Do you want the start menu in Windows 8?

[Dot Matrix]

If open the start screen you use the "Windows key' + Page up or Page down you can move the start screen from screen to screen. Only problem is I don't want it taking up ANY of my monitors.

Why not? That's what running multiple monitors was designed to do. They allow you secondary tasks - like opening Start - without distracting your main work.

Unless this is a beef with fullscreen in general.

[Nick H. Supervisor]

Why not? That's what running multiple monitors was designed to do.

No. Multiple monitors are used to provide you with more space to have more documents open at the same time without having to flip back and forth. The start screen takes a step back in that regard, forcing one application to take up the whole screen which some people don't want.

[Dot Matrix]

No. Multiple monitors are used to provide you with more space to have more documents open at the same time without having to flip back and forth. The start screen takes a step back in that regard, forcing one application to take up the whole screen which some people don't want.

But Start doesn't stay open long enough to be a distraction in that regard. Search what your looking for, or click a tile, and you're done. It takes all but a few seconds.

[vcfan]

nope,cant say I miss it either.

[ITFiend]

If you hit the Windows Key on the keyboard, Start for me has always opened on the center "main" monitor. If your a big mouse user, which many here "claim" to be, then it should take you less than a second to move the mouse over to the other monitor and press the Start Corner.

The Start Screen & Charm Bar is not tied to any monitor when you use a corner click or touch to open it. However if you call on it via ctrl-escape, Windows key, or Windows Key + C or F or Q or W, it will always open on the monitor it was last in focus on. Its behavior is always consistent. I like its behavior in these regards because its quick and easy to change which monitor it defaults to.

Really, the only thing I absolutely hate is that i'm limited to one Modern UI session. It makes, for example, the Netflix app completely worthless to me. My wife and I use my computer as the central media hub. Monitor #1 is always Netflix, Hulu, dvd/bluray playback, etc. Monitor 2 is always my main workspace and normally primary start screen focus. Monitor 3 is normally VDI/RDP sessions.

I love the Netflix app vs the Netflix website. But unless I RDP into a RemoteFX session on monitor 1 to run it, the app is completely worthless to me. I'd love to actually be able to run two start screens at once so monitor 1 could run Netflix, and monitor 2 could run a modern UI game.

That all said, Microsoft absolutely has to fix volume control in the modern UI space vs desktop space. Everything in the modern space is horribly loud vs the desktop, and its impossible at this point in time to make the volume in that space lower than desktop. So if I play Netflix on the desktop, but Pac-Man in the modern UI, I have to disable all sound within the Pac-Man app or its simply impossible to play any other media.

[Noir Angel]

The current start menu isn't disorganised :/ It displays folders in alphabetical order, and it has one big advantage over the start screen: folder support. I'd actually argue that it's the start screen with it's "splay icons all over the damn place" approach that's disorganised.

[+Warwagon MVC]

The current start menu isn't disorganised :/ It displays folders in alphabetical order, and it has one big advantage over the start screen: folder support. I'd actually argue that it's the start screen with it's "splay icons all over the damn place" approach that's disorganised.

Exactly when you show all programs on the start screen it looks like a conglomerate cluster ****. No seriously it does. For those who say "You can just start typing" ..well you can also do that in windows 7.

There have been ZERO individuals when shown the all programs list in Windows 8 thinks it looks better than the old start menu.

[Noir Angel]

It's REALLY bad with Nero and it's plethora of help files. Those practically turn the start screen into a visual dumping ground.

[+hedleigh Subscriber²]

Because I feel the Start Screen is more useful than the Start Menu and going back to it would be a step backwards. Right now on my Start Screen I have my apps pinned into groups how I use them. This is better for me than a list that can only extend to the top of my screen. I have a 16:9 screen so thats not a lot of space to use. And the Programs listed in the Start Menu are either randomly generated by use or I have to pin them in a list. The programs I've pinned onto my Start Menu wouldn't fit on my Start Menu.

