The Start Menu will reportedly return to Windows this fall

At BUILD 2014, Microsoft surprised many by showing off a Start menu that will be making its way back into Windows. After Windows 8 debuted without the iconic feature, there was a great deal of negative feedback, and along with numerous other contentious issues surrounding the OS, it eventually lead to the departure of Steven Sinofsky.

But with Windows 8.1 and its first major update, Microsoft has been slowly re-introducing classic features and has made a commitment to making the OS more mouse- and keyboard-friendly.

Ever since the Start menu was shown off, everyone has been wondering when we will see it return to the OS and, according to Wzor, the answer will be this fall.

Right now, it is unclear if the update to bring the Start menu back will be called Windows 8.2, or will simply be 'Windows 8.1 Update 2'. Either way, this is the first bit of semi-credible information about when we can expect the Start menu to return to the OS.

Now, grab a pinch of salt as Wzor is also dishing more information about a future cloud iteration of Windows. We should clarify that a move to Windows as a service (WAAS) is well-known, and a logical move for the company - but what’s new here is that the OS would supposedly be free, with premium feature subscriptions.

The Windows cloud OS is not something we should expect to see in the near future, and it will take Microsoft quite a while to prepare this new form of Windows so that it’s functionally complete for the end-user.

The return of the Start menu this fall seems logical, as Microsoft already knows that, with the cat out of the bag, they must act swiftly to deliver on these promises. If they wait too long, they run the risk of angering users once again, so it is in their best interest to get this feature out the door as soon as possible.

If you are curious about what all the new Start menu will bring when it returns (as this is not your grandma’s Start menu) you can check out our closer look here.

Source:  Wzor | Via Winbeta

Report a problem with article
Previous Story

Microsoft and Motorola Solutions sign Android-Chrome OS licensing agreement

Next Story

Google offers those scammed by Virus Shield a refund, $5 Google Play Store credit

149 Comments

Commenting is disabled on this article.

I keep thinking about Windows, I have used it for 40 years, and there was a time when it was the only option, other than Linux (which was usually reserved for mainframes). But as the years have gone by, it's importance has diminished. There are so many other less expensive options, and honestly, many superior apps, products and devices in the Apple, Android and Linux world.

I could see keeping a (meaning one) Windows machine around, but for myself I think I would get more bang for the buck from an Apple, Android or Linux device. I think to myself $120.00 or $200.00 just for the OS, for each machine? There isn't that much I do to justify it? Having 7 computers and devices in the house, I feel like I am still being left behind in the tech world, by using the Windows ecosystem.

I guess it is just my time to start expanding my horizons, again.

Only way people would cry the least would be to add a screen to the installation with the option to choose between Windows Xp Style, Windows 7 Style, Modern Style and Mixed Modern Style (new start menu and start screen still included on windows) and add those styles on add/remove features so people wouldnt complain about extra clutter.

People will still complain about extra clutter because it's still part of the OS and "adds bloat" even if it's completely optional. Also, what about Win 3.11 style and Win9x style? I want those too!

Why did Windows try to make everyone learn how to use the new Win8 interface, and then starting bringing back other features like the Start Menu? I mean, I've gotten used to the Metro interface, it's fine, and I like it (coming from a guy who loved the Start Menu), but if Microsoft is giving the Start Menu back, doesn't that mean that all their hype for the Metro interface is rendered null?

acquabob said,
Why did Windows try to make everyone learn how to use the new Win8 interface, and then starting bringing back other features like the Start Menu? I mean, I've gotten used to the Metro interface, it's fine, and I like it (coming from a guy who loved the Start Menu), but if Microsoft is giving the Start Menu back, doesn't that mean that all their hype for the Metro interface is rendered null?

I think they're conceding the fact that Apple was right - nothing wrong with sharing a common backend but when you have different form factors you need to deliver something unique to that form factor but we'll never see Microsoft admit they made a mistake.

Mr Nom Nom's said,

I think they're conceding the fact that Apple was right - nothing wrong with sharing a common backend but when you have different form factors you need to deliver something unique to that form factor but we'll never see Microsoft admit they made a mistake.

May be one day, after a decade, when someone will interview Ballmer about his biggest regret at MS days then he will admit it and will say release of Win 8 with metro crap was his biggest mistake. Even more than Vista as he listened in to this guy named Sinofsky and drank his cool aid or touch fad every where and messed up things badly.

Oh, I remember one thing, when Win 8 was released there were so many reports of MS having no plan B in regards to Metro fad. I guess we are at plan U-turn now. However, I would like them to completely remove or make it optional this Metro fad. Otherwise I will keep using win 8 with startisback.

acquabob said,
if Microsoft is giving the Start Menu back, doesn't that mean that all their hype for the Metro interface is rendered null?
Those who like the Start Screen can continue using it just like before. The Start Menu is being provided for those who just haven't been able to move on (yet).

