5 Reasons To Get Over The Hype And Start Loving Windows 8.1

[adrynalyne]

The way you feel about the Screen is how I felt about the Start Menu since 1995 - worthless, cumbersome and annoying. And the only real fix that was ever given for it was the addition of the search box, making it easy to avoid using the menu itself.

 

To me the Start Screen was an extremely necessary change. A new UI was needed as far back as Windows 98,really. It's a crime that it took Microsoft this long to give something else a try.

I can respect a new UI.

 

However, two completely different UIs, with some features being duplicated between them, its just ridiculous IMO.

 

If you are going to move to a new UI, commit to it.  Don't just toss it in like an add-on.

[DConnell Member]

I can respect a new UI.

 

However, two completely different UIs, with some features being duplicated between them, its just ridiculous IMO.

 

If you are going to move to a new UI, commit to it.  Don't just toss it in like an add-on.

 

I don't see how the new UI is an add-on. It's the core of 8, with the traditional desktop built-in as one of its features. More of the control panel elements should be moved to Modern, but Microsoft is working on that, and the desktop-specific ones probably should stay on the desktop Control Panel.

 

And I really don't see the duplication as a bad thing. It just means more ways to access what you need, which has always been one of the strengths of Windows.

[adrynalyne]

I don't see how the new UI is an add-on. It's the core of 8, with the traditional desktop built-in as one of its features. More of the control panel elements should be moved to Modern, but Microsoft is working on that, and the desktop-specific ones probably should stay on the desktop Control Panel.

 

And I really don't see the duplication as a bad thing. It just means more ways to access what you need, which has always been one of the strengths of Windows.

I didn't say it was an add-on. 

 

It feels like one though.

 

Duplication isn't bad (such as Finder > Applications vs. Launchpad), but do we really need two control panels?

[DConnell Member]

I didn't say it was an add-on. 

 

It feels like one though.

 

Duplication isn't bad (such as Finder > Applications vs. Launchpad), but do we really need two control panels?

 

I feel the opposite - to me Modern feels like the core, while the desktop feels like I'm running everything in Virtualbox.

[adrynalyne]

I feel the opposite - to me Modern feels like the core, while the desktop feels like I'm running everything in Virtualbox.

To each their own, but at least we agree that there is UI discontinuity.

[PGHammer]

Now, instead of rambling on about Civil Rights and Alabama, which have absolutely zero justification for being mentioned here - you stop being evasive and get to addressing the point?

 

Vista introduced the best feature the start menu ever had - the hybrid search box / launcher functionality. A feature which is dependant on - shock horror, the keyboard.

 

Care to comment?

It didn't address the core problem - the reality that the Start menu is STILL a bias in favor of pointing devices.  In other words, the bias is due to there BEING a Start menu.

 

Notice that, in Windows 8 (and 8.1, and even Server 2012/2012R2), that Runbox is still around - in fact, the Runbox was in XP, 2000, and even NT4 and 9x; it doesn't (and didn't) require the Start menu.  (To be honest the Runbox dates back to Windows 3.0 - and no, I'm not kidding.  More ties into it - such as Search, for example; however, the Start menu has exactly diddly to do with it.  The added functionality - in terms of Search - is due to two add-ins, and neither has anything to do with Vista; Index Server (Windows 2000 Professional) and Windows Search 4.0 (an add-in between Windows XP Service Packs 2 and 3) - all Vista did was unify the two, as Windows Search did not fully hook into Index Server.  The Runbox gained functionality that it, by rights, SHOULD have gotten with the addition of Index Server - how many complaints were there about broken search functionality in XP alone?)

 

The functionality is NOT dependent on the Start menu - if it were, it could not be in Windows 8/Server 2012, which don't have such a menu.

 

Basically, you miss that pointing-device-centeredness - is admitting that so painful to do?

[Athernar]

It didn't address the core problem - the reality that the Start menu is STILL a bias in favor of pointing devices.  In other words, the bias is due to there BEING a Start menu.

 

Notice that, in Windows 8 (and 8.1, and even Server 2012/2012R2), that Runbox is still around - in fact, the Runbox was in XP, 2000, and even NT4 and 9x; it doesn't (and didn't) require the Start menu.  (To be honest the Runbox dates back to Windows 3.0 - and no, I'm not kidding.  More ties into it - such as Search, for example; however, the Start menu has exactly diddly to do with it.  The added functionality - in terms of Search - is due to two add-ins, and neither has anything to do with Vista; Index Server (Windows 2000 Professional) and Windows Search 4.0 (an add-in between Windows XP Service Packs 2 and 3) - all Vista did was unify the two, as Windows Search did not fully hook into Index Server.  The Runbox gained functionality that it, by rights, SHOULD have gotten with the addition of Index Server - how many complaints were there about broken search functionality in XP alone?)

 

The functionality is NOT dependent on the Start menu - if it were, it could not be in Windows 8/Server 2012, which don't have such a menu.