As I said, I don't have a problem with those who like the new layout. I don't like it though.

If the choice was there how does that make it a backward step?

You wouldn't have to enable it if you didn't want it.

I think all the people complaining about those who want it back are completely missing the point, End User Choice!

If you think that's a bad idea, I believe you have lost sight of what "Personal Computing" even means.

[Dot Matrix]

As I said, I don't have a problem with those who like the new layout. I don't like it though.

If the choice was there how does that make it a backward step?

You wouldn't have to enable it if you didn't want it.

I think all the people complaining about those who want it back are completely missing the point, End User Choice!

If you think that's a bad idea, I believe you have lost sight of what "Personal Computing" even means.

It would have been a backwards step because holding onto the legacy baggage is what's getting Windows into trouble in the first place. Windows held on to so much legacy crap that it made it unable to work on newer devices. There comes a point where you have to let that go.

It wouldn't have taken long for some dip**** blogger to re-enable the menu and cry fowl that Windows sux0r for tablets.

[Panda X]

In XP and I believe Vista as well you still had the option to use the old Start Menu, why not in 8?

[Noir Angel]

No, what is getting them into trouble is trying to do everything by bastardising their products, then claiming that it's progress simply because it's a change. I don't know why some people seem to think that change automatically = better.

[neo158]

No, those who want the start screen can use that and those who want the start menu back can use startisback, Start8 or classic shell. I don't see Microsoft bringing back a nearly two decade old paradigm.

[+hedleigh Subscriber²]

It would have been a backwards step because holding onto the legacy baggage is what's getting Windows into trouble in the first place. Windows held on to so much legacy crap that it made it unable to work on newer devices. There comes a point where you have to let that go.

It wouldn't have taken long for some dip**** blogger to re-enable the menu and cry fowl that Windows sux0r for tablets.

And again, how is choice a bad thing?

There are already 3rd party apps that achieve it without breaking your precious layout. Seems that history is starting to repeat itself. Everything that made windows what it is today (except for the OS itself) came about from 3rd parties making the system easier and nicer to use. Sound, mouse, more than 2 colours etc.

OT;

I remember laughing at my windows friends trying to play games using a keyboard. My lovely Amiga came with all that built in. Nearly 10 years before it was possible on windows.

I also sit 3 to 4 feet from my monitor, couldn't reach it if I tried. Unless I stand up of course.

Also, is 8 still able to have high contrast and low contrast stuff for those with bad eye sight? Why wasn't that removed if it is still there?

It's only one particular aspect that I want to see kept and you call it not keeping up! Give me a break. I haven't asked for anything to be removed that you like. Pity the same can't be said for the other side of this argument.

[Dashel]

In practice I find I rarely have to "scan" the apps screen much at all because the program icon usually just jumps out at me (which is a benefit of having all the icons right on the screen and not buried in subfolders) and then I can launch it with one click instead of having to click on each subfolder (and deal with the annoying expand/contract behavior, or the frustrating flyout bottlenecks in 9x/XP). If you do want to browse by folder you can zoom out, and this works better in *some* cases but IMO the *majority* of the time the flattened view is better (especially since if you don't know the name of the program - and so can't use search - there's a good chance you don't remember which subfolder it's in either), so it's the right default.

If icons were meant to be the scanning target, they would have used bigger sizes (a la LaunchPad). While I will give you that is easier when you can pull it off, its shooting a long 3 when a drive in the lane is a higher percentage shot. A flattened view is only better for people who don't take advantage of organization - ie most people who never liked the 95-2000 menu nor bothered to organize it.

Personally, I prefer no more than four columns usually (no more than 6-8" horizontal, at half screen height) so All.P crams in 60%+ useless information.

It really comes down to lack of any view options in Metro that we all have with Explorer, when is a symptomatic of Win8 at large. Its a conglomeration of half assed attempts and starts. It may be the future (which is fine with me), but the PRESENT is mediocre at best. We're simply betting on MS to fix it at a future point and that the paradigm will pan out.