Mr Nom Nom's said,
I think they're conceding the fact that Apple was right - nothing wrong with sharing a common backend but when you have different form factors you need to deliver something unique to that form factor but we'll never see Microsoft admit they made a mistake.
What's the common backend in iOS and OS X? Is there app compatibility between the two?

Romero said,
Those who like the Start Screen can continue using it just like before. The Start Menu is being provided for those who just haven't been able to move on (yet).

What's the common backend in iOS and OS X? Is there app compatibility between the two?

Where do you think AV Foundation came from to replace Quicktime? most of the 'new technologies' that exist on iOS appeared in Mac OS X and ideas in Mac OS X migrated their way back to iOS. The only things missing is that on the desktop you use App Kit and on iOS you have UI Kit which forces you to write an interface for touch and an interface for traditional desktop - as long as you keep your presentation and logic separate (which you should do anyway as a matter of good coding) then it should be a non-issue right from the get go. Apple's own software such as Pages, Keynote and Numbers share a common backend but a difference front end hence you're able to share documents without there being major incompatibility issues.

Auditor said,
However, I would like them to completely remove or make it optional this Metro fad.
It's not going to be removed. I don't mind if they make it optional but people who keep calling for its removal so no-one else can use it too are just being selfish dogs in the manger.

Mr Nom Nom's said,
Apple's own software such as Pages, Keynote and Numbers share a common backend but a difference front end hence you're able to share documents without there being major incompatibility issues.
Was talking about app, not doc compatibility. Give me an x86 tablet any day on which I can run the same apps as on my desktop.

Romero said,
It's not going to be removed. I don't mind if they make it optional but people who keep calling for its removal so no-one else can use it too are just being selfish dogs in the manger.

Was talking about app, not doc compatibility. Give me an x86 tablet any day on which I can run the same apps as on my desktop.

And you didn't even read what I wrote - I talked about API compatibility between the two platforms THEN used Pages/Keynote/Numbers as an example of Apple using that API compatibility to produce a product that spans iPhone, iPad and OS X. Next time spend some time reading what people wrote rather than coming to conclusions without actually reading.

I know you were talking about API and doc compatibility, but you responded to my query asking about app compatibility, which means the ability to run the same app no matter the device. That's what I am focusing on as an advantage of Windows so how about understanding that instead? There's nothing intrinsically "right" about Apple's approach as you claimed. As long as I can't run all the same apps on their tablet that I can on their desktop OS, their split OS approach is just wrong as far as I am concerned.

Edited by Romero, Apr 24 2014, 2:06pm :

acquabob said,
Why did Windows try to make everyone learn how to use the new Win8 interface, and then starting bringing back other features like the Start Menu? I mean, I've gotten used to the Metro interface, it's fine, and I like it (coming from a guy who loved the Start Menu), but if Microsoft is giving the Start Menu back, doesn't that mean that all their hype for the Metro interface is rendered null?

Well, perhaps it was because no one wanted to use it? or didn't like it? or didn't want to spend time learning to use it? or the App store had useless apps? or Touch screen devices are more expensive? But, I am with you I have no clue, why they did it.

Finlay, hopefully that metro crap can be removed too. I do not need 2 start menus, half working metro control panel and so on...

Metro apps already can be removed, and Start Screen will be impossible to remove but will be optional. If that's not sufficient you can stay with Win7.

I do not want to stay with windows 7 as windows 8.1 is better. They finally trimmed the fat that was used to boost the hardware sales before ... bad luck they failed miserably with the GUI but at least there is light in the tunnel already...

If the light "in" the tunnel you're referring to is an optional Start Menu and improved Metro (as those MS Research videos showed), I'm all for it.

Im not holding my breath for it. In fact, I dont care anymore. I am using Classic Shell and I doubt they will make it as customizable. So I will just stick with it.
Hopefully they will make the whole Metro crap optional, though. I just hate it to see that UI when I want to change some settings, add Bluetooth devices, etc, or the dozens of restarts needed just to change a dozen of deeper hidden settings. I am already thankful that ASRock has made a little utility to boot directly into the UEFI, because if I wanted to do that via Windows, it would take me literally 100 times as long.

It was completely useless anyway, once I found out that apps dont work anymore if you disable UAC. Until then I was planning on getting a nice touchscreen that has a resolution so apps will work (not even 720p works), but now I laughed hard when I noticed this audacious behavior and moved on from my plans.

Edited by coolhund, Apr 22 2014, 6:29am :

Romero said,
Why would you want to disable UAC completely anyway?

Because there are still some old (and recent) applications that are no longer updated that need to have admin rights and that need to be put in the autostart. Applications like that wont auto-start with UAC activated.

I know for most people UAC is no issue (except that it really doesnt make the system more secure, since youre getting bombarded with those screens all the time and just click OK anyway), but there are actually people who need to often work much deeper in the OS.

