Solution to get rid Windows 8 haters

[JayPhi]

And that's the misconception people have with Windows 8. (Maybe afterall it's still Microsoft's fault as they could have provide a smoother guide into Metro.)

It would have been bad if Windows 8 would only be all Metro as in everything is a full screen Windows Store app like with Windows RT on the Surface RT. The thing is, it's not. Thank god we still have the desktop, an even better version at that. Feels faster, more stable and more refined. You really can just ignore Metro, if you don't like it, as it is the first iteration of a new direction Windows is going, therefore it could not have evolved. Blue is the evolution. It's coming and let's see what it has to offer. From what I see, it refines the UX of Windows 8 a bit. Heard a people saying it's going into the right direction. I think Windows Store apps just adds something interesting to Windows. If I want to get my work done I still can do so on the desktop, with no distraction or whatsoever.

People are complaining as if they're stuck in the Metro side of Windows forever once they get there. But that's just not true. You have the option just to not use it, no? But for people who finds use for them it's great.

[adrynalyne]

You have the option just to not use it, no? But for people who finds use for them it's great.

That has been the whole debate. Give folks an option to turn it off.

[Dot Matrix]

I think that is what consumers see, and sales numbers don't lie. There are some that like them, sure. There are more that do not.

This thread is a perfect example. A small handful of defenders against an angry mob.

I have yet to see an "angry mob" anywhere.

[adrynalyne]

I have yet to see an "angry mob" anywhere.

Of course not. You are stuck in the Dot Matrix reality distortion field.

If it assists your understanding, change "angry mob" to, "the crowd that disagrees with you".

[HawkMan]

I have no idea what fighting you are talking about, because it certainly doesn't say that in my post. The funny thing is, if you read my post you would see that I said the start screen was fine, as is. The inclusion of Modern apps is the real problem.

Here is something I find funny. Windowed apps are becoming popular in Android. So it would appear not everyone wants full screen apps, even in the tablet and smartphone space. Microsoft should have skipped the full screen and just jumped to the head of the line with windowed apps. It would ease some of the complaints of Windows 8.

So who's forcing you to use modern apps if you don't want to then ? it's there if you want to, but you don't have to, so then your post is rather pointless.

Seriously Dot-y if it was 'transitional' MS should've doing something like this in first place:

Which one you wish to use?

* Exlusive Metro ?

* Classic Desktop ?

* Hybrid ?

- You can also change your preference in ...

But noooo, somehow its eluded the Windows Design team to include such choices. why??

why the need to force-shove it to the masses ?

because, and I feel like I'm repeating myself.... The start menu is redundant and deprecated, the start screen does the same only better. so they're removing it to avoid bugs in unused code, to avoid wasting resources on two parallel systems and to make the system leaner and faster.

I think that is what consumers see, and sales numbers don't lie. There are some that like them, sure. There are more that do not.

This thread is a perfect example. A small handful of defenders against an angry mob.

the wast majority buying computers today buy windows 8 and want it, the few who don't want it is easily convinced when they're sown what windows 8 actually is, and not what their anti windows8 tech friends or journalists makes them think it is.

sales are down because hardware sales are down because the economy is down. but I'm sure windows 8 is the cause of the bad economy as well...

That has been the whole debate. Give folks an option to turn it off.

turn off the ability to run modern apps... what sense does it make to have the start screen and have a toggle to disable modern apps... just don't use them, THAT's the toggle... makes zero sense.

[Shaun N.]

Has this thread not run its course? why is it still open?

[JayPhi]

That has been the whole debate. Give folks an option to turn it off.

Why do you need to turn it off, if it is not in your way. It's not completely gone, I give you that, but still, it won't hinder you at all in whatever you're doing on the desktop.

It's like if I were saying, I don't want to use the classic start menu on Windows 7. Give me an option to turn it off. The thing is I don't have to. Because I'm not affected by it being there or not. It's the same with the new Start Screen.

[adrynalyne]

Why do you need to turn it off, if it is not in your way. It's not completely gone, I give you that, but still, it won't hinder you at all in whatever you're doing on the desktop.

It's like if I were saying, I don't want to use the classic start menu on Windows 7. Give me an option to turn it off. The thing is I don't have to. Because I'm not affected by it being there or not. It's the same with the new Start Screen.

People who run start menu replacements disagree with you. Microsoft would win more people over by giving them a choice. People like having choices.

Is there ANY harm in giving a choice? Seems like it is win-win to me.

[fusi0n]

People who run start menu replacements disagree with you. Microsoft would win more people over by giving them a choice. People like having choices.

Is there ANY harm in giving a choice? Seems like it is win-win to me.

Yeah, I agree. They should offer choices.

[Dot Matrix]

People who run start menu replacements disagree with you. Microsoft would win more people over by giving them a choice. People like having choices.

