The return of the Start menu in future Windows 8.1 update: Thoughts?

[+Eternal Tempest MVC]

Good move by Microsoft.

 

If there wasn't enough push back by companies and consumer's, Microsoft won't of reversed it's decision.

Ms listened to feedback, and changed a product based on demand.

[The_Observer]

You're welcome.

 

 

LOL thanks, is this stage one? stage two will let you select to install Windows XP or Windows  9?

[McKay]

They should bring back the Program Manager, since going off comments about Windows 95 at the time, it was superior to the Start Menu in every single way, only "kiddies" and "casuals" used the start menu. "Real professionals" were "more productive" with the Program Manager

 

[DConnell Member]

They should bring back the Program Manager, since going off comments about Windows 95 at the time, it was superior to the Start Menu in every single way, only "kiddies" and "casuals" used the start menu. "Real professionals" were "more productive" with the Program Manager

 

Program_Manager.png

 

Works for me. I'd rather have that than the Menu.

 

Not even joking.

[+InsaneNutter MVC]

Works for me. I'd rather have that than the Menu.

 

Not even joking.

 

You have it already, the desktop.

[DConnell Member]

You have it already, the desktop.

 

Not quite the same thing, at least for me. What I'd really like is for Program Manager to be the boundary between the two halves of Windows, and have a flat presentation, and provide information in the icons.

 

Oh wait, that's the Start Screen!

 

<Gilda Radner> Nevermind . . . </GR>

[+LogicalApex MVC]

Honestly, I'm very confused here... Why is there such a negative reaction to this information? People such as myself have only wanted one thing from MS in regards to Windows 8, choice. Is the Start Screen better? To me, no it isn't, but that doesn't mean MS won't add compelling reasons for me to change my mind in the future. Offering choice, as this change will allow, will enable me to jump over to it at my own leisure. This is rule number 1 of any major change... You do it gradually while empowering the user to buy in.

 

The sheer size of the Windows user base means that there are people who love the Start Screen and those who don't. No one is right or wrong... We all use computers differently...

 

Why are the pro Windows 8 users so hostile to choice?...

 

As power users we should be embracing more options. The more options we have the more flexibility we have to ensure that our computing experience serves our needs well...

[LUTZIFER]

Sweet, lookin forward to it.

The current Start screen is a complete mess and very hard to find my programs, unless pinned to the main screen.

However, I do like some of the live tiles so I put up with it.

So having the excellent Win 7 style start menu, but with live tiles is a bonus.

[zhangm Supervisor]

Honestly, I'm very confused here... Why is there such a negative reaction to this information? People such as myself have only wanted one thing from MS in regards to Windows 8, choice. Is the Start Screen better? To me, no it isn't, but that doesn't mean MS won't add compelling reasons for me to change my mind in the future. Offering choice, as this change will allow, will enable me to jump over to it at my own leisure. This is rule number 1 of any major change... You do it gradually while empowering the user to buy in.

 

The sheer size of the Windows user base means that there are people who love the Start Screen and those who don't. No one is right or wrong... We all use computers differently...

 

Why are the pro Windows 8 users so hostile to choice?...

 

As power users we should be embracing more options. The more options we have the more flexibility we have to ensure that our computing experience serves our needs well...

 

I liked the start screen, but I'm not passing judgment on this new form until after I try it out.

[MorganX]

Its nice to have options but if it was removed cause it wasn't going to work with touch or multi screen situations then I felt removing it was the best choice for further QA testing or for a code rewrite.

 

I totally agree but a lot have the bad habit of not letting go for change

 

I think it was removed because the executives as MS got hoodwinked by Tim Cook at Apple and bought into his notion that we're in a "post PC" era. They literally thought the desktop was dead/dying. Apple has been in a post PC era for a long time, due to failure to capture large market share on the desktop.

 

Microsoft realizes their folly. Sales will most likely go through the roof when it returns.

 

As for it being ancient, the wheel is ancient. And no one has invented a better one yet ... just sayin'. MS invested a lot of money, research, and time developing the Start menu. It, like everything else can be improved. But nothing in the Modern UI does anything better than the Start Menu, it's just different.