One of those things is programming stuff. Got a program from a friend lately, tried to run it and it simply wouldnt work, with no logical reason. We tried to find the reason for 3 days until he found out that some versions of windows (pro+) block dll and other files that arent signed or werent created on the computer. There is a simple solution to this: Properties of the files -> unblock. However, it wouldnt work for me. It just wouldnt accept the unblock. I had extracted it with Windows. I then used WinRAR (admin rights) and suddenly it worked. Only found this out on accident.

This OS is just turning into OSX. Did you ever look at the deeper settings? Its extremely restricted already. You think things like apps not working if you disable UAC, is anything other than a restricted Android or iOS?

coolhund said,
There is a simple solution to this: Properties of the files -> unblock. However, it wouldnt work for me. It just wouldnt accept the unblock. I had extracted it with Windows. I then used WinRAR (admin rights) and suddenly it worked.
Meh, that shouldn't have been too difficult to take care of. It's just the Attachment Manager in Windows adding Zone.Identifier as an ADS to the file, and something like SysInternals' streams utility would have deleted it in a jiffy. You can also turn this security feature off via gpedit or regedit.

Personally I haven't come across any app in a long time that fails completely with UAC. Even if it was never updated to run without admin rights (which most software never needs but programmers were used to such trashy coding before UAC), the folder virtualization feature redirects all file writes to system folders and that keeps the OS clean and stable. I don't know what sort of apps you're running on a regular basis that prevents you from having UAC turned on but I bet most are crap and could easily do without requiring admin access at all. It's the apps at fault here, not UAC (whose popups are far more toned down in Win7 and 8 than in Vista). As for the restrictions, I think it's a very good thing and far better than the time when every app used to run as admin and take a big fat dump in Windows and System32 and Program Files and who knows where else, and also leave all that crap behind on being "uninstalled". Too bad MS didn't make a standard account the default after setup and still creates an admin account that most clueless people use.

I'd considering using the start menu on my desktop if they allow me to make it much larger. Maybe a good 1/3 of my screen. As it is in 7 is WAY too small. I always bump it up to 18 or more items to make it taller, but I can't make it any wider. It kinda blows.

No one is commenting about how Windows are planning to be a subscription service. If that happens, I am sure to move all my personal computers to Hackintosh.

PotatoAlchemist said,
Until in the near future the subscription services become the norm and Apple will be lagging behind that.

This would truly be unfortunate, most people can't afford to upgrade, let alone pay a monthly/yearly fee for multiple subscriptions. I have trouble, seeing this as a successful worldwide business model.

I don't understand why it's going to take this long. I thought R&D for it would take a week or two, for a corporation as large as Microsoft.

Seems there are just far more important aspects to be taken care of corporation wise in all departments, than just a minor UI change. If they could spend time revamping the iconset from the hybrid Windows 95/XP/Vista combination, then that's something else that goes up to the priority list.

68k said,
I don't understand why it's going to take this long. I thought R&D for it would take a week or two, for a corporation as large as Microsoft.

That's assuming the update isn't going to include other things. If it was just the Menu, Microsoft would have released it already, but it's not.

68k said,
I don't understand why it's going to take this long. I thought R&D for it would take a week or two, for a corporation as large as Microsoft.

Maybe MS should just release the menu by itself in Windows Update? Make it an optional update like Bing Desktop, so those who want it can go get it right away, and those who don't can ignore it.

68k said,
I don't understand why it's going to take this long. I thought R&D for it would take a week or two, for a corporation as large as Microsoft.

Depends, they might have re-written the bar using WinRT/XAML and thus has taken time to ensure feature parity with the old win32 version.

I have no issues with the current start screen. What I'm really looking forward to is the option to run Windows Store Apps in a windows mode on my desktop.

sinis said,
YES,
and vice versa, I want to be able to run Windows Classic apps full screen without Desktop !

Which is why for me at least Store apps work splendidly as it is now. They offer distraction-free experience, and act as a virtual space on its own when placed aside. Without needing the desktop to be ran atop on.

Gungel said,
I have no issues with the current start screen. What I'm really looking forward to is the option to run Windows Store Apps in a windows mode on my desktop.

Not so great, since those apps require at least a 1024x768 window. Thats too restrictive to properly use them as Windows, especially since most really only need a very small window actually.

WZOR has come back! Now let's hope that the leaks continue! The start menu returning back is the best thing that has happened to Windows since Windows 7.

I can't wait till September or October 2014. Hope Microsoft returns the start menu around June or July 2014? Would be great then. Let's see what happens.

the bigger news for me (you guys are all still stuck on this Metro/Start Menu bs! move on!) is the WAAS rumour. That could be interesting.

Only include it with Windows 9.

That way Windows 8 desktop users will be forced to upgrade and ... MORE MONEY.

Worked with Windows 7 from Vista users.

