Do you want the start menu in Windows 8?


Do you want the start menu in Windows 8  

631 members have voted

  1. 1. Do you want the start menu in Windows 8?

    • Yes
      351
    • No
      280


Recommended Posts

Those are horrible examples. A rotary dialer is not faster than a keypad, but the start menu in some cases is faster than the start screen.

Nothing is faster than Search, and the Start Screen has that. That and app pinning are the only things you should ever need in an app launcher.

Those are horrible examples. A rotary dialer is not faster than a keypad, but the start menu in some cases is faster than the start screen.

The large dial on the television, or the rotary on the phone, could easily be argued to be faster than digital buttons, in some special cases.

I still believe that they're perfectly apt. In fact, I think you've helped to show why they are better examples than I had even intended.

I don't even know why the zealots even defend windows 8 anymore, at the retail level we are seeing sales of new pcs have hit a brick wall mostly due to windows 8 and that abortion of a start screen.

Windows 8 is not a consumer friendly OS by any means, the average consumer wants a start menu, they want to be able to boot their machine and go to work without having to learn keyboard shortcuts or having to find hidden menus or anything else the 'metro' garbage has to offer them, I can't count how many customers who see 'metro' for the first time literally back up and away from the computer and go somewhere else, it happens countless time every day.

  • Like 3

I don't even know why the zealots even defend windows 8 anymore, at the retail level we are seeing sales of new pcs have hit a brick wall mostly due to windows 8 and that abortion of a start screen.

Windows 8 is not a consumer friendly OS by any means, the average consumer wants a start menu, they want to be able to boot their machine and go to work without having to learn keyboard shortcuts or having to find hidden menus or anything else the 'metro' garbage has to offer them, I can't count how many customers who see 'metro' for the first time literally back up and away from the computer and go somewhere else, it happens countless time every day.

You continue to say that, but continue to post no credible sources.

Windows 8 is not a consumer friendly OS by any means, the average consumer wants a start menu, they want to be able to boot their machine and go to work without having to learn keyboard shortcuts or having to find hidden menus or anything else the 'metro' garbage has to offer them, I can't count how many customers who see 'metro' for the first time literally back up and away from the computer and go somewhere else, it happens countless time every day.

I go into Best Buy just to watch it happen. It's hilarious. A lot of people hate Windows 8.

  • Like 2

You continue to say that, but continue to post no credible sources.

It's real easy to back up, simply go to your nearest best buy, microcenter, staples etc and watch it with your own eyes, or should I take video for you and post it here?

It's real easy to back up, simply go to your nearest best buy, microcenter, staples etc and watch it with your own eyes, or should I take video for you and post it here?

Yes make a video and post it. That would rock.

We have the Start Menu, it's size has just changed. I really don't see why there is so much negative reaction. No baiting, I just see why people are saying it's so bad. It's just bigger and the icons can now have additional info, nbd. Or is there something I am missing in the complains?

I don't miss it because I used to pin all the programs I used to the taskbar in win 7 so I just pin them all to the start menu and I,m away. it was a bit strange at first not seeing it there but I,m used to it now

Again.....Start Screen search is slower than Start Menu search, so that argument is invalid as well.

Windows 7 - Go to Start and begin typing control panel. There is it.

Windows 8 - Windows key and start typing control panel - click settings - and there it is.

Yeah, Start Screen searching is MUCH FASTER than Start Menu :rolleyes: Requiring an extra step already means it is slower. Or are we just changing the definition of fast and slow here?

Let's get real guys. There is NO DISADVANTAGE at ALL for providing an option. I have a keyboard and mouse, and always will unless something because available to read our minds or something.

I will NOT do programming, video editing, photoshop, illustrator, audio editing, and play call of duty (just a game as an example) on a 30" touch screen monitor. I will not have my hands up all day programming on a tough screen monitor. I will not have my hands up all day manipulating photos when I do a better job with a precision mouse. I will not be manipulating audio to the millisecond with a touch screen monitor, a mouse gives me more precision.

