point is, where is the problem to let the people the choice? Why the force?

Because MS wants to move forward, and as you can read in this tread, a lot of people are against change and would turn Metro off for themselves and probably on all the pc's they 'fix' for friends and family.

That way we stay stuck in the past

TechieXP said,
Why do you need a start button?

Because Windows (unlike OSX) has always been about more than one way to do something.

Windows has always been more backward compatible, from a software AND end user/GUI compatibility standpoint.

Moving away from that is playing right into Apple's hands, because the people who weren't switching to Apple because they don't want to try something new are now going to see that OS X looks a lot more like what they are familiar and comfortable with than Windows 8 does.

(this is all about the desktop, of course)

Stoffel said,

Because MS wants to move forward, and as you can read in this tread, a lot of people are against change and would turn Metro off for themselves and probably on all the pc's they 'fix' for friends and family.

That way we stay stuck in the past

People have more that 6 programs you know.

The whole point of the Metro Start Screen is that it's easier to see all your apps at once (instead of having to dive through folders like the Start Menu). THAT is why Metro is better. Not because they're encouraging people to pin things to the taskbar... that's not at all what MS is trying to do.

andrewbares said,

People have more that 6 programs you know.

The whole point of the Metro Start Screen is that it's easier to see all your apps at once (instead of having to dive through folders like the Start Menu). THAT is why Metro is better.

...on a tiny touch screen like a phone of tablet.

It bloody SUCKS on a 30" monitor, let alone three. Biggest wasters of prime real estate next to cemeteries and golf courses. 8P

Too bad. Not sure what they're thinking...average consumers are not going to want to re-learn how to use their computers.

jshimmy3 said,
Too bad. Not sure what they're thinking...average consumers are not going to want to re-learn how to use their computers.

That's the point; you don't have to learn Metro. People are struggling with interface because instead of finding natural/intuitive method of accomplishing a task, they are trying to find old/conventional method.

Gaurav Agrawal said,

That's the point; you don't have to learn Metro. People are struggling with interface because instead of finding natural/intuitive method of accomplishing a task, they are trying to find old/conventional method.

so the natural way is to hide things and make people poke around the screen hoping it would appear?

jshimmy3 said,
Too bad. Not sure what they're thinking...average consumers are not going to want to re-learn how to use their computers.

Actually, the 'average consumer' only clicks the envelope and the big blue E as it is, because no one has taken the time to teach them the nuances of desktop-style computing.

The 'average user' may find some pains adapting to the new, but will generally accept it over the old, as it is easier and works better for accomplishing tasks than the days of old.

The 'guru user' is afraid of what this means for the compendium of knowledge they can throw at their friends on a whim to appear brighter than they are.


This is the problem with Windows 8. Those who make recommendations on purchasing decisions know just enough to make a bad decision and 'skip it'.

I for one am thinking about how to sell windows 8 to my stakeholders in terms of improved functionality between apps, versus the desktop way of doing things.

Gaurav Agrawal said,

That's the point; you don't have to learn Metro. People are struggling with interface because instead of finding natural/intuitive method of accomplishing a task, they are trying to find old/conventional method.

They are struggling because Metro HIDES the ways to use the OS from its users...bloody brilliant UI design there.

You have to love MS. They listen to their users and produce win 7 and it does great, then they start believing their own hype again and do what they want and think the consumer will follow blindly. Come on MS, we are totally loving your current OS, don't muck the next one up!!!!

Orange Battery said,
You have to love MS. They listen to their users and produce win 7 and it does great, then they start believing their own hype again and do what they want and think the consumer will follow blindly. Come on MS, we are totally loving your current OS, don't muck the next one up!!!!

It's more that the success of Metro as a touch tablet/phone UI has been taken to an illogical extreme.

Apple tried this with launchpad and it FAILED.