Im sorry but this image is about 3-4 months old and no one noticed that the metro mail app is running as a normal window on the desktop, cant see why start menu "returning" is the news here XD

Goldenheaven said,
Im sorry but this image is about 3-4 months old and no one noticed that the metro mail app is running as a normal window on the desktop, cant see why start menu "returning" is the news here XD

Why wouldn't it return with windowed modern applications? if it means that it brings the possibility of unified API for all device types then it'll speed up the delivery of universal applications. Another great thing would be the ability to kill off the 'Live Essentials' in favour of having a single set of front end software to hook into Microsoft's cloud computing - there are many benefits to Microsoft which is why they're pushing so hard to get it out asap.

Just noticing that a new feature is being left unnoticed because of the new start menu
and that feature is complementary of the new start menu.

Also we all knew these features were eminent from what we've seen on windows 8.1.1, since we got there the modern apps that can be minimized in preparation for the new start menu.

On why wouldn't it return? well 8.1.1 modern apps could be the apps launched by that modern start menu since you can minimize and be straight on the desktop but microsoft once again listened to feedback from people. On another note
modern windowed app could partially kill the 50-50 screen split.

i don't want Start Menu..perhaps Microsoft should solution this more wisely..We need modern UI all over the OS ..just like they did with MS Office...

I think the Menu hater's protest to much, they already have the option to boot to the Start Menu, and why did they use Windows 7 and XP for all those years, if they hated it so much. Plus, they have RT if they want nothing to do with Windows 7 and prior.

Personally, I think Microsoft will screw this up somehow, I wish they would put back others features they stripped out and allow Aero. All of this pointless garbage if they can't improve their App store. I would never buy a Windows tablet (RT) or Pro over an iPad or Android for app usage, just doesn't make sense. The only reason I use Windows is because of media center, but Media Browser 3 may be it's new replacement, finally freeing me from MS.

It is a start, no pun intended, to making Windows-8 more suitable to the laptop/desktop venues. Windows-9 could be the more permanent solution--give users the options on how the UI looks and feels. One "flavor" for tablets/smartphones and another "flavor" for laptops/desktops. Two separate form factors require separate UIs--each one optimized for their respective form factor.

TsarNikky said,
It is a start, no pun intended, to making Windows-8 more suitable to the laptop/desktop venues. Windows-9 could be the more permanent solution--give users the options on how the UI looks and feels. One "flavor" for tablets/smartphones and another "flavor" for laptops/desktops. Two separate form factors require separate UIs--each one optimized for their respective form factor.

The Modern Design Language will still very much be a part of Windows going forward.

DConnell said,
How does autoselecting the UI based on form factor equal giving us _more_ options?

Exactly. Doesn't the user decide how he/she would interact with their computer? Of course the OEM's can also decide the default behavior of it, but that's it. You still get to customize it to your need.

JHBrown said,
The further I can get from Metro, the better. Thanks for the option Microsoft.

So, you're just writing off these applications? Even though before long, they'll be universal?

We have a ways to go before these apps are universal. However, I am not writing them off. Microsoft has the money and resources to get this done correctly.

Everyone is NOT waiting for the Start menu to return. Those of us who actually are capable of using Windows 8 have been fine and never missed the old Start menu. Backtracking is the wrong choice. Too many people are too lazy to learn the new way of doing things, forcing this retrofit. It's ridiculous.

Robert, it is not people being lazy. This is the typical response from people who love Metro. This is about a user interface that was improperly implemented. If it was done the right with a seamless transition, millions would not have a problem with it. I'm far from lazy. In fact, I'm learning something new everyday just for the pure satisfaction. However, Metro was terribly done and the majority voiced their opinions. Microsoft assessed the mess they created and now they are trying to redeem themselves. Kudos to them.

Yeah, it's pretty much laziness. The new system required a tiny bit of retraining, and that was just too much for some people, who just threw up their hands because it wasn't EXACTLY the way it was before (rolling eyes). It's ridiculous, as is most of the histrionic whining about it.

Robert Wade said,
Everyone is NOT waiting for the Start menu to return. Those of us who actually are capable of using Windows 8 have been fine and never missed the old Start menu. Backtracking is the wrong choice. Too many people are too lazy to learn the new way of doing things, forcing this retrofit. It's ridiculous.

I am sure all 4 of you can go out and have a beer to celebrate then

pmbAustin said,
Yeah, it's pretty much laziness. The new system required a tiny bit of retraining, and that was just too much for some people, who just threw up their hands because it wasn't EXACTLY the way it was before (rolling eyes). It's ridiculous, as is most of the histrionic whining about it.

Why people should go through retraining to do something they do not like? What you are talking about are customers who pay money to buy a product not employees who get paid.

pmbAustin said,
How do they know they 'do not like' something when they've made ZERO effort to learn or understand or experience it?

I am curious: What kind of telemetry do you have access to in order to back up such a final and definitive assertion?

If Microsoft is keen on doing this, than these options need "modernized," and added into the Control Panel and Settings windows. Half a**ing these options into the Taskbar Properties really looks cheap.