If you can do your jobs with a touch screen, great. But I cannot.

So again, there is absolutely no disadvantage to providing an option to the user. If it absolutely has to be forced, then only force it on users that DO have touch screen monitors.

"How can computing advance?" - Umm.......I do not have anything but a standard monitor, keyboard, and mouse. What good is it to force me when I do not have the stuff to take advantage of it? That is why I said, if NO touch screen devices are detected during install, give the user a choice.

You do realize this will make Windows 8 a major success, right? Look at all the people complaining. Windows 8 has enough under the hood changes to be more beneficial than Windows 7 even without messing with the new UI.

So what is the big deal? Why does it have to be forced on me when I do NOT have the hardware to take advantage of it? What good does it do?

Please explain to me what is so absolutely, end of the world, about providing a built-in start menu as a choice?

Again, the "computing cannot evolve" argument does not work because, like myself, many people do not have the hardware to take advantage of it.

  • Like 2

<snipped>

So what is the big deal? Why does it have to be forced on me when I do NOT have the hardware to take advantage of it? What good does it do?

Please explain to me what is so absolutely, end of the world, about providing a built-in start menu as a choice?

Again, the "computing cannot evolve" argument does not work because, like myself, many people do not have the hardware to take advantage of it.

Question has been asked a number of times and hasn't been answered as yet!

Hard to answer it without proving yourself to be against user choice I suppose.

The large dial on the television, or the rotary on the phone, could easily be argued to be faster than digital buttons, in some special cases.

:blink:

Have you ever used a rotary phone before? I would love to hear about these "special cases" that are quicker with a rotary phone than a dialpad.

Again.....Start Screen search is slower than Start Menu search, so that argument is invalid as well.

Windows 7 - Go to Start and begin typing control panel. There is it.

Windows 8 - Windows key and start typing control panel - click settings - and there it is.

Yeah, Start Screen searching is MUCH FASTER than Start Menu :rolleyes: Requiring an extra step already means it is slower. Or are we just changing the definition of fast and slow here?

Typed c-o-n, and it's the first option on the APPS screen. Not sure where you're getting this from, but it's not true.

post-420821-0-31115600-1360934203.png

I will NOT do programming, video editing, photoshop, illustrator, audio editing, and play call of duty (just a game as an example) on a 30" touch screen monitor. I will not have my hands up all day programming on a tough screen monitor. I will not have my hands up all day manipulating photos when I do a better job with a precision mouse. I will not be manipulating audio to the millisecond with a touch screen monitor, a mouse gives me more precision.

If you can do your jobs with a touch screen, great. But I cannot.

So again, there is absolutely no disadvantage to providing an option to the user. If it absolutely has to be forced, then only force it on users that DO have touch screen monitors.

"How can computing advance?" - Umm.......I do not have anything but a standard monitor, keyboard, and mouse. What good is it to force me when I do not have the stuff to take advantage of it? That is why I said, if NO touch screen devices are detected during install, give the user a choice.

You do realize this will make Windows 8 a major success, right? Look at all the people complaining. Windows 8 has enough under the hood changes to be more beneficial than Windows 7 even without messing with the new UI.

So what is the big deal? Why does it have to be forced on me when I do NOT have the hardware to take advantage of it? What good does it do?

Please explain to me what is so absolutely, end of the world, about providing a built-in start menu as a choice?

Again, the "computing cannot evolve" argument does not work because, like myself, many people do not have the hardware to take advantage of it.

Also, I'm not sure where you get this crazy idea that Metro is touch only, and it's taking away your keyboard. My keyboard works just fine in Windows 8 and Windows RT. ;)

Typed c-o-n, and it's the first option on the APPS screen. Not sure where you're getting this from, but it's not true.

post-420821-0-31115600-1360934203.png

Also, I'm not sure where you get this crazy idea that Metro is touch only, and it's taking away your keyboard. My keyboard works just fine in Windows 8 and Windows RT. ;)

The desktop stuff is not shown there, that is why settings is on that list. But like I said, the Start Menu showed everything without having to click a category.