 

Basically, you miss that pointing-device-centeredness - is admitting that so painful to do?

 

So the addition of a keyboard-centric feature that allows for pure keyboard based usage of said menu, with no mouse needed - is "still" biased towards the mouse? Hah!

 

Why cannot you admit you're wrong? It's not even subjective at this point, you are quite simply objectively, wrong.

[Xerxes]

EDIT: Nevermind, I'll keep it to myself as I don't want to start a flame war... 

[Dotdot]

That's just a silly comparison.  But in a similar line...

 

 

Stagnation isn't a great thing either.

If it aint broke, why fix it?

[Xerxes]

If it aint broke, why fix it?

 

Then why replace Command prompt with a GUI? it worked fine and wasn't broken. Why replace Program Manager with Explorer? that wasn't broken either. Things do not need to be broken for progress/change to happen. If it did work that way, we'll probably still be in caves.

[Dotdot]

Then why replace Command prompt with a GUI? it worked fine and wasn't broken. Why replace Program Manager with Explorer? that wasn't broken either. Things do not need to be broken for progress/change to happen. If it did work that way, we'll probably still be in caves.

Except the cave would of "broke" collapsed and killed the inhabitants. :p

Change should be driven by need. There was no need to fix the start menu. Least not in my view.

[Xerxes]

Except the cave would of "broke" collapsed and killed the inhabitants. :p

Change should be driven by need. There was no need to fix the start menu. Least not in my view.

You make a valid point but the start menu has been with us for nearly 20 years now (hard to believe it has been that long) and I think it is time to explore new ways. Particularly with the advent of 4k monitors I feel the tiny start menu has had its day and isn't necessarily the most efficient means of using a PC anymore. If you disagree and still feel the start menu is best more power to you, you certainly still have that as an option via 3rd party addons and rumours MS might return it as a legacy option of some sort in the future.

[TMYW]

Takes less time and clicks to use the start menu.  Especially if the app you need is in the 10 "most common" list (which it always is for me).

To get efficient with Metro, you have to use the keyboard, and that still takes more time than just using the mouse.

 

How so? The "pinned" applications list in Windows 7 is worthless. It's just a single list of shortcuts that does nothing but launch applications. And the "All Programs" menu was a drilldown nightmare. I ######ing HATED it. To avoid using that POS menu, I ended up having to clutter my desktop with my most-used programs since I couldn't fit them all onto the taskbar without making it a complete mess.

 

The Windows 8 Start Screen made the concept of "pinning" an application useful since the tiles can be arranged and grouped while rendering live information. It also allowed me to clean up my desktop. I've installed a few programs that insist on creating desktop icons, which I usually delete or leave if I'm lazy, but for the most part I have only my standard desktop icons (Computer, User's Files, Network, Recycle Bin, and Control Panel) on my desktop.

 

Also, because the "All Apps" menu doesn't require drilling down into a nested mess of program folders, I don't detest using it like I did the "All Programs" menu in Windows 7. The one complaint I have about it is that there's not enough distinction in the typography between the names of the program groups and the names of the programs themselves and not enough spacing between program groups.

[TMYW]

If it aint broke, why fix it?

 

It is broken. I hated it and glad they got rid of it.

[PGHammer]

So the addition of a keyboard-centric feature that allows for pure keyboard based usage of said menu, with no mouse needed - is "still" biased towards the mouse? Hah!

 

Why cannot you admit you're wrong? It's not even subjective at this point, you are quite simply objectively, wrong.

Athernar - read my post again.

 

The feature is still there, even though the Start menu itself isn't - that tells me that the feature itself doesn't, and didn't, depend on it.

I've also pointed out (from the beginning) that all those Taskbar features that Windows 8 has retained (some of which date back to XP, while others were added with Vista and 7) don't depend on the Start menu either.

 

They may have been introduced alongside Start menu features - however, that doesn't mean that they depend on those same features. The fact that they are still in Windows 8.1/Server 2012R2 - which lacks a Start menu altogether - puts paid to that line of thinking.

[Athernar]

Athernar - read my post again.

 

The feature is still there, even though the Start menu itself isn't - that tells me that the feature itself doesn't, and didn't, depend on it.

I've also pointed out (from the beginning) that all those Taskbar features that Windows 8 has retained (some of which date back to XP, while others were added with Vista and 7) don't depend on the Start menu either.

 

They may have been introduced alongside Start menu features - however, that doesn't mean that they depend on those same features. The fact that they are still in Windows 8.1/Server 2012R2 - which lacks a Start menu altogether - puts paid to that line of thinking.

 

No, it's not there - the feature was removed and replaced with something completely different in 8.0.

 

8.1 restores the functionality the start menu search feature had, but the implementation is grossly inferior by taking up the entire screen.

 

8.x isn't relevant to the point though, nor are "dependencies". It was a feature added to the start menu, it was part of the start menu - so your assertion said menu was "pointing-device-biased" is factually incorrect.

[PGHammer]

No, it's not there - the feature was removed and replaced with something completely different in 8.0.