I agree with you for a change. The UI is half a$$ed. It is not fluid nor seamless. I believe there needs to be one interface for different types of users. An all out Modern UI with all the bells and whistles for users like you and a business oriented UI for people like me. Mixing the two even after the last updates looks terrible.

Actually i'm in agreement as well. There's too much of a mix between modern and classic for accessing settings.
I know it's going to mean a double handle, but having the options in both areas would be quite handy. (And base it on whether you're running in 'classic' or 'modern' mode perhaps?)

As long as there's an easy way to get to the start screen from the start menu, I'm cool. Even better if you can go directly to the all apps screen from the start menu.

Those Windows 7 icons completely destroy the sexiness of the modern look. Anyways, I REALLY hope to God that Microsoft will focus on Metro in the near future. Both of these "updates" have done nothing but revert functionality. I really want to see more functionality come to the Metro side, that way Microsoft can hopefully spur app development, deprecate older features, and clear up the code base a little bit.

I agree - to an extent. I don't mind the older features coming back as options, but I don't want or need them personally.

I don't want a titlebar in Metro - it gets in the way of triggering the sidebars. And I don't like how "in your face" Boot to Desktop is. I've answered dozens of people on the MS Community forums asking how to turn it off, since you need to disable Metro apps on the taskbar to completely suppress exit to desktop behavior.

These options to make 8 more familiar are a good thing overall, but they need to be user-selected.

If I wanted an OS that looked and acted just like Windows 7, I'd be running Windows 7.

Yeah, the whole mechanism of exiting Store apps acts depending both on the "When I sign in or close apps on all screens, go to desktop instead of Start" and "Show Windows Store apps on the taskbar" being toggled on or off. Also, it feels weird that instead of the hand icon, we get the same default cursor when dragging Store apps down.

Dot Matrix said,
Those Windows 7 icons completely destroy the sexiness of the modern look. Anyways, I REALLY hope to God that Microsoft will focus on Metro in the near future. Both of these "updates" have done nothing but revert functionality. I really want to see more functionality come to the Metro side, that way Microsoft can hopefully spur app development, deprecate older features, and clear up the code base a little bit.

I am curious, what functionalities did you loose with 8.1 and Update 1? Unless of course you consider a wider range of options a regression.

Dot Matrix said,
I REALLY hope to God that Microsoft will focus on Metro in the near future. Both of these "updates" have done nothing but revert functionality. I really want to see more functionality come to the Metro side, that way Microsoft can hopefully spur app development, deprecate older features, and clear up the code base a little bit.

You hate it but the rest of the world loves it.

Start Menu is from Win95 too! Now decide, do y'all want the "classic" Start Menu and "classic" icons, or the Modern Start Screen and Modern icons? Remember, no mix 'n' match allowed! :p

PotatoAlchemist said,

And some of them from Windows XP, and some of them even 98 or 95! :p

Yeah but not the stuff you see every day

mrp04 said,
Yeah but not the stuff you see every day
Different people see different stuff every day, so why leave some out? If they're gonna refresh the icons might as well do them all or else people will continue complaining about the old ones still present in some forgotten nook and cranny of the OS.

Bring on those options, baby! Who wants to use a start menu, can use it. Who wants to keep the start screen, can use it. Should have been this way from the beginning.

Couldn't agree more.
The start menu is an iconic feature of Windows that, IMHO, shouldn't have been messed with to begin with. I dare say that some Linux distro probably had one before, and people will scream that it was ripped off, but I certainly am a believer in giving people options rather than force a whole new way of thinking on current users.
Those that despise the start menu, you'll be happy that you still have the icon menu screen thing.
Those that prefer a classic start menu, myself included, will be happy to use Win8.....
......although I'll actually need to load it onto my pc/lappy first.

It is only iconic if you are pointing-device (and specifically MOUSE) centric - not all Windows users - even those without touch support at all, are that way. That is - from what I have observed - the REAL issue with Windows 8 - pointing-device-centric users are no longer kissed up to as they have been since Windows 95 (when the Start menu debuted - remember, it didn't cross over to NT until NT 4).

PGHammer said,
It is only iconic if you are pointing-device (and specifically MOUSE) centric - not all Windows users - even those without touch support at all, are that way.

Pointing-device centric?

Sure... if the first time you ever used Windows was with Windows 8... then you're probably not pointing-device centric.

Otherwise... everyone who came from Windows 7, Vista, XP or before... came from a pointing-device centric world. That's over a billion people today.

There are more people who come from a pointing-device centric computing experience than haven't. That's neither good nor bad... it's just how it is.

You say not all Windows users are pointing-device centric... but A LOT of them are :)

And we haven't mentioned apps. Even if you like the Start Screen and Metro apps... you're still spending a lot of time using traditional pointing-device centric desktop apps. There can't be too many people who upgraded to Windows 8 and solely rely on Metro apps.