That is fine, but it annoys the hell out of me to use keyboard and mouse with the new UI. You do know people like and do things differently right? So again, what is so absolutely horrible, end of the world, about giving the user a choice.

Installers should be able to detect if a touch device is connected. If one is NOT FOUND, give users a choice on what they want to do. How is that hurting anyone? Computing would not be "stuck" and the world would not end as you guys keep saying because I, and many others, do not have the hardware for all of this to be MORE beneficial than the traditional desktop.

There is NO advantage to desktop users.....NONE. Dealing with hot corners, having a 30" start screen, having to click Desktop every time (which I restart a lot so I have to do that a lot, I do not care if you NEVER EVER restart your system, but I DO and many others DO). Dealing with clients that forget where to shut down, even if I have told them a dozen times because when you use an older system, your habit comes back.

The desktop stuff is not shown there, that is why settings is on that list. But like I said, the Start Menu showed everything without having to click a category.

That is fine, but it annoys the hell out of me to use keyboard and mouse with the new UI. You do know people like and do things differently right? So again, what is so absolutely horrible, end of the world, about giving the user a choice.

Installers should be able to detect if a touch device is connected. If one is NOT FOUND, give users a choice on what they want to do. How is that hurting anyone? Computing would not be "stuck" and the world would not end as you guys keep saying because I, and many others, do not have the hardware for all of this to be MORE beneficial than the traditional desktop.

There is NO advantage to desktop users.....NONE. Dealing with hot corners, having a 30" start screen, having to click Desktop every time (which I restart a lot so I have to do that a lot, I do not care if you NEVER EVER restart your system, but I DO and many others DO). Dealing with clients that forget where to shut down, even if I have told them a dozen times because when you use an older system, your habit comes back.

There's no choice because Microsoft felt ready for a new step in pace. They're ready for something new. Whether you want to follow that or not is up to you, but there's dozens of new technologies out there, that can't play nice with the desktop UI. Point and click was great in the 90's but today, there's more than that, and it where people want to go. You have touch, motion, augmented reality, etc, while other technologies have yet to be invented.

You say you don't see an advantage, but I do. Metro and Windows RT have opened up more doors for Microsoft than continuing with the dull desktop GUI (Just look at Surface). If you want to hide behind windows full of code, that's great, but the vast majority of users don't want that. They want something quick and easy to use, so they can be on with their day. Again, My keyboard works great with Windows 8. It's not going away at all, but this notion that we have to spend our days pointing and clicking away at 10px x 10px UI elements is old and tired.

It's like asking if a large dial should be put back on television sets to change the channel. Or, asking if telephones should go back to using rotary dialers.

No, it's dated and irrelevant.

Funny, thats more akin to what the removal did that the opposite. Bad metaphor.

If all we 'needed' was search and an app launch we'd have chosen a Mac FFS. That Windows went beyond such simplistic hooey is why its the dominant Desktop platform.

Funny, thats more akin to what the removal did that the opposite. Bad metaphor.

If all we 'needed' was search and an app launch we'd have chosen a Mac FFS. That Windows went beyond such simplistic hooey is why its the dominant Desktop platform.

Actually, he's dead on. Compared to old, rotary phones, today's phone allow us to see missed messages and missed calls. It brings us information, much like the new Start Screen does compared to the old Start Menu.

Start Screen

musi.jpg

WTF!!!

musicmt.jpg

Start Menu

start8music.jpg

What exactly are you searching for?