Apple is trying to do this again with an update to OSX, but the debacle over Windows 8 will surely give them pause if not send them back to the drawing board.

excalpius said,

It's more that the success of Metro as a touch tablet/phone UI has been taken to an illogical extreme.

What success again? Metro to this day has failed miserably in the marketplace…

excalpius said,

It's more that the success of Metro as a touch tablet/phone UI has been taken to an illogical extreme.

Apple tried this with launchpad and it FAILED.

Apple is trying to do this again with an update to OSX, but the debacle over Windows 8 will surely give them pause if not send them back to the drawing board.

Who said Apple failed with the Launchpad? I think the Launchpad is a brilliant feature of Lion. The previous OS X method of launching apps from the Applications folder was like the Windows equivalent of going in to "C:\Program Files" or wherever you install the programs directly to launch them. Silly. Apple didn't have (or want) a Start Menu so they created Launchpad from the success of iOS. It is customisable and friendly to launch apps, but it doesn't mean the same will work for Windows. The Start Menu has been an integral part of Windows for nearly 20 years now. Trying to force Metro and the tiled launch start screen isn't going to do any favours especially for Home Desktop, Business and Enterprise users, who are averse to change anyway. Just ask technical people who work in corporate environments, how many of their users know how to browse to a URL using the address bar in their Internet browser? They will quickly tell you that a vast majority of users will type the full URL in to a Google search box, because they don't even understand the concept of the address bar. Likewise, you remove the Start Menu and they will be completely lost!

Zoom7000 said,

Who said Apple failed with the Launchpad?

Every single Apple user...because they don't use Launchpad. The dock and finder rock, but the launchpad was stillborn...

Windows 8 will be a Windows ME debacle...mark my words...trying to change the user feel in one swoop will be an epic fail. I can for one promise you at my company, we've already held meetings that we will generation skip windows 8. There should be a SKU for enterprise that doesn't disrupt the users ability to work....no thank you too Windows 8

abadaba said,
Windows 8 will be a Windows ME debacle...mark my words...trying to change the user feel in one swoop will be an epic fail. I can for one promise you at my company, we've already held meetings that we will generation skip windows 8. There should be a SKU for enterprise that doesn't disrupt the users ability to work....no thank you too Windows 8

Well I think Microsoft is no longer in position to experiment with their users. There is a lot competition.

abadaba said,
Windows 8 will be a Windows ME debacle...mark my words...trying to change the user feel in one swoop will be an epic fail. I can for one promise you at my company, we've already held meetings that we will generation skip windows 8. There should be a SKU for enterprise that doesn't disrupt the users ability to work....no thank you too Windows 8

Mark your words? No.

Is your company on Windows XP or Windows 7? It doesn't make a lot of business sense to upgrade to Windows 8 if you're already on 7. Likewise, a smart company would upgrade to 7 from XP, because it has already been on the market for 3 years with all the bug fixes and compatibility resolved.

abadaba said,
Windows 8 will be a Windows ME debacle...mark my words...trying to change the user feel in one swoop will be an epic fail. I can for one promise you at my company, we've already held meetings that we will generation skip windows 8. There should be a SKU for enterprise that doesn't disrupt the users ability to work....no thank you too Windows 8

Did your company ever use DOS based WinX?
That speaks volumes right there.

Tender Foot said,

I have no need for one

No one has a need for one. The iPad is a toy. I know, I own one.

A windows 8 tablet would be useful to run some programs on, but it's still no substitute for professional or business applications in those environments.

excalpius said,

No one has a need for one. The iPad is a toy. I know, I own one.

A windows 8 tablet would be useful to run some programs on, but it's still no substitute for professional or business applications in those environments.

Currently the best Enterprise App for iPad is Microsoft Lync. Beautiful. Clearly developed by the Mac business unit. When Windows 8 tablets are out, it will be hard for its Windows counterpart to match it. The Windows side have no functional design coolness at all. They should let the MS Mac Business unit design most of their UIs, lol.