The pointing-device centric nature of Windows... however archaic it may be... isn't going away anytime soon.

As long as it's optional I'm cool. :-)
I love the Start screen now. Didn't like how in Update 1 they made the Desktop boot by default... but glad the option was there.

Romero said,
That was a concession to all the desktop owners whining about Metro.

It is interesting how zealots are compelled to characterize people who dissent as whiners...

Do you deny the fact that all the whining was what made MS sit up and listen? Or do you think the Start Menu lovers were all stoically sitting quietly in a corner, not at all complaining till the cows came home? FWIW I would have been complaining as well, loudly, if something I liked was snatched away from me. In this case IMO the replacement was far better, but I'm not against all you complainers having the Menu back as an option. In fact, I'm happy precisely because I hope it will finally put an end to all (well most of) the endless whining and hand-wringing. Can we move on now, or at least whine about something else for a change? This is just getting to be so old and tiresome and even the arguments run the same well-worn course every time this BS comes up for discussion.

Romero said,
Do you deny the fact that all the whining was what made MS sit up and listen? Or do you think the Start Menu lovers were all stoically sitting quietly in a corner, not at all complaining till the cows came home? FWIW I would have been complaining as well, loudly, if something I liked was snatched away from me. In this case IMO the replacement was far better, but I'm not against all you complainers having the Menu back as an option. In fact, I'm happy precisely because I hope it will finally put an end to all (well most of) the endless whining and hand-wringing. Can we move on now, or at least whine about something else for a change? This is just getting to be so old and tiresome and even the arguments run the same well-worn course every time this BS comes up for discussion.

I am afraid that you missed the point of my observation: the fact that someone disagree with my opinion does not mean that he/she is necessarily a whiner, rather someone with different opinions or preferences which is perfectly understandable; I have never been a fan of the "Cultural Revolution"....

No, but what makes a whiner one is the act of whining about something. That was exactly what some were doing, continuously, and I am being completely factual when terming them so. Whether they had opinions opposed to mine or not doesn't change what they were up to.

Romero said,
No, but what makes a whiner one is the act of whining about something. That was exactly what some were doing, continuously, and I am being completely factual when terming them so. Whether they had opinions opposed to mine or not doesn't change what they were up to.

"to all the desktop owners whining about Metro" where "all" is the word you used.
Maybe next time you will complain about some situation that does not fit you.... someone will characterize you a whiner as well regardless of the merits of your arguments.

Ok, all the ones endlessly whining about Metro were... wait for it... whiners. If that's not common sense I don't know what is. If I whine and complain endlessly about something, no matter if I think I am right, I would be whining and complaining. You can choose to term whiners as something else if it makes you feel better, doesn't change facts in the least.

That's what it should have been to begin with on the desktops, full screen version on mobile as before. A bajillion shortcuts from a bunch of development tools and such is just awful to look at in "wall of icons" mode, plus losing out on jumplists, ugh. Rather nice looking too, best of both worlds.

And it took close to three years from XP RTM until SP2 final was released. Although even if Windows XP was having its own heavy startup, businesses and consumers opted for it because mostly they skipped a whole release to get to XP (mainly 2000) or were unsatisfied with Windows ME.

Windows 8 went RTM in August 2011 and around that time this year we'll get the second feature pack for Windows 8.1. Quite the accomplishments for a rapid release cycle.

Melfster said,
its funny Windows XP was cluster #### and wasn't successful until service pack 2 the same could happen to windows 8.

Keep repeating that lie over and over again.

Eventually it will be true. I guess 40% of us who switched to XP before 2004 didn't exist and were not happy.

Melfster said,
its funny Windows XP was cluster #### and wasn't successful until service pack 2 the same could happen to windows 8.

That's why they're calling it a "feature pack" now. :p

PotatoAlchemist said,
Windows 8 went RTM in August 2011 and around that time this year we'll get the second feature pack for Windows 8.1. Quite the accomplishments for a rapid release cycle.

What? Windows 8 RTM'd in 2012, not 2011.

brainsuck said,
When will Windows 8 BETA TEST END isn't rc 4 now

You appear confused. Beta testing is to ensure stability and attack bugs. Not to add features.

Russell Green said,

You appear confused. Beta testing is to ensure stability and attack bugs. Not to add features.


Have you ever been a MS beta tester? Based on your statement I guess not....

brainsuck said,
When will Windows 8 BETA TEST END isn't rc 4 now

To be fair, Windows 8 is a really fast and stable OS. the only two problems were the removal of start menu which was a bad move and the confusion of two different world of full screen apps optimized for touch and traditional apps.which they addressed both with return of start menu, pinning apps to task bar and closing them using familiar close button instead of awkward dragging to the bottom of the screen.

Cool. This will hopefully end the cluster#### known as Windows 8, and we can all move on. I really hope they learn their lesson from this, and NOT just blatantly disregard the howls of hate from the alpha and beta folks before releasing another monstrosity such as the Start Screen.