[MorganX]

Honestly, I'm very confused here... Why is there such a negative reaction to this information? People such as myself have only wanted one thing from MS in regards to Windows 8, choice. Is the Start Screen better? To me, no it isn't, but that doesn't mean MS won't add compelling reasons for me to change my mind in the future. Offering choice, as this change will allow, will enable me to jump over to it at my own leisure. This is rule number 1 of any major change... You do it gradually while empowering the user to buy in.

 

The sheer size of the Windows user base means that there are people who love the Start Screen and those who don't. No one is right or wrong... We all use computers differently...

 

Why are the pro Windows 8 users so hostile to choice?...

 

As power users we should be embracing more options. The more options we have the more flexibility we have to ensure that our computing experience serves our needs well...

 

I think people who chose a side feel an obligation to argue about it when MS backtracks, even if clearly for the better. If the new Start Menu allows app switching from the tiles on it, combined with taskbar pinning of Modern Apps, this will clearly be a superior launcher, task manager. Though I'm quite comfortable with 8.1 now, app switching is something that just does not work efficiently on the desktop with Modern UI IMO.

[DarkyDan]

No thankyou, I treat the startscreen like a fully expanded start menu, and it's a lot quicker that way.

 

The new update with close buttons in metro apps and their integration into the taskbar is quite enough for me.

 

The start menu is a relic of the past.  The start screen is a smart upgrade and the only people that have issue with it are those with low brain functionality.

 

BUT!

 

if this calms down the ignorant whinging, it may be a good thing :)

[Quppa]

I'm hoping there's an option to disable the live tiles on the right-hand side of the new Start Menu, and ideally add back the right-hand side links and menus as seen in Windows Vista and Windows 7. The Win+X menu includes most of them, but it's not a perfect replacement. Live tiles are hampered by being tied to Windows Store apps - if they open up the functionality to desktop programs, they might be more useful.

 

Otherwise, it's a fantastic move - one that I'd feared might not happen.

[Michael Scrip]

... a lot have the bad habit of not letting go for change

I thought the great thing about Windows was its customization?  Who cares if I want to use my computer the same way I have for the last 15 years?  That's my choice.  

 

So I don't feel like making a change... that's my choice too.

 

And then there's that old saying of "change for change's sake"

 

What exactly was the purpose of the Start Screen anyway?  How is my life better because of this change?

 

Since Microsoft may be somewhat retreating from that idea in the future... it must not have been that important after all.

 

I don't hate change... I only like it where it is necessary.

[PGHammer]

I thought the great thing about Windows was its customization?  Who cares if I want to use my computer the same way I have for the last 15 years?  That's my choice.  

 

So I don't feel like making a change... that's my choice too.

 

And then there's that old saying of "change for change's sake"

 

What exactly was the purpose of the Start Screen anyway?  How is my life better because of this change?

 

Since Microsoft may be somewhat retreating from that idea in the future... it must not have been that important after all.

 

I don't hate change... I only like it where it is necessary.

Please - name a NECESSARY change.

 

Every change that has been made in Windows has been fought tooth and nail.

[Michael Scrip]

Please - name a NECESSARY change.

 

Every change that has been made in Windows has been fought tooth and nail.

Nobody was asking for the change to Modern or Metro. So that was definitely NOT a necessary change :)

 

If you came from Windows 7 or earlier... ALL of your programs were traditional desktop programs.  And the machine you're using is also a traditional desktop or laptop.  

 

So it's only natural to have a meh attitude (or even hate) Microsoft's new focus on Metro and touch-based apps.

 

In a recent video... Windows VP Joe Belfiore said the following:

 

"Windows 8 was a new design for Windows that was created to enable awesome new touch-based tablets and PCs"

 

And then in the very next sentence he says:

 

"we know that many Windows 8 and 8.1 users are still using mouse and keyboard... or don't have a touchscreen at all"

 

Well... no #### sherlock.  What kind of research did you do?  Didn't you know that there are a billion Windows PCs out in the world that don't have a touchscreen?  So why change the UI at all?

 

At least all your old traditional Windows software will still work.  But you gotta wonder what they were thinking.

 

Judging by the way they are putting back old features... their plan didn't work out too well.

[Quillz]

Not quite the same thing, at least for me. What I'd really like is for Program Manager to be the boundary between the two halves of Windows, and have a flat presentation, and provide information in the icons.