Is there ANY harm in giving a choice? Seems like it is win-win to me.

HawkMan said it best:

because, and I feel like I'm repeating myself.... The start menu is redundant and deprecated, the start screen does the same only better. so they're removing it to avoid bugs in unused code, to avoid wasting resources on two parallel systems and to make the system leaner and faster.

[adrynalyne]

HawkMan said it best:

Progman was deprecated too, but it was included all the way up until XP, despite the new interface being introduced with Windows 95. It started out as a choice, then a non-documented program, then disappeared.

Yet, it gave people a choice until they were accustomed to the new interface. It caused no harm to include it, and it certainly didn't hold people back on a previous interface. It simply allowed people time to adjust.

I still see no harm, and your arguments of it being deprecated is irrelevant. It wouldn't waste enough resources to be worth mentioning, but I think you know that.

[HawkMan]

the start menu alone would require at least one developer position, every time they change something in the start screen, they would have to do bug/QnA testing to make sure it it doesn't cause any new or old bugs in the start menu.

it's a snowball. everything you do ads on, and while it doesn't cost a lot of resources in the picture, it does cost some, and it's unnecessary.

and they're cleaning up the code making it every more lean and efficient, keeping old crap around doesn't fit in with that.

[adrynalyne]

the start menu alone would require at least one developer position, every time they change something in the start screen, they would have to do bug/QnA testing to make sure it it doesn't cause any new or old bugs in the start menu.

it's a snowball. everything you do ads on, and while it doesn't cost a lot of resources in the picture, it does cost some, and it's unnecessary.

and they're cleaning up the code making it every more lean and efficient, keeping old crap around doesn't fit in with that.

Additional cost on Microsoft's end seems small in comparison to increasing adoption of Windows 8.

Again, they did it with progman to ease the transition. Pulling the rug out from under people is not the right way to handle it.

[xWhiplash]

the start screen does the same only better

Would people stop saying this. Where can I get a collapse-able expandable folder-like design in the start screen? Where are the jump lists?

It is NOT THE SAME - otherwise nobody would be complaining.

I PREFER the folder like design and I use jump lists A LOT.

[Dot Matrix]

Would people stop saying this. Where can I get a collapse-able expandable folder-like design in the start screen? Where are the jump lists?

It is NOT THE SAME - otherwise nobody would be complaining.

I PREFER the folder like design and I use jump lists A LOT.

First of all, yelling does not help your cause, second, jumplists are still very much available on the taskbar, third, folders have been replaced by the Start Screen's grouping option.

[JayPhi]

People who run start menu replacements disagree with you. Microsoft would win more people over by giving them a choice. People like having choices.

Is there ANY harm in giving a choice? Seems like it is win-win to me.

I see where you guys are coming from. There is certainly no harm in giving the option. That's the part where I was saying that Microsoft should have provided a smoother guide to Metro in an earlier post.

It's just that in my opinion the option is not needed. As that you have the choice to use either environment with only a small set of overlap, that doesn't really hinders you. And the thing about people using replacement programs to emulate Windows 7 is just about keeping the exact same familiar environment they got used to and loved. Of course you're more productive if you've been doing something the same way over 10 years.

But once you get around the learning curve it will be as effecient as if you been handling it for 10 years really. (Effectively, the difference is only the way of organizing your apps, cascading menus or full screen sideslide live tiles in groups and the way search results are displayed.) But most people are not willing to do that. Which I think is too bad, but in the end understandable. Nonetheless give it a try and be patient. It's all good. ;-)

[xWhiplash]

First of all, yelling does not help your cause, second, jumplists are still very much available on the taskbar, third, folders have been replaced by the Start Screen's grouping option.

Groups cannot be collapse-able

There are no jump lists in the Start Screen. THEREFORE, it is not "exactly the same". Why do people keep saying this as it is fact? You just proved that it is not. Jump Lists are only available in the taskbar now. NOT the Start Screen. Therefore, the Start Screen is not exactly like the start menu. And better is an opinion, not a fact. It is not better for me.

[Dashel]

If it were so self-evident we wouldn't be having this discussion. Plus as noted, the ease with which 3rd parties have accomplished this herculean task begs to differ.

It isn't the same, nor is it arguably better. Your reasons for the removal of choice is poorly reasoned bull****. Nor is it a true replacement if it only exists in a completely different space inside the OS. If your qualm is with Classic Start, improve it, but within the confines of the Desktop.

[adrynalyne]

I see where you guys are coming from. There is certainly no harm in giving the option. That's the part where I was saying that Microsoft should have provided a smoother guide to Metro in an earlier post.

It's just that in my opinion the option is not needed. As that you have the choice to use either environment with only a small set of overlap, that doesn't really hinders you. And the thing about people using replacement programs to emulate Windows 7 is just about keeping the exact same familiar environment they got used to and loved. Of course you're more productive if you've been doing something the same way over 10 years.

