Windows 8: The Boldest, Biggest Redesign in MS's History

[simplezz]

Then, they'll be happy to know the Start Button was never removed!

Yes it was. That little image that pops up if you hover the mouse in the position where the start menu was is just a link back to the start screen, not the start menu. You can deny reality all you want, but I've used Windows 8 quite a bit, and it's annoying as hell having to switch back and forth between the start screen and the deskop. I wish Microsoft had gone one way or the other, not the hybrid mess we have at the moment.

[phailyoor]

Yes it was. That little image that pops up if you hover the mouse in the position where the start menu was is just a link back to the start screen, not the start menu. You can deny reality all you want, but I've used Windows 8 quite a bit, and it's annoying as hell having to switch back and forth between the start screen and the deskop. I wish Microsoft had gone one way or the other, not the hybrid mess we have at the moment.

The start screen is not really all that annoying. It does most of what the old start menu did. Yes it's worse than the old start menu, but it's not that bad.

[BeerFan]

Yes it was. That little image that pops up if you hover the mouse in the position where the start menu was is just a link back to the start screen, not the start menu. You can deny reality all you want, but I've used Windows 8 quite a bit, and it's annoying as hell having to switch back and forth between the start screen and the deskop. I wish Microsoft had gone one way or the other, not the hybrid mess we have at the moment.

Nah, they're probably talking about the "Start button" on the charms bar. Still, it's incredibly annoying to have to hover over a certain part of the screen, then click a button which takes you to another screen, upon which you have to right-click and then choose all apps, then scroll through the ugly, huge, space-wasting list and finally click on the program tile.

[BajiRav]

Alt tab? Works in dekstop... Also, it's no faster than the taskbar.

Which is only about 50% of the time. So on average it's not better. It's also worse if you're trying to access an app that is farther in the history.

Only really badly written apps waste CPU when idle. I mean realy, really badly written.

Pause playback in WMP-just hit space. There's also the "pause" button.

What?

You complained about mouse movement so I gave you example related to mouse movement.

p.s. to pause playback in WMP, you first need to switch to it and keystroke is Ctrl + P not space (when not in focus).

[phailyoor]

You complained about mouse movement so I gave you example related to mouse movement.

p.s. to pause playback in WMP, you first need to switch to it and keystroke is Ctrl + P not space (when not in focus).

P.S.

Switching to the last used app using the metro switcher and mouse is no faster than using the taskbar. It's the same mouse movement, though for apps that are not the most recent, the taskbar is a much better option.

[Dot Matrix]

Yes it was. That little image that pops up if you hover the mouse in the position where the start menu was is just a link back to the start screen, not the start menu. You can deny reality all you want, but I've used Windows 8 quite a bit, and it's annoying as hell having to switch back and forth between the start screen and the deskop. I wish Microsoft had gone one way or the other, not the hybrid mess we have at the moment.

The Start Screen was needed, IMO. It works better on most devices, looks better, and is more functional.

[phailyoor]

The Start Screen was needed, IMO. It works better on most devices, looks better, and is more functional.

Except for all of the devices with mice. Those don't count, right?

[Dot Matrix]

Except for all of the devices with mice. Those don't count, right?

Not sure what you're talking about, because it works fine with my mouse, and the trackpad on my laptop. Or are you just trolling for a response now?

[mrp04]

Not sure what you're talking about, because it works fine with my mouse, and the trackpad on my laptop. Or are you just trolling for a response now?

Some people you need to give up on convincing because they won't be convinced. The only way they'll realize they were wrong is when they're forced to a use a Windows 8 computer and then slowly realize that they can do things just fine in it.

[phailyoor]

Some people you need to give up on convincing because they won't be convinced. The only way they'll realize they were wrong is when they're forced to a use a Windows 8 computer and then slowly realize that they can do things just fine in it.

It works. It works fine. It's just worse. It's worse than the old start menu in many, many ways. It works. I can use it. I have been using it for months without using a third party replacement. That still does not change the fact that it is worse.

[BeerFan]

Some people you need to give up on convincing because they won't be convinced. The only way they'll realize they were wrong is when they're forced to a use a Windows 8 computer and then slowly realize that they can do things just fine in it.

That's the poorest logic ever! Sure, you can do what you need. But it's much less intuitive and more complicated. If Windows versions are measured by progress in a forward direction, this one doesn't get a good grade.

[BajiRav]

P.S.

Switching to the last used app using the metro switcher and mouse is no faster than using the taskbar. It's the same mouse movement, though for apps that are not the most recent, the taskbar is a much better option.

I clearly mentioned that switching is faster when you are in upper half of the screen while taskbar is faster if you are in lower half.

[phailyoor]

I clearly mentioned that switching is faster when you are in upper half of the screen while taskbar is faster if you are in lower half.

So on average, it's just about the same.??I also said that too. It's not better.

[Calum Veteran]

Except for all of the devices with mice. Those don't count, right?

It works better on devices with mice. That's what I've found, after many months of heavy use.

The Start Menu is small, cumbersome, and messy; whereas the Start screen is neither of those things, and it provides very useful information in the form of live tiles (to many of us). Funnily enough, the Start Menu only took up a small portion of one's large screen, yet many people who dislike the "'Metro' experience" and would like the Start Menu back complain that "Metro" apps don't make use of their large screen very well.

[phailyoor]

It works better on devices with mice. That's what I've found, after many months of heavy use.