 

Oh wait, that's the Start Screen!

 

<Gilda Radner> Nevermind . . . </GR>

I do recall seeing a "modern" Program Manager someone made for XP and later. It's a third-party program, but it worked just like Program/File Manager.

[Nashy]

I don't really get the complaint about "leaving the screen I'm working on". How is invoking the menu any less leaving your work? Yes, you can see it, but you can't interact with it without deactivating the menu. Personally, I put more importance on finding stuff faster than on the visual continuity.

 

If you have either the Screen or the Menu up, you're currently focused on that. At that moment you're working on finding the program you want to launch. So why not devote more/all of the screen to that task, so you can get it done faster and get back to what you were going before ( or get started on the new program)?

 

Frankly, to me having most of your screen just showing your desktop or programs in the background is a waste of space. That space could be more effectively used for what you're working on at that moment, which is finding a program.

 

Screen space isn't at a premium like it was in 1995. Why should the program launcher be relegated to a tiny corner any more?

 

Watching youtube and movies for me.

[Raa]

Best decision Microsoft has made in 2 years.

[(Account no longer active)]

Even if they do bring back the Start menu, I'm sticking with Start8 or similar. The new Start menu looks too fragmented. Then again, I've gotten used to the Start screen (hit Windows key and type).

[DConnell Member]

I do recall seeing a "modern" Program Manager someone made for XP and later. It's a third-party program, but it worked just like Program/File Manager.

 

And can it be set as the boundary between the two halves of Windows, like the Screen currently is?

[PGHammer]

Nobody was asking for the change to Modern or Metro. So that was definitely NOT a necessary change :)

 

If you came from Windows 7 or earlier... ALL of your programs were traditional desktop programs.  And the machine you're using is also a traditional desktop or laptop.  

 

So it's only natural to have a meh attitude (or even hate) Microsoft's new focus on Metro and touch-based apps.

 

In a recent video... Windows VP Joe Belfiore said the following:

 

"Windows 8 was a new design for Windows that was created to enable awesome new touch-based tablets and PCs"

 

And then in the very next sentence he says:

 

"we know that many Windows 8 and 8.1 users are still using mouse and keyboard... or don't have a touchscreen at all"

 

Well... no #### sherlock.  What kind of research did you do?  Didn't you know that there are a billion Windows PCs out in the world that don't have a touchscreen?  So why change the UI at all?

 

At least all your old traditional Windows software will still work.  But you gotta wonder what they were thinking.

 

Judging by the way they are putting back old features... their plan didn't work out too well.

I don't have a touch-screen, and I have had exactly zero issues with the StartScreen, ever since the Developer Preview.

 

YOU started off with an assumption (the StartScreen and ModernUI are only for tablets and other touch interfaces) , and basically refused to even consider that the StartScreen could do everything the Start menu did - and more besides.

 

Go to pages 30-39 (inclusive) in the Microsoft Beta forum right here on Neowin and read my posts - all of them.

 

While I HAVE used Windows on touch-screen hardware, it has always been someone else's hardware - not mine.  Day in and day out, I have been running Windows 8+ as primary OS on a desktop-formfactor PC, with a traditional (though wireless) keyboard and mouse.  It works because the pointing device in general (and the mouse in particular) is NOT how I primarily interact with the PC; the keyboard is.

 

I was quite skeptical that ModernUI would even WORK for those without touch; however, I adjusted quite well, thank you.  (I've made a point of making that plain as well - and even pointed out why.)

 

I warned the pointing-device-centric that the StartScreen was NOT the Start menu - while there ARE similarities, it does have some differences.  However, those of you that are so pointing-device-centric howled and screamed - the gravy train of kissing up that stretched back to Windows 95 was being derailed!

 

That is why I regard the return of the Start menu as nothing more - or less - than kissing back up to the pointing-device-centric.

[margrave]

You must do what you have to in order to sell a product.

 

I think this compromise of classic start menu and modern metro will help sales. Which is what is ultimately important.

 

Windows for free on 9 inch and under screens I expect to be huge.

[PGHammer]

Nobody was asking for the change to Modern or Metro. So that was definitely NOT a necessary change :)

 

If you came from Windows 7 or earlier... ALL of your programs were traditional desktop programs.  And the machine you're using is also a traditional desktop or laptop.  

