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

View more comments

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.

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.

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.

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.

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!

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.

Commenting is disabled on this article.