MorganX said,

Currently the best Enterprise App for iPad is Microsoft Lync. Beautiful. Clearly developed by the Mac business unit. When Windows 8 tablets are out, it will be hard for its Windows counterpart to match it. The Windows side have no functional design coolness at all. They should let the MS Mac Business unit design most of their UIs, lol.

Office for Mac is terrible, where have you been? Office on Windows looks way better! It's all opinion, but I'm sure the majority would agree the ribbon setup is much cleaner on Windows than the double stacked tab thing they have going on with Mac.

And Windows 8's UI is quite beautiful and definitly has "functional design coolness" in my opinion. Clearly this all comes down to opinion...

Tender Foot said,
looks like windows 8 will be the first OS I've ever skipped

Yeah, unfortunately me too - I even bought Win ME - so that is really saying something. Computer geeks like most of us OBVIOUSLY can't be faulted for dismissing Win 8 because we dislike change - we crave it - new tech fires our blood, but this is just... not what we want. Vote with your wallets. Just do it.

andrewbares said,

Office for Mac is terrible, where have you been? Office on Windows looks way better! It's all opinion, but I'm sure the majority would agree the ribbon setup is much cleaner on Windows than the double stacked tab thing they have going on with Mac.

And Windows 8's UI is quite beautiful and definitly has "functional design coolness" in my opinion. Clearly this all comes down to opinion...

mac office does not have a ribbon, but looks better IMO. It does not work better because there is no ribbon. Notwithstanding, Microsoft software looks better on MAC IMO.

Love or hate Metro, I'm not sure how one can call it beautiful.

thekim said,
For me it's clear. No start menu - no Windows 8. Metro UI and fullscreen apps are an illness.

I think it is also clear to most businesses, massive UI changes that are worthless to non-tablet systems will make Windows 8 a non-started in the business world. I know personally the fortune 500 I work for has no plans at all to move past Windows 7 unless things drastically change in Windows 8, the only exception to that may be Server 8 and even that we are not so sure on at this point.

Wouldn't it better to just install ViStart and enjoy all the benefits of Windows 8? I installed ViStart until my Windows 8 CP, but I never really use it. It's there, but I just click on the left corner to open the start screen instead.

ahhell said,
Good. Don't use it then.

And we wont.
It has been more than 10 years using the latest version on Windows, even trying to use Longhorn as the main OS.

I dont care for a light OS, it can be another Vista, I have the hardware. It can have another UI, I can change if it's better, I love changes and I expect them.

But this is not better. Not on the UI.

Zippo7 said,

I think it is also clear to most businesses, massive UI changes that are worthless to non-tablet systems will make Windows 8 a non-started in the business world. I know personally the fortune 500 I work for has no plans at all to move past Windows 7 unless things drastically change in Windows 8, the only exception to that may be Server 8 and even that we are not so sure on at this point.
Well that makes perfect sense doesn't it? If they're already on Windows 7, then there's always NO reason for them to incur additional costs of upgrade. For those who are still on Windows XP, then it makes PERFECT sense not to upgrade to Windows 8. It has always been this way in businesses. Companies typically don't upgrade to the newest OS, period.

Zippo7 said,

I think it is also clear to most businesses, massive UI changes that are worthless to non-tablet systems will make Windows 8 a non-started in the business world. I know personally the fortune 500 I work for has no plans at all to move past Windows 7 unless things drastically change in Windows 8, the only exception to that may be Server 8 and even that we are not so sure on at this point.

Windows 8 would be a non-starter in most enterprises *without* UI changes.

In case you haven't noticed, most enterprises are either flat-lining spending on IT or even cutting back - why would they necessarily buy a new version of Windows (and especially if they are running Windows 7) in this period of "maximize investor return"? Upgrading Windows is far from the minds of enterprises - at most, the UI change is an excuse.