Still, if the lack of native Start Menu was the holdup from consumers adopting Windows 8.1 from earlier versions, does this mean that by that standard, Windows 8.1 is a better Windows version and there's little to no reason staying with 7 for example?

DConnell said,
You're getting what you want and still complaining? Some people are never happy.

Its true that some people complains no matter what but I really think Windows 8 with coming start menu is what it should have been at first place. he has the point

SharpGreen said,
As long as it can be disabled and I can still use the start screen, fine with me.

No, it should be "as long as it can be ENABLED.

This crap needs to be disabled by default.

Crimson Rain said,

No, it should be "as long as it can be ENABLED.

This crap needs to be disabled by default.

Sorry, you are in the insignificant minority. One look at every change made to Windows 8 from 2013 onwards will tell you that.

Unattend.xml, OneDrive syncing options, integrated registry tricks, there are ways to automatize on putting the Start Screen being the default choice instead, if it will be the other way around. :p

Lord Method Man said,

Sorry, you are in the insignificant minority. One look at every change made to Windows 8 from 2013 onwards will tell you that.

You mean the improvements like metro apps on the taskbar to make metro even more prominent in the OS?

Studio384 said,
You mean the improvements like metro apps on the taskbar to make metro even more prominent in the OS?

And the windowed Store apps option will get a more complete and tighter integration in that regard, which will definitely benefit a lot of users. I personally do like it having them in a separate screen space in fullscreen, so to speak, being "minimized" into the Metro-based recent apps list on the upper left corner.

But hey, with this upcoming update there will be significant choice options for all adopters, and I'm all in for it. Having supported and native functionalities included into the OS is beneficial for power and casual users alike.

That's funny. I find that when I use Win 7 today, it seems archaic and half-baked. And the Start Menu has been crap since XP.

Optional is nice. I do think I will use it, but no reason to not make it optional. Things are really starting to look good. At this pace, I can see a Windows 8u2 rollout being not only viable, but desirable option.

MS is making a really good recovery from 8 RTM.

Lord Method Man said,

Sorry, you are in the insignificant minority. One look at every change made to Windows 8 from 2013 onwards will tell you that.


I don't honestly think people who like the Start screen are a miniority. Just that people who hate it are screaming louder.

SharpGreen said,

I don't honestly think people who like the Start screen are a miniority. Just that people who hate it are screaming louder.

This. Everyone but some diehard techies love windows 8. If in any case, a normal person doesn't like it, it is usually because he couldn't figure it out. Just explaining to him for 2 minutes gets him in the same group.

On the other hand, OMG METRO IS ######## I WANT MY AERO BACK ppl are just too loud on the internet.

DConnell said,
Cool, now if they just make it optional, that'll be one less point of contention for the pro-and anti-Modern camps.

Well, based on what has been MS behavior after Sinofsky " departure", meaning the offering of different ways to interact with the OS, my guess is that it is very likely that the Start Menu, regardless of the way it will be implemented, will have the option to be enabled or disabled.
As always options is the best strategy.

DConnell said,
Cool, now if they just make it optional, that'll be one less point of contention for the pro-and anti-Modern camps.

Doesnt matter if it is optional or not. People will still find a way to complain about it.

techbeck said,

Doesnt matter if it is optional or not. People will still find a way to complain about it.

I'll complain if I don't have an option of complaining.

I'm with WZor and also expect it to come as a free update to Win8 rather than only with Win9 that we'll need to buy.

How do you know, as far as rumors go, Windows 9 was planned to be Windows 8.2 which was another free update for Windows 8. Microsoft decided to go with Windows 9 to get rid of the Windows 8 brand.

Still too early for another major Windows release (that's in a new line, like Windows 9 is to be) in my opinion. Rapid release cycles work better with feature and major updates like Update 1 was, or the upcoming second one this fall.

I somehow dislike these new feature updates wich yes, they are frequent but the Boom is not that big like it happened when Vista arrived. I still wait for a MS OS wich will bring new technology and features on large scale.

PotatoAlchemist said,
Still too early for another major Windows release (that's in a new line, like Windows 9 is to be) in my opinion. Rapid release cycles work better with feature and major updates like Update 1 was, or the upcoming second one this fall.


It's really not. With the new rapid release schedule we'd be right on schedule or starting to get a bit behind.

what will be left for Windows 9, if the Start Menu is returned? Um, they could allow customization to Start Screen, select tile background colors, text colors, custom Widescreen scrolling backgrounds, would be nice. Or Aero as a choice?

But after that what would be left? ohhh, right a new App store with useful apps, but why wait years for that? Maybe, they will decide to skip releasing a Windows 9 all together. No I doubt that, Windows 8 is so disliked, they could still use Windows 9 as a disguise in hopes of getting old Window users back. But the just cost of upgrading still might not do it, and what about all those unsold Windows 8 machines.

No way you look at it, Microsoft seems to keep shooting themselves in the foot, poor toes.