But once you get around the learning curve it will be as effecient as if you been handling it for 10 years really. (Effectively, the difference is only the way of organizing your apps, cascading menus or full screen sideslide live tiles in groups and the way search results are displayed.) But most people are not willing to do that. Which I think is too bad, but in the end understandable. Nonetheless give it a try and be patient. It's all good. ;-)

I agree with a lot of what you are saying, and I use Windows 8 without a start replacement. However, sometimes we have to step back and realize that we might be the exception to the rule. Especially when you consider the huge wall of resistance against Windows 8 out there. For those that think a little differently, or are slower to adapt, those people are the reason why we should have an option. It doesn't have to be an option for every future version of Windows. Handle it like progman was, imo.

[Dot Matrix]

I agree with a lot of what you are saying, and I use Windows 8 without a start replacement. However, sometimes we have to step back and realize that we might be the exception to the rule. Especially when you consider the huge wall of resistance against Windows 8 out there. For those that think a little differently, or are slower to adapt, those people are the reason why we should have an option. It doesn't have to be an option for every future version of Windows. Handle it like progman was, imo.

"Huge wall of resistance"?

http://winsupersite.com/windows-8/report-windows-8-secures-75-percent-tablet-market

[adrynalyne]

"Huge wall of resistance"?

http://winsupersite....t-tablet-market

We can cherry-pick websites all day long and still never agree. I can show you just as many articles showing that Windows 8 is failing.

I could also mention that we are talking about an OS and how it isn't working out in the PC market. I use a tablet different than a PC.

http://www.extremete...s-desktop-linux

3.1% in what, five months? Windows 7 had that in the first month.

[Dashel]

Again, if we are just talking phablets Dot, why aren't you over in the ****ing mobility section instead of harassing PC users here? He was clearly speaking from a Desktop perspective FFS.

There is a perfect thread entitled 'Best non-iOS tablet', why don't you start there and see if you understand the market like you think you do.

[HawkMan]

Would people stop saying this. Where can I get a collapse-able expandable folder-like design in the start screen? Where are the jump lists?

It is NOT THE SAME - otherwise nobody would be complaining.

I PREFER the folder like design and I use jump lists A LOT.

the start screen replaces the pinned items on the start menu and mostused apps area, which is the part of the start menu peple actually used. Same thing with jump lists, neat idea, NEVER used.

MS has metrics from millions of users. they didn't drop these things because they where heavily used, they dropped them because they where virtually unused. heck I've only heard of one person who actually used start menu jump lists even on this site. sure after windows 8 launched, there's a few who claims to have used it to prove their point, but when asked, they don't even know how the jump lists worked.

the start screen was created based on how people actually used windows, not on all the neat cool features they could cram into it, that ended up unused.

We can cherry-pick websites all day long and still never agree. I can show you just as many articles showing that Windows 8 is failing.

I could also mention that we are talking about an OS and how it isn't working out in the PC market. I use a tablet different than a PC.

http://www.extremete...s-desktop-linux

3.1% in what, five months? Windows 7 had that in the first month.

in a majorly growing PC market that was ready to upgrade.

as opposed to Windows 8 that launched in an economic recession, an any computers sold in the last 3-4 years unless it was rock bottom (and for the last year even the rock bottom cheapest computers come with celerons that are in fact first gen i3's) performs just fine for anything but gaming. people just don't need to buy new computers, and they can't afford to splurge on it.

[xWhiplash]

the start screen replaces the pinned items on the start menu and mostused apps area, which is the part of the start menu peple actually used. Same thing with jump lists, neat idea, NEVER used.

MS has metrics from millions of users. they didn't drop these things because they where heavily used, they dropped them because they where virtually unused. heck I've only heard of one person who actually used start menu jump lists even on this site. sure after windows 8 launched, there's a few who claims to have used it to prove their point, but when asked, they don't even know how the jump lists worked.

the start screen was created based on how people actually used windows, not on all the neat cool features they could cram into it, that ended up unused.

Never used? Well, what the hell am I using then?

Do not say something "Does the same thing" when it clearly doesn't. Many people have said this and is irritating because it is just simply not true. The fact that the Start Screen does not have collapse-able / expandable features and jump list already means it does not do the same thing.

And saying it is better is a matter of opinion.

[Dashel]

Are you honestly telling me more people pinned **** to their Start Menus than used Start Jumplists? Where is that fraking metric?

'People' use desktop shortcuts and rarely the Start Menu. SS doesn't change any of that. So if 'most' don't, why not just annihilate it completely instead of half-assed excuses? Thats really the simple truth. StartScreen is a Desktop replacement much more than a Start Menu - so in fact that is what they have done. Yet you keep lying by saying 'its the same' when you aren't even comparing it honestly.

Those poor Mac yoyos and their silly band-aids seem to persevere ok without one.