KevinN206 said,
Well that makes perfect sense doesn't it? If they're already on Windows 7, then there's always NO reason for them to incur additional costs of upgrade. For those who are still on Windows XP, then it makes PERFECT sense not to upgrade to Windows 8. It has always been this way in businesses. Companies typically don't upgrade to the newest OS, period.

That's the problem. Do you really think they will migrate from XP to 8, and not the downgrade 7 (if necessary) or hope for a good alternative on Windows 9?

When Vista was out, most companies brought PCs with downgrade options (I worked for dell at the time, saw this happen). On windows 7 the OS was good enough most of the time (some still changed to XP).
Now, time for downgrade again.

aristofeles said,

That's the problem. Do you really think they will migrate from XP to 8, and not the downgrade 7 (if necessary) or hope for a good alternative on Windows 9?

A lot of major companies are waiting for the release of win8, they will install on company tablets and laptops, so why wouldn't they install the full win8 server too to maximise the whole thing.

When Vista was out, most companies brought PCs with downgrade options (I worked for dell at the time, saw this happen). On windows 7 the OS was good enough most of the time (some still changed to XP).
Now, time for downgrade again.

ahhell said,
Good. Don't use it then.

That means MS is gambling its future on what smartphone and table users want, and who cares about what businesses want and need.

I'm still on the fence about the changes in Windows 8. I just feel they should have made incremental changes in a few versions of Windows and that this is going to really confuse a lot of users (and maybe annoy a few).

I'm still reserving judgment, but I'm really not sure about this release...

M_Lyons10 said,
I'm still on the fence about the changes in Windows 8. I just feel they should have made incremental changes in a few versions of Windows and that this is going to really confuse a lot of users (and maybe annoy a few).

I'm still reserving judgment, but I'm really not sure about this release...

I'm not entirely sure how you would make incremental changes from one UI to such a completely different UI. I don't think that is a feasible suggestion given how wildly different they are.

Of course one incremental change they HAVE made is to keep the legacy desktop in this version. I'd be willing to bet it disappears entirely in Windows 9 once the metro app ecosystem is fully developed.

Edited by Ryster, Mar 30 2012, 11:40pm :

TCLN Ryster said,

I'd be willing to bet it disappears entirely in Windows 9 once the metro app ecosystem is fully developed.

Sure, 'cause VS, Office and so one will soon be Metro apps… When will people wake up?

MFH said,

Sure, 'cause VS, Office and so one will soon be Metro apps… When will people wake up?

It's you whining luddites that need to wake up. Metro isn't going anywhere. Face it.

TCLN Ryster said,

It's you whining luddites that need to wake up. Metro isn't going anywhere. Face it.


If you think that Microsoft will port VS, Office, or any other productivity software to WinRT you're dumber than I thought…

MFH said,

If you think that Microsoft will port VS, Office, or any other productivity software to WinRT you're dumber than I thought…

That day will come.

MFH said,

If you think that Microsoft will port VS, Office, or any other productivity software to WinRT you're dumber than I thought…

That day will come. Win32 is not long in the tooth, and will slowly be replaced by WinRT as Metro becomes more mature. If you think Win32 will be around forever, you're dumber than I thought.

TCLN Ryster said,

It's you whining luddites that need to wake up. Metro isn't going anywhere. Face it.

Haha, couldn't have said it better myself. Watch the metro version of windows go no where. Wont leave the store shelves, won't make it out of the boxes in the store room.

The start button is still there. You click the bottom left corner of the screen. And the start menu is still there too...it just fills the whole screen since it is impossible to focus on two objects at once anyways (while providing more info).

DClark said,
The start button is still there. You click the bottom left corner of the screen. And the start menu is still there too...it just fills the whole screen since it is impossible to focus on two objects at once anyways (while providing more info).

Everyone knows that the Start button is still there but there is nothing to indicate this. That's what people are asking for since this will confuse many when they've used to press a button to get somewhere and now suddenly it's nowhere to be seen.