 

So it's only natural to have a meh attitude (or even hate) Microsoft's new focus on Metro and touch-based apps.

 

In a recent video... Windows VP Joe Belfiore said the following:

 

"Windows 8 was a new design for Windows that was created to enable awesome new touch-based tablets and PCs"

 

And then in the very next sentence he says:

 

"we know that many Windows 8 and 8.1 users are still using mouse and keyboard... or don't have a touchscreen at all"

 

Well... no #### sherlock.  What kind of research did you do?  Didn't you know that there are a billion Windows PCs out in the world that don't have a touchscreen?  So why change the UI at all?

 

At least all your old traditional Windows software will still work.  But you gotta wonder what they were thinking.

 

Judging by the way they are putting back old features... their plan didn't work out too well.

Horsepuckey.

 

I go back pre-Windows, if not pre-Microsoft - to IBM big iron (mainframes in particular).

 

The issue with the Start menu is pointing devices in general - if not mice in particular.

In no less than "Introducing Windows 95" (Microsoft Press), the reason for the reset of the desktop (from Windows 3.x) and the Start menu is explained with quite a bit of candor; the Start menu (unlike Program Manager) is a pointing-device-driven interface - nothing shows until you click on either a label or icon.  (If you look at Windows 95 installed with the defaults, you'll notice an empty desktop - not even wallpapered.  It's waiting to be dressed up by the user.)

However, if you aren't pointing-device-centric (and a LOT of Windows users weren't, even then), you basically got thrown under the bus - and you'd be stuck under that bus until Windows 8's Developer Preview began leaking.

Windows 8 got those of us that weren't pointing-device-centric out from under the bus because the Start menu was gone.

Yes; touch-screen users did benefit - I've never said otherwise.  However, keyboard-centered users benefit even more than touch-centered users because - unlike touch-centered users - we didn't require any new hardware at all.  (In other words, so much for you assumption - and that is exactly what it is - that all traditional hardware users running Windows are pointing-device-centered.  A lot are - it may even be a majority; however, it certainly is far from all.

 

Assumptions are the mother of all muckups - and that cuts multiple ways.

[Michael Scrip]

Horsepuckey.

 

I go back pre-Windows, if not pre-Microsoft - to IBM big iron (mainframes in particular).

 

The issue with the Start menu is pointing devices in general - if not mice in particular.

In no less than "Introducing Windows 95" (Microsoft Press), the reason for the reset of the desktop (from Windows 3.x) and the Start menu is explained with quite a bit of candor; the Start menu (unlike Program Manager) is a pointing-device-driven interface - nothing shows until you click on either a label or icon.  (If you look at Windows 95 installed with the defaults, you'll notice an empty desktop - not even wallpapered.  It's waiting to be dressed up by the user.)

However, if you aren't pointing-device-centric (and a LOT of Windows users weren't, even then), you basically got thrown under the bus - and you'd be stuck under that bus until Windows 8's Developer Preview began leaking.

Windows 8 got those of us that weren't pointing-device-centric out from under the bus because the Start menu was gone.

Yes; touch-screen users did benefit - I've never said otherwise.  However, keyboard-centered users benefit even more than touch-centered users because - unlike touch-centered users - we didn't require any new hardware at all.  (In other words, so much for you assumption - and that is exactly what it is - that all traditional hardware users running Windows are pointing-device-centered.  A lot are - it may even be a majority; however, it certainly is far from all.

 

Assumptions are the mother of all muckups - and that cuts multiple ways.

I guess I don't understand the point of the ModernUI.

 

Are developers supposed to create Modern versions of their programs?

 

Apparently that's not happening yet (if at all) and people are still using their old programs (from the desktop)

 

And they still want to interact with their old programs the way they've done for years (on the desktop with a familiar Start Menu)

 

That's why I was saying people didn't ask for this change.

 

I'm still on Windows 7... so all my programs are traditional desktop programs.  

 

I never said "boy I wish there was a new way to interact with my computer. Even if I still use a keyboard and mouse... I wish everything looked and worked differently."

 

I don't think anyone said that. That's why it was such a shock when it happened.