Yup, Balmer out, Start Menu, aggressive ads and promotions, Microsoft taking feedback serious... sounds good and I won't complain but they seem desperate. VERY desperate (release cycle= shut up and eat fatboys! Fanboys aherm. )
/s /r /q

Studio384 said,
How do you know, as far as rumors go, Windows 9 was planned to be Windows 8.2 which was another free update for Windows 8. Microsoft decided to go with Windows 9 to get rid of the Windows 8 brand.

What's with all the talk of Windows 9? Microsoft hasn't even announced it.

Their best approach would be a free update only for existing Windows 8 users.

Customers wanting to upgrade from previous versions of Windows can pay the same price as Windows 8... or maybe slightly less ;).. and of course they can stop selling Windows 8 heh.

Funny how Windows versioning is becoming only very loosely associated with Windows branding:

Vista is version 6.0
7 is actually 6.1
8 is actually 6.2
8.1 is actually 6.3
9 will probably be 6.4. LOL.

Dot Matrix said,

What's with all the talk of Windows 9? Microsoft hasn't even announced it.


We need something to hope for. Currently windows 8/8.1 cannot be considered real windows... to me it is just some failed experiment...

DaveBG said,

We need something to hope for. Currently windows 8/8.1 cannot be considered real windows... to me it is just some failed experiment...

What's not real about it? Microsoft has unified their operating systems in a way no one else has come close to doing.

Mr Nom Nom's said,

No one ever reads or watches videos here hence the reason there are the same ridiculous arguments over topics that have already been settled.

It was just two minutes long on the whole BUILD 2014 keynote, perhaps just different things took priority in it? :p

But then again except very similar news articles over it soon for a few more times.

PotatoAlchemist said,
It was just two minutes long on the whole BUILD 2014 keynote, perhaps just different things took priority in it? :p

But then again except very similar news articles over it soon for a few more times.

It might have been only 2 minutes long but I would have expected a website filled with people who are supposed to be 'tech enthusiasts' to have actually watched the keynote from start to finish. Why even hang around on a website if one doesn't have any interested in technology then?

Arrivance said,
Guys, you do know that when they announced it, they said:

'we will be making this available to all Windows 8.1 users as an update.'

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=G4S5F0Ckrc8

You've not been keeping up with the news, have you? After the Build keynote Myerson wrote a blog post ( http://blogs.windows.com/windo...on-day-1-of-build-2014.aspx ) where he said these two things (Start Menu and Modern apps in a window) will be coming in "the next iteration of Windows". There was sufficient ambiguity to lead columnists and commentators to suggest that they were deliberately being vague about whether "next iteration" meant Win8.1 Update 2 or Win9. Now we're hearing from WZor and MJF ( http://www.zdnet.com/microsoft...r-is-not-enough-7000028638/ ) that the Start Menu might come in Win8.1 Update 2 as early as August or September, but the Modern apps in a window feature is being deferred to Win9. Just because something was shown in a Build keynote doesn't mean it's a firm shipping commitment, especially when neither the exact OS version nor ETA are mentioned. Until we receive confirmation from Microsoft all this is rumor (not if these things will come, but when and in which version), however I am inclined to believe that the Start Menu will definitely return in Win8.1 Update 2 and won't be delayed till Win9 as some were claiming after reading Myerson's blog post. There, now you've been brought up to date. You're welcome. :)

Edited by Romero, Apr 23 2014, 1:58am :

Dot Matrix said,

What's with all the talk of Windows 9? Microsoft hasn't even announced it.

Unofficially, Windows 9 is code named Threshold and supposedly to be released sometime in 2015. I don't think Microsoft knows what to do at this point, and are just stumbling around in the dark.

oh-hum, they are soooo boring, I just don't think MS can compete any more. They simply have no innovations, they try to make their monies by copying everyone else.

Yes, sitting on the outside an ignorant person like you magically knows all about what they're doing and how they are supposedly "stumbling in the dark". All I see others doing is copying left and right too, including the UI from MS.

My my Windows 8 fans are truly an angry group, why would I want to become like you.

When you are my age, I have gone through every phase of Microsoft, there wasn't even a Microsoft until, I was 15. I can tell you, they are in a mess, look at the numbers, mate, and if switching back and forth, taking out functions, then putting them back. YES, I think they are stumbling in the dark, trying to figure out, what the hell to do. So, don't start making accusations, you cant support.. I may be ignorant, but I am not a stupid ass like you.

Only a stupid ass makes comments about them not being able to compete any more and making monies copying and other such nonsense. For someone you accuse of not be able to compete they seem to be doing fine for themselves. People who like to pontificate have been accusing them of being in a mess ever since the WinME and Vista days, and will continue to do so for decades to come. I see them innovating with Metro 2.0, WP (Cortana etc.) and a whole bunch of other things and don't foresee them collapsing (as many love to predict) any time soon.