I don't think it would be the end of the world for them to keep the Start button but guess they've made their mind. Let's hope the tutorial they make is brilliant or they'll have loads of support calls...

Zkal said,

Everyone knows that the Start button is still there but there is nothing to indicate this. That's what people are asking for since this will confuse many when they've used to press a button to get somewhere and now suddenly it's nowhere to be seen.

Precisely. The master control functions of Windows 8 are entirely INVISIBLE to the new user and there is NOTHING to indicate they should even try something or go somewhere.

A tutorial will be useful...once. And then the vast majority of users will forget this and a HUGE portion of the growing elderly population will forget, get confused and lost, and then just dump "this accursed doohickey!"

The invisible widgets issue is FAR more problematic that the start button, but both are critical for transitional users...something MS used to be the best as covering.

PS I did make it clear in all of my previous posts that these decisions were made internally at MS last year and they have no intention of making major changes to Windows 8 today, no matter how much we complain.

Zkal said,

Everyone knows that the Start button is still there but there is nothing to indicate this. That's what people are asking for since this will confuse many when they've used to press a button to get somewhere and now suddenly it's nowhere to be seen.

I don't think it would be the end of the world for them to keep the Start button but guess they've made their mind. Let's hope the tutorial they make is brilliant or they'll have loads of support calls...

And just as the "click here to begin" bouncy arrow and message appeared towards the end of the beta cycle of Windows 95, something similar will appear towards the end of the beta for Windows 8. Chillax

TCLN Ryster said,

And just as the "click here to begin" bouncy arrow and message appeared towards the end of the beta cycle of Windows 95, something similar will appear towards the end of the beta for Windows 8. Chillax

yeah, but at least then there was something to click at! now it's like, 'hover over here where we removed the start button and you'll find something else to click!' and it will jar you into a full screen start menu with a bunch of dumb apps that have no windows or controls and where you'll have to figure out how to exit from. Just kind of a little more retarded that Windows 95.

DClark said,
The start button is still there. You click the bottom left corner of the screen. And the start menu is still there too...it just fills the whole screen since it is impossible to focus on two objects at once anyways (while providing more info).
Sometimes I'm watching a video stream (e.g. of a tennis game, for example) and I want to pull something up (e.g. a web browser or something) to check my emails etc while not disrupting my view of the video. Sure you can say we can't focus on many things at once, but I don't think having my video in full sight all the time is too much to ask? If they made a miniature version of the Start Screen I'm all for it.

And the hot corner thing is flawed at the top left hand corner, which is where the quick access toolbar is on ribbon interfaces. When a metro app is running in the background, the leftmost button at the top is rendered useless since it will pop up the app switcher instead...

With no start menu I don't feel the need for a start button.
The button in the left corner along with the multitasking panels works perfectly fine.

Possession said,
With no start menu I don't feel the need for a start button.
The button in the left corner along with the multitasking panels works perfectly fine.

I agree.

Possession said,
With no start menu I don't feel the need for a start button.
The button in the left corner along with the multitasking panels works perfectly fine.

Agreed. As the desktop is just a compatibility environment for legacy and non-metro apps, I don't see the need for a massive amount of UI on the desktop.

TCLN Ryster said,

Agreed. As the desktop is just a compatibility environment for legacy and non-metro apps, I don't see the need for a massive amount of UI on the desktop.

Why? Because I'm using a DESKTOP computer, not a friggin tablet.

Nashy said,

Why? Because I'm using a DESKTOP computer, not a friggin tablet.

So? You're not thinking outside the box. Desktop computers are becoming more than just a box with a mouse and keyboard...

Dot Matrix said,

So? You're not thinking outside the box. Desktop computers are becoming more than just a box with a mouse and keyboard...

With Windows 7, mine isn't.

Why should you need a tutorial at all in the first place?