This topic is now closed to further replies.
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
  • Posts

    • Hello, Hope all is well. I am in UK.  
    • I'm not happy with myself for it, but I've gone and got hold of it. Just another 45 minutes and I'll be Bond, James Bond. In my defence, IO's Hitman series is awesome, and I'm a sucker for 007. So while it might seem a bit simplified compared to Hitman, I'm sure I'll be right at home.
    • Or just check the script yourself ^^. I hate having a Microsoft account tied to my windows install.
    • 007 First Light review: Satisfying spy adventure that James Bond needed by Pulasthi Ariyasinghe I have fond memories of classic James Bond games from the Electronic Arts era. Using high-tech gadgets, sneaking into parties, and dispatching bad guys were wildly exciting activities for my younger self. In recent years, Bond games have entirely disappeared, alongside the super spy genre. Fast forward to 2020, imagine my surprise when IO Interactive announced it had secured the Bond IP to make a game. Considering the studio’s Hitman history, this project is one I keenly kept an eye on. Six years later, 007 First Light is finally here, and after spending time inside this globe-trotting adventure, I can safely say that my excitement for this developer’s take on this universe was not unfounded. IO has taken lessons it has learned from Hitman and combined them with what I would expect from a directed cinematic experience like James Bond. I have refrained from mentioning major plot points to save you from story spoilers in this review. This is an original story that doesn’t tie into any movies, so there isn’t an expectation of knowing the backstory or the decades of movies either. Bond, James Bond When 007 First Light begins, Bond is just Bond. There isn’t a spy angle, fancy gadgets, or even a secret mission. The introductory mission is framed to show how James Bond handled himself and how he does not care about the odds when it comes to saving lives. It’s a gorgeous level as well, showing off an island scattered with cliffs in the middle of a storm. Looking back, this is probably the best-looking level in the game, with IO showing off all its abilities with its custom engine, Glacier. But my favorite ended up being the follow-up to this level. Once the United Kingdom's foreign intelligence agency, MI6, recruits our daring youngster into its super-spy “00” program, training begins. However, instead of treading through the same tutorial missions where the game teaches you to run and jump and drive, IO opted for a montage, and it’s amazing. The scenes cut between Bond practicing and improving his marksmanship, parkour, hand-to-hand combat, and driving as weeks go by in his training. What impressed me here was the lack of any loading screens or stutters as scenes instantly switched to different locations entirely, as if I was watching a movie. This creativity is a trend I noticed in most levels, where there is some sort of gameplay or choreography mechanic being introduced to keep things interesting. Soon, the rest of the cast is introduced, bringing other agents that our favorite secret agent will be working with, the scientists and engineers that build MI6’s spy gadgets, as well as higher-ranking officers that either appreciate or (at best) tolerate Bond’s rebellious attitude. It’s a tight cast, all with incredibly good voice acting and personalities that quickly grew on me. The casting for Bond himself is also an excellent one. From showing his iconic soft spot for women to the condescending smiles that get a rise out of enemies, I had no issues getting immersed into this universe as this new face of James Bond. The missions take place in a wide range of locations as MI6 sends Bond to tackle dangers that are growing everywhere from the UK to Africa. These aren’t unrelated adventures where MI6 is sending secret agents, which is an angle I would love to see in another game, but a part of a bigger conspiracy affecting the entire world. Some of the twists and turns were all too predictable, and the character that Lenny Kravitz played made me cringe a little too much. But all in all, I enjoyed the campaign’s storyline that sets the stage for this new agent joining the illustrious “00” program. Plenty of Possibilities The third-person style of IO Interactive fits this role quite well. Bond is presented as a master at hand-to-hand combat as well as firearms, while also having a knack for being stealthy when required. Most sections of missions have a lot of freedom. This means I could beat up every goon and security guard on the way to an objective, slip past them without sounding a single alarm, or do a mix of both. My sessions usually end up with the third option because I tend to be impatient