The Start Menu is small, cumbersome, and messy; whereas the Start screen is neither of those things, and it provides very useful information in the form of live tiles (to many of us). Funnily enough, the Start Menu only took up a small portion of one's large screen, yet many people who dislike the "'Metro' experience" and would like the Start Menu back complain that "Metro" apps don't make use of their large screen very well.

Why do you think so???The only advantage that the start screen has it the ability to have more items in it at once.??If you don't happen to need >20 items in the start menu, the start screen is somewhat slower.??You can't deny that.

Why do you think so???The only advantage that the start screen has it the ability to have more items in it at once.??If you don't happen to need >20 items in the start menu, the start screen is somewhat slower.??You can't deny that. It's perfectly usable with a mouse. It's also worse.

[Calum Veteran]

Why do you think so? The only advantage that the start screen has it the ability to have more items in it at once. If you don't happen to need >20 items in the start menu, the start screen is somewhat slower. You can't deny that. It's perfectly usable with a mouse. It's also worse.

I think so for the reason you stated?the ability for the Start screen to show more items if required?but I also believe the benefits of the Start screen outweigh any the Start Menu may have had (e.g. the live tiles). It certainly isn't slower. It takes the same amount of time to press Start and click a tile or search for an app, as the actions are the same one uses to achieve those tasks with the Start Menu. It may seem slower to you because the Start screen covers the screen; perhaps it's an illusion? But the time and effort to select a program or search for a program is the same whether one is using the Start screen or Start Menu, unless either 1) the screen is large and they have more items showing on the Start screen than they'd have showing on the Start Menu or 2) the programs in their Start Menu were tucked away in folders and they didn't use the search function; in both cases, using the Start screen would be quicker.

[Denis W. Veteran]

While I don't take much issue with the Start Screen, there is one annoyance: if I'm reading a tutorial on some site and it asks to open a folder path, I'd usually open Start on Vista/7 and key in the path in the search box while I read off the path in my browser window. Obviously with the fullscreen Start Screen this isn't possible in Windows 8.

Sure, I could use WIN+R instead, or open an Explorer window and key it into the address bar, or I could copy and paste the path into the Start Screen. Force of habit is hard to break.

[Calum Veteran]

Frankly, neither you or Dot or any of the other 'least common denominators' are in a position to make such judgements so kindly, <snipped>.

Lemme guess: You don't really like Windows 8 that much, and you're a person who likes to be biased, so if you read positive experiences of Windows 8, you straight away dismiss them and believe they're wrong or biased, just to suit your view based on ignorance. Am I right? :)

Okay. You keep being unreasonable, while the rest of us engage in mature, meaningful discussion, like the adults we are (Y)

[PGHammer]

While I don't take much issue with the Start Screen, there is one annoyance: if I'm reading a tutorial on some site and it asks to open a folder path, I'd usually open Start on Vista/7 and key in the path in the search box while I read off the path in my browser window. Obviously with the fullscreen Start Screen this isn't possible in Windows 8.

Sure, I could use WIN+R instead, or open an Explorer window and key it into the address bar, or I could copy and paste the path into the Start Screen. Force of habit is hard to break.

And that's where the *unintuitiveness* comes from.

The Start menu - like it or not - has been around since Windows 95; therefore, if you have never used any version of Windows NT (and especially not NT 3.x), you would have been under the impression that Start menu=Win32 (from a user's POV).

The wrench in that line of thinking, however, is that Windows NT - the original NT 3.1 - while having the 1.0 Win32 API, had the same UI as Windows 3.1, it's Win16 brother - by design.

The very reason the Start menu was added to Windows 95 was because of the explosion in the use of pointing devices (largely sparked by Windows 3.x - despite the UX itself being heavily biased in favor of keyboards).

So, merely going back to Windows 3.x, that's two decades that mouse usage has had to take root - not exactly an easy habit to break.

[Dot Matrix]

While I don't take much issue with the Start Screen, there is one annoyance: if I'm reading a tutorial on some site and it asks to open a folder path, I'd usually open Start on Vista/7 and key in the path in the search box while I read off the path in my browser window. Obviously with the fullscreen Start Screen this isn't possible in Windows 8.

While you are right, it is still possible to type in Explorer paths. Perhaps copy & paste?

[cropcircles]

We all know this is a bold step in some direction and it's obvious MS doesn't communicate well with the public on how this transition will take place as an OS upgrade or replacement, or IMO an OS-Mod ! Next will be all the new touchscreen devices you'll "be recommended" to buy to get the full W8 experience pre-installed on your new device of course. It'll be interesting to see how MS begins advertising after it's release.

[HSoft]

In the end Microsoft have created a good tablet and phone OS but a very poor desktop OS.

[siah1214]

While you are right, it is still possible to type in Explorer paths. Perhaps copy & paste?

Either copy paste or win+r and type it into the run dialog.

[PGHammer]

Either copy paste or win+r and type it into the run dialog.

Actually, you can even type it into the File Explorer path (ala Windows Explorer, or even Windows/NR 3.x File Manager). (Yes - that trick's been around that long. And it still works.)

[Dot Matrix]

In the end Microsoft have created a good tablet and phone OS but a very poor desktop OS.

Huh? It's an excellent desktop OS, if you ask me. The desktop side of it blows Windows 7 out of the water, and the speed of the OS beats all.