I am not against the removal of the start button, but as long as the OS is relatively easy to use and get around in. Currently this is not the case.

People should not need to work through a tutorial just to use the basic features. It should be instantly intuitive to everyone.

Ryano121 said,
Why should you need a tutorial at all in the first place?

I am not against the removal of the start button, but as long as the OS is relatively easy to use and get around in. Currently this is not the case.

People should not need to work through a tutorial just to use the basic features. It should be instantly intuitive to everyone.

I'd argue Windows 8 is similar to Windows 95 (in terms of changes) - which was very aggressive in i tutorials and hints (ex. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4UxwAlqCCmk). So yes, a tutorial is needed for first-use in Windows 8.

Ryano121 said,
Why should you need a tutorial at all in the first place?

I am not against the removal of the start button, but as long as the OS is relatively easy to use and get around in. Currently this is not the case.


Microsoft would argue that you need the tutorial.

Yes but we are talking about stepping up from Windows 3.0 here which was a massive leap forward in terms of graphical user interfaces. Also remember that not many people used a computer back then. They would still have to have a tutorial in how to use Notepad.

This is not expected in a modern OS, even with people with little experience. You expect and should have an OS which you can use without first learning how to use it again. Windows is a change, but it's not a change compared to Windows 3.0 - 95.

Ryano121 said,
Why should you need a tutorial at all in the first place?

I am not against the removal of the start button, but as long as the OS is relatively easy to use and get around in. Currently this is not the case.

People should not need to work through a tutorial just to use the basic features. It should be instantly intuitive to everyone.

You'd be surprised to here that the Start button in Windows 95 had a tutorial.

A lot of things we think are intuitive are simply because we have learned or heard it. I know a girl who just bought this new iPad (3). And guess how she does app switching between her messaging app and Safari?

1. Running safari and wants to send a message
2. Click the home button
3. Look for and click on "Message"
4. Type a message and send
5. Click the home button
6. Click on Safari from doc
7. Now wants to send a message again, repeat 2-6 from above

Or, she could have "intuitively" know that double-tap on the home button and it would bring her the app switching window. Or better yet, use a four-finger swipe to go back to the previous app. She was completely clueless to these features until I showed her.

KevinN206 said,
A lot of things we think are intuitive are simply because we have learned or heard it. I know a girl who just bought this new iPad (3). And guess how she does app switching between her messaging app and Safari?

1. Running safari and wants to send a message
2. Click the home button
3. Look for and click on "Message"
4. Type a message and send
5. Click the home button
6. Click on Safari from doc
7. Now wants to send a message again, repeat 2-6 from above

Or, she could have "intuitively" know that double-tap on the home button and it would bring her the app switching window. Or better yet, use a four-finger swipe to go back to the previous app. She was completely clueless to these features until I showed her.


The difference being that it didn't stop her doing what she wanted in the first place. You just showed her a shortcut to do the same thing quicker.

Ryano121 said,
Why should you need a tutorial at all in the first place?

Exactly! seems Microsoft have resurrected the "vista" team for this build of windows, and it'll suffer the same fate - i.e. no one will buy it!

MattWeihl said,

I'd argue Windows 8 is similar to Windows 95 (in terms of changes) - which was very aggressive in i tutorials and hints (ex. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4UxwAlqCCmk). So yes, a tutorial is needed for first-use in Windows 8.