 

8.1 restores the functionality the start menu search feature had, but the implementation is grossly inferior by taking up the entire screen.

 

8.x isn't relevant to the point though, nor are "dependencies". It was a feature added to the start menu, it was part of the start menu - so your assertion said menu was "pointing-device-biased" is factually incorrect.

Athernar - by "dependent" it means that without the Start menu, the feature would go away.

 

This particular feature didn't go away - therefore it couldn't be dependent on the Start menu (which did go away).

 

Still, to you, whether or not the feature depended on the Start menu is not the point - the point (to you) is that the Start menu went away, and you want it back.

YOu have danced all around that much - what I'd like to know is why are you dancing around something so obvious that it can be seen by the contextually-impaired?

[Dot Matrix]

Needed changes and changes for the hell of it are a bit different, yeah?

So, how do you tell the difference? How do you know what you're missing if you're afraid of changing things up?

[MorganX]

If it aint broke, why fix it?

 

The answer is simple. Because it "was" broken on tablets and phones. Microsoft's challenge is to integrate it in a more seamless and unobtrusive fashion on the desktop. They're headed in the right direction.

 

I'm actually finding myself wishing they would get their Modern UI/WinRT act together so we could have full fledged/functional Modern apps to actually replace most of what we do in Win32. Probably not going to happen, there are just too many limitations to a touch-centric UI when it comes to micro-management and precision. But they can do a lot better.

 

I'm not looking forward to windowed Modern apps though, I think snap views is superior. I really think it's a mistake. Let those few who care, buy ModernMix.

[Brian Miller]

Reason number 1) It's not Mac OS.

[MindTrickz]

Then why replace Command prompt with a GUI? it worked fine and wasn't broken. Why replace Program Manager with Explorer? that wasn't broken either. Things do not need to be broken for progress/change to happen. If it did work that way, we'll probably still be in caves.

 

To make it more user friendly and productive. Windows 7 has both of these over Windows 8. Modern/Metro UI is cumbersome and not very efficient productivity wise. This is one of the reasons why Windows 8 sales are closer to Vista rather than Windows 7. OEM's are bringing back Windows 7 due to demand from consumers.

 

Change/progress in itself is neither good nor bad and as such there can be good change/progress and equally there can be bad change/progress. Windows 8 is the later. Why force a tablet optimized UI on the desktop users? It makes no sense.

 

Microsoft should have given people the option of booting straight into the desktop, using metro apps in windowed mode and not making the new start menu going fullscreen. Basically; everything Start8 does.

 

[Athernar]

Athernar - by "dependent" it means that without the Start menu, the feature would go away.

 

This particular feature didn't go away - therefore it couldn't be dependent on the Start menu (which did go away).

 

Still, to you, whether or not the feature depended on the Start menu is not the point - the point (to you) is that the Start menu went away, and you want it back.

YOu have danced all around that much - what I'd like to know is why are you dancing around something so obvious that it can be seen by the contextually-impaired?

 

Yet again you're wrong as it -did- go away, 8.0 completely murdered it until 8.1 reverted the changes they made to search. (Albeit still an inferior implementation due to fullscreen usage)

 

It's immensely hypocritical of you to accuse me of dancing around the point when you have yet to directly address a single post I have made.

 

You have made repeated assertions the start menu was biased towards "pointing devices", I have proven that assertion to be false. Simple as that. My or any other person's feelings towards the start screen and start menu are completely immaterial to this point.

[Dot Matrix]

Yet again you're wrong as it -did- go away, 8.0 completely murdered it until 8.1 reverted the changes they made to search. (Albeit still an inferior implementation due to fullscreen usage)

 

It's immensely hypocritical of you to accuse me of dancing around the point when you have yet to directly address a single post I have made.

 

You have made repeated assertions the start menu was biased towards "pointing devices", I have proven that assertion to be false. Simple as that. My or any other person's feelings towards the start screen and start menu are completely immaterial to this point.

If you're still mad at a full screen Start, why not just use the search charm? There's multiple ways to open an app in Windows. Windows 8/8.1 hasn't changed that.

Something tells me you'll never be happy with what Microsoft does.

[leo_the_lion]

Loving 8.1........all round faster than 7.........snappier.........and I like some of the apps. 

[Athernar]

If you're still mad at a full screen Start, why not just use the search charm? There's multiple ways to open an app in Windows. Windows 8/8.1 hasn't changed that.

Something tells me you'll never be happy with what Microsoft does.

 

Which is a double keystroke to invoke opposed to one, so it's still a regression.

 

And it depends what you mean by "never be happy" DM, if by that you mean "carelessly defend whatever changes are made simply because they have the MSFT label" like yourself then no, I won't ever be happy.

 

I was quite happy with XP, Vista and 7 - and I still think Vista's reputation was undeserved, but I guess that doesn't fit in with your constructed reality of "everyone that doesn't like 8 is a MSFT haters omgg!!1111", hmm?