Its good that MS decided to update the Start Menu, unfortunately they done such basic job and its just not a practical replacement, thats why people want the old one back. It feels like Im using a start menu replacement app, not the next great interface from Microsoft.

I just don't know why people are so accepting of removing choice and features simply because MS management decided it was time to ship. The WP8 XBM/Zune fiasco is the same root problem. They put out a **** poor replacment and killed the much more elegant, polished, and functional one.

I believe it is quite valid. I have my mouse speed at full and a 23 inch monitor, I find it quite annoying.

Users shouldn't have to reduce their precision to compensate for more travel since its even more pronounced on a trackpad, one of the mobility devices that are supposed to be the focus of the 'future'.

Additionally, the StartScreen being a full screen annoyance for searches isn't about focus, its about periphery. You can be aware (and quickly reposition to) of a Window while shifting focus to Start and back again.

I think all the people complaining about those who want it back are completely missing the point, End User Choice!

If you think that's a bad idea, I believe you have lost sight of what "Personal Computing" even means.

Amen

[Growled Member]

On a touch screen I probably wouldn't care but on my old laptop without touch screen I'm not going to use it without a start menu, regardless of the OS.

[neo158]

Those of you who want the start menu back, see if you can answer this:

If I were to hand you two tablets, one running Windows 8 and one running Windows 7, which would you choose?

[Panda X]

Those of you who want the start menu back, see if you can answer this:

If I were to hand you two tablets, one running Windows 8 and one running Windows 7, which would you choose?

Windows 8 isn't a tablet only OS.

[Xerxes]

No, I don't want the start menu back. Back during the Consumer/Release Previews I hated the start screen and wanted the start menu back badly and immediately installed Start8 soon as I found out about it. However, you know what? I prefer the start screen now and it doesn't bother me. I'm happy with the start menu in Win7 and start screen in Win8. Long story short, most people will adapt and be fine in their own time. There will always be people who hate it for various reasons but that is life, we will never achieve a 100% consensus on what is better.

[neo158]

Windows 8 isn't a tablet only OS.

That doesn't answer the question.

[bandit_liberty_rumble]

That doesn't answer the question.

Uh, what exactly are you trying to prove with that question? How about this question:

If I were to hand you a tablet running a version of Windows 8 that included the option to have a Start menu appear on the Desktop, would you really be any worse off than another guy getting a tablet running Windows 8 as it exists now?

[+hedleigh Subscriber²]

Those of you who want the start menu back, see if you can answer this:

If I were to hand you two tablets, one running Windows 8 and one running Windows 7, which would you choose?

And that's where your assumptions fall apart, we're talking about the desktop not tablets.

To answer your question, neither as I don't use or want a tablet.

[neo158]

And that's where your assumptions fall apart, we're talking about the desktop not tablets.

To answer your question, neither as I don't use or want a tablet.

Actually, I'm trying to prove that all of you who want the start menu back would choose the Windows 8 tablet and install a start menu replacement anyway, just like on your desktops and laptops.

[Jim K Global Moderator]

Actually, I'm trying to prove that all of you who want the start menu back would choose the Windows 8 tablet and install a start menu replacement anyway, just like on your desktops and laptops.

Uh no...if I had a tablet the metro start thing would be perfectly acceptable. Start menu wouldn't be as handy because of its size on the smaller tablet.

Desktop though, the metro start thing....well...I echo pretty much everyone else out there that wants it but do not really want a 3rd party app. Which is why I test drove CP for a few months and went back to Win7.

[Scott Hellewell]

Yes, for a couple of reasons.

1. I wish that search results were combined.

2. Users used to having it are confused by it not existing.

3. We don't have time to train users and can't/don't want to wait to deploy new OSs.

4. Why should my apps close down or disappear when I want to do a search or look at live tiles.