Yes, with such a major change in the UI, it's not totally unreasonable that a tutorial would be needed. The problem is, they've removed a visible marker for something without any good reason. My main complaint with Windows 8 is that, unlike the switch from 3.1 to Windows 95, this is a UI switch designed for another form factor, a tablet. Windows 95 may have been different, but at least it was still for a non-touch, mouse and keyboard environment. Windows 8's Start screen is not for that, it's for a touch screen on tablets. It's dumb to get rid of the button anyway just because it wouldn't work well on a tablet device. And where's the discover-ability. In Windows 95, there were no hidden UI features that required you to hover your mouse over them to find them. True, right-clicking was a new thing, but that's still a mouse driven thing. The whole new interface with the Start screen just seems like it's being shoved on Desktop and Laptop users because Microsoft thinks it's the future, not because it's more useable. This is why you have to see the Start screen first in Windows 8, instead of the Desktop. If you were just brought to the Desktop without a Start button, you'd be lost for hours trying to figure out what's going on! Now, they need to give you two places from the Desktop to get back to the Start screen? From the hidden icon that's only visible when you hover in the left lower corner that gives no visible cue that there's anything there? Or from the Charms bar that you also have to discover by hovering over on the other side of your monitor. How can they think this is better for a desktop non-touch device? It's not!!

capr said,

Microsoft would argue that you need the tutorial.

An intuitive product shouldn't need a tutorial for such basic functionality really.

MattWeihl said,

I'd argue Windows 8 is similar to Windows 95 (in terms of changes) - which was very aggressive in i tutorials and hints (ex. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4UxwAlqCCmk). So yes, a tutorial is needed for first-use in Windows 8.

Even with the tutorials, new users could see that there was still a logical place to click. A huge button that said "START".

Kuraj said,
Whoever thought they'd change their mind...

Seeing how little changed from Windows 7 beta to RTM, expect the same for Windows 8. There will be few wallpapers, icons here and there. Fine

@ Microsoft, If you want to shove that Metro down our throat, the hot corners thing needs to change. I use a dual monitor and it is stressful to get hot corner behave as it should as my mouse moves over to next screen. That itself is a big fail in UI. All the Microsoft fanboys can defend metro and everything. But NO ONE EVER can convince me over this hot corner issue,

I'm not a Microsoft employee, I actually work at Salesforce.com, one of their biggest CRM competitors and overall the company is very anti-Microsoft but I love Windows 8 and once you get used to it, you find that it is a lot better.

Think about search. We search on a lot of difference platforms: Bing, Google, Facebook, Twitter, LinkedIn, whatever. Windows 8 makes searching super easy. Imagine meeting someone you want to add on Facebook and follow on Twitter. Because they will surely implement the search contract in their apps, all you have to do is hit the Search Charm, start typing their name, and hit Facebook. Facebook will open, with the search area still on screen and you can add the person. Then to find them in Twitter, you just hit Twitter, and then that opens.

The beauty doesn't end there. Since the Windows Live backend is connected with your those social networks, it will automatically link them in your address book, which will then sync to your computer (and Windows Phone) so you can see all of their activity in one convenient place.

Edited by xendrome, Mar 30 2012, 9:45pm :

sanke1 said,

Seeing how little changed from Windows 7 beta to RTM, expect the same for Windows 8. There will be few wallpapers, icons here and there. Fine

@ Microsoft, If you want to shove that Metro down our throat, the hot corners thing needs to change. I use a dual monitor and it is stressful to get hot corner behave as it should as my mouse moves over to next screen. That itself is a big fail in UI. All the Microsoft fanboys can defend metro and everything. But NO ONE EVER can convince me over this hot corner issue,

Yeah, it's a pain in the ass. I have to move over to screen 2, then slowly back across to the top right of screen one to hopefully hit the hot spot. 50% of the time I get it.

Metro blows. 100%, I don't care what Metro lovers say, I don't like it.

Nashy said,

Yeah, it's a pain in the ass. I have to move over to screen 2, then slowly back across to the top right of screen one to hopefully hit the hot spot. 50% of the time I get it.

Metro blows. 100%, I don't care what Metro lovers say, I don't like it.

Win+C solves all your problems.

Nashy said,

Yeah, it's a pain in the ass. I have to move over to screen 2, then slowly back across to the top right of screen one to hopefully hit the hot spot. 50% of the time I get it.

Metro blows. 100%, I don't care what Metro lovers say, I don't like it.