about waiting for a patrol to move. Drawing from its Hitman genes, the developer almost always gives multiple routes for going through missions. Levels can be massive, sometimes sporting hundreds of NPCs going their own ways and having conversations. If my objective is to break into a security room on the third floor, I could look around for roof access, eavesdrop on conversations to find out where someone lost a key, create a distraction and pickpocket a guard for a keycard, sneak in through the vents, or simply kick down the offending door. I enjoyed the variety on offer, especially because the same solutions didn’t usually show up in different missions. Before heading out into a secret MI6 escapade, the gadget specialist of the branch walks Bond through the organization's latest and greatest achievements. This can be cool little devices like a laser built into the watch, a phone that fires poison darts, or a camera that emits a powerful shockwave. The choice of what can be taken into the mission is up to the player. I could usually find fresh routes or get out of tough situations with a punch or two, so I never had the feeling of missing out by not choosing the right equipment. It’s still a fun practice. Choosing the armaments before a mission enhanced the super spy feeling quite a bit. As I mentioned, stealth comes in as a very viable option for most of the missions, letting Bond sneak past foes or knock them out silently. While it is satisfying to clear entire areas of goons and walk away without any alarms, the way of accomplishing this could have been done better. Bond can lure enemies, sneak up and knock them out, or use a gadget to disorient them before dealing a nasty blow. Bodies cannot be moved or hidden afterward either. It’s a very simple system, which I wish were more exciting to pull off. Perhaps more stealth-orientated gadgets, distraction options, or multi-takedowns could have helped here, I think. Getting caught while attempting to be in stealth does not mean a game over. Other than getting into a fist fight, an interesting twist of 007 First Light is the bluffing option. While an enemy is confused as to what you are doing in a restricted location, Bond has the option to improvise and persuade them that you are exactly where you’re supposed to be. These are fun little dynamic interactions with unique dialog depending on the mission and location, giving a few extra moments for Bond to go past suspicious guards smoothly. It’s the first time I’ve witnessed this system in a game, and I hope to see more. License to Kill Bond isn’t just dealing with security guards or civilians. From time to time, entire gangs of gun-toting mercenaries show up in levels looking to take down our protagonist. It is then that License to Kill mode is activated for Bond, letting him use firearms with no restrictions. I was surprised by just how tight gunplay is in 007 First Light. The weapons feel powerful and satisfying to fire, with single bullets capable of taking down an enemy with a headshot. Ammo is scarce, and enemies don’t drop weapons with full magazines most of the time. This forces a hectic kind of gameplay where I am always advancing towards enemies to take their weapons after they are downed. Things like shooting legs to immobilize, aiming at the hands to make their weapon go flying, blowing up nearby fire extinguishers for cover, and using gadgets to halt a goon in their tracks while I reload, make up enjoyable levels. I had to hold back my disappointment when the enemy count in these action sequences dropped to zero and I had to go non-lethal again. Speaking of action sequences, First Light isn’t just offering sandbox levels to complete at the player’s own leisure either. Each level comes with specific linear and directed scenes to move the story forward and put Bond in tight situations. These usually end up with high-octane chases or driving sections, offering the chance to witness chaining explosions, hails of gunfire, and scripted parkour scenes that remind me of Mission Impossible movies more than Bond. Elements like seeing James Bond jump out of a plane without a parachute or drive through buildings in London inside a trash truck were fantastic and always left me at a high point when finishing a mission. The classic James Bond theme is sprinkled in here too, which only happens a handful of times in the game, but at just the right moments. Visuals and Performance Compared to Unreal Engine 5 games we are seeing nowadays, 007 First Light isn’t flexing a huge amount of realism when it comes to graphics. The models, textures, and effects all feel a little dated, with the starting mission that I mentioned being the most visually striking. However, the complete lack of stutters, the hundreds of NPCs that can be on screen