I never thought about dual-screen setups. That is terrible, that sucks! Otherwise Metro works really well on my single-display computer.

Dot Matrix said,

Win+C solves all your problems.

I'm not after keyboard shortcuts to do tasks. I have a mouse for a reason.

Nashy said,

I'm not after keyboard shortcuts to do tasks. I have a mouse for a reason.


I think if you offset main screen few pixels lower in screen resolution settings, it should solve the problem, as mouse will not move to another screen while being at the bottom of the screen. so you just drag a cursor to the bottom, then left/right (left for app switcher and start hot corner, right for charms bar) and up.

But well, if people need to think of such tricks to get these gestures working, it really means that there is a design flaw.

Edited by x.iso, Mar 31 2012, 8:42am :

Kuraj said,
Whoever thought they'd change their mind...

It wouldn't be the first time a software company yields to the ongoing complaints by customers.

Mr Byte said,

I agree with Nashy. Why do I have to take my hand off the mouse?

Why would you have to take your hand off the mouse? Do you move the mouse with both your hands? I can hit Win+C with my left and move the mouse with my right. Not that hard.

Dot Matrix said,
I can hit Win+C with my left and move the mouse with my right. Not that hard.

Ever heard of left handed people? Sure you don't…

Dot Matrix said,

Why would you have to take your hand off the mouse? Do you move the mouse with both your hands? I can hit Win+C with my left and move the mouse with my right. Not that hard.

When I'm watching a movie or something, generally I'm sitting back, feet up, and comfortable. My hand stays on my mouse, and my left it nowhere near my keyboard.

I can move the mouse, click start easily, and do what I want on my other screen.

Eg. See something in movie. "Oh, I want to wiki that". Move mouse to bottom left, without having to look to see if I am actually hitting the right spot, browser and search.

With metro I need to find the right browser app for desktop, after finding the correct area to click to find a start menu.

It's crap. I appreciate you like it, but all you're doing is looking like a fanboy. Every issue I have with metro is a genuine issue, whether you like it or not.

MFH said,

Ever heard of left handed people? Sure you don't…

I think that's why they invented keyboards with a WinKey on the right..

Cøi said,

I think that's why they invented keyboards with a WinKey on the right..

My laptop only has one Win key.

wixostrix said,
Windows 8 makes searching super easy.

No it doesn't.. the search just sucks.
In Windows Vista/Seven I can always press the Windows key in my keyboard and use the little search bar in the start menu to search everything in my computer.. from files to applications and to control panel items.

The search in Windows 8 sucks... as you start typing a sidebar shows up showing the results.. however the results are categorized in 2 or 3 different categories. So if I want to open "Add/Remove Programs" I have to start typing, switch the results category to "Apps" and then click the result.

DeMo_BR said,

No it doesn't.. the search just sucks.
In Windows Vista/Seven I can always press the Windows key in my keyboard and use the little search bar in the start menu to search everything in my computer.. from files to applications and to control panel items.

The search in Windows 8 sucks... as you start typing a sidebar shows up showing the results.. however the results are categorized in 2 or 3 different categories. So if I want to open "Add/Remove Programs" I have to start typing, switch the results category to "Apps" and then click the result.

So that one extra step means it sucks? Come off it. The fact that you can search within any app makes Windows 8 Search so much more powerful and in my opinion better.

DeMo_BR said,

No it doesn't.. the search just sucks.
In Windows Vista/Seven I can always press the Windows key in my keyboard and use the little search bar in the start menu to search everything in my computer.. from files to applications and to control panel items.

The search in Windows 8 sucks... as you start typing a sidebar shows up showing the results.. however the results are categorized in 2 or 3 different categories. So if I want to open "Add/Remove Programs" I have to start typing, switch the results category to "Apps" and then click the result.

So that one extra step means it sucks? Come off it. The fact that you can search within any app makes Windows 8 Search so much more powerful and in my opinion better.