without a single hitch, massive sandbox levels, and smooth transitions between them all play a part in making this an immensely immersive and complex experience. The in-engine cutscenes are gorgeous as well, offering an upgraded visual style and model detail over the gameplay sections. Animations are one aspect that jumps out at me about any new game, and First Light has nailed what a third-person action game should feel like. Walking, sneaking, and running all have a heaviness to them that I appreciate. Whenever Bond moves past a wall or a ledge, his arms reach out to lightly hold those structures until he moves away. NPCs actually react to my character and move out of the way. Even during melee combat or takedown animations, the fists impacting a body or a head hitting a wall all have that same weight. Even the more frivolous animations, like catching a gun in midair or chucking an empty one at a goon (yes, you can do that), are satisfying to pull off. Of course, the in-engine cutscene animations are remarkably well done too, with facial animations and the upgraded model details improving my engagement with the characters. I have an AMD Radeon RX 9070 XT 16GB paired with an eight-core Ryzen 7 3700X and 32GB of RAM, with the game running at 1440p resolution. Deciding to completely max out all the graphics options gave me a range of frame rates between 60 and 100 depending on the scene and level. While I did try to enable AMD FSR, which bumped up the frame rates by a good 20% at Quality mode, IO Interactive’s implementation of the technology wasn’t that great. Every corner and edge in levels began shimmering, and I was also seeing smearing issues in fast-moving sections. The title seemingly uses the older generation FSR 3.1 and not the machine learning-assisted FSR 4, leading to these artifacts. Unfortunately, there isn't a way to manually upgrade this right now either. I opted to turn off the upscaling and play the game in native 1440p to avoid problems. I would say the FPS range I was getting was an acceptable one for a single-player action game for my setup. I do wish there were an FOV slider option in the settings. While the camera is far enough back for my tastes in most situations in this third-person adventure, at times the perspective is far too close. When trying to look around quickly and spot targets, I realized I was getting a slight headache at times due to the use of an almost over-the-shoulder close-up camera. Conclusion Being James Bond in 007 First Light is a treat. Traveling around the world chasing conspiracies, using high-tech gadgets disguised as everyday accessories, and improvising on the spot to fool foes all give a fantastic feeling of being a super spy. For an origin story, IO Interactive has done a great job at introducing the character and his motives for doing what he does. The satisfying combat animation and fantastic voice acting are definitely high points, with the License to Kill moments being my favorite. Not being able to move bodies and the simplistic stealth of mechanics does hurt its presentation a little. The NPC logic and intelligence is easy to manipulate and trick, repeating the same actions over and over again if I keep making distractions. The lack of an FOV slider was also a pain (quite literally) at times, and the FSR implementation is quite poor. These are things I hope the studio will improve upon with updates. Even with its faults, IO Interactive and James Bond are a match made in heaven. The studio knows how to make a main character that oozes charm and competency while also leaning heavily into its Hitman experience to make gigantic levels with what looks like hundreds of NPCs roaming around. Being an origin story, IO’s Bond has a way to go before he becomes the highly effective agent we see in the movie world. I am hoping the studio will continue this series alongside its Hitman ventures going forward, just so we get to experience the journey for longer. 007 First Light is available on PC (Steam, Epic Games Store, and Xbox PC), Xbox Series X|S, and PlayStation 5 for $69.99. This review was conducted on the PC version of the game provided by IO Interactive.
  • Recent Achievements

    • Collaborator
      conkir earned a badge
      Collaborator
    • Rising Star
      olavinto went up a rank
      Rising Star
    • One Month Later
      lamborghiniv10 earned a badge
      One Month Later
    • Week One Done
      lamborghiniv10 earned a badge
      Week One Done
    • Reacting Well
      X-No-file earned a badge
      Reacting Well
  • Popular Contributors

    1. 1
      +primortal
      504
    2. 2
      PsYcHoKiLLa
      271
    3. 3
      +Edouard
      75
    4. 4
      Skyfrog
      74
    5. 5
      Steven P.
      71
  • Tell a friend

    Love Neowin? Tell a friend!