Where is the classic start menu in Windows 7

[iambk]

Classic Start Menu for Windows 7 - Seven Classic Start http://www.sevenclassicstart.com/

=)

Thank You!

There is now a chance in hell that I might actually move to Windows 7.

I've read comments in this thread that the win95/98/me/nt4/2000/xpclassic start menu needs to go because it isn't pretty.

Well, some of of don't care about everything being pretty. I care about low latency, quickness, usability, and clarity. My background is a nice solid color. Buttons are clearly defined. I turn off that annoying visual effects. I clean up my start menu so that I can access my programs with 2 keystrokes or 2 mouse clicks, whichever I prefer. I turn off that annoying 'click' sound every time I click on something. I've created my own install disc of WindowsXP that by default has all of the hidden/system files shown. File extensions aren't hidden. The 'Documents and Settings' folder is instead 'Profiles'. 'Program Files' is 'PF64' and 'Program Files (x86)' is 'PF32'. I don't install crap, including a virus scanner because I don't need one; email is scanned and I'm not stupid about downloading random junk. I do install Ad Muncher which is a wonderful advert removal app. I use the lightweight Thunderbird in lou of heavy Outlook. I do use Office 2007 because well, it is an amazing office suite. No indexing. Classic search.

Some of you guys prefer otherwise. I respect that. Have your pretty start menu with objects moving around. I suppose many users install so much crap it is no wonder they need a virus scanner and a search engine just to find their programs.

But why are you guys so insistent that there not even be an option for users such as myself that like a lightweight and efficient system?

I'm using WindowsXP x86-64 and I'm happy with it but there is one annoying limitation that Microsoft didn't bother to correct. I cannot hibernate with more than 4GB of addressable memory. I had 4 GB installed in my system, but the BIOS reserves some of the address space under the 4GB mark so some of my RAM gets mapped about 4GB. I've worked around this issue by booting WindowsXP with a /MAXMEM=4096 option but I loose nearly 1/2 gigabyte of RAM because of that. Not a big deal today, but this will be an issue down the road as applications require and increasing amount of RAM to run well. The other issue is that new systems don't always come with WindowsXP x86-64 drivers. But I'm got everything working on my specific system at least.

I'm working my way through 'Windows 7' trying to give it a fair evaluation. My latest issue is that I don't seem to be able to add programs to 'SendTo' for all users (not the default user, 'All Users'). But I'm working through things.

[Kirkburn]

Well, some of of don't care about everything being pretty. I care about low latency, quickness, usability, and clarity. My background is a nice solid color. Buttons are clearly defined. I turn off that annoying visual effects. I clean up my start menu so that I can access my programs with 2 keystrokes or 2 mouse clicks, whichever I prefer. I turn off that annoying 'click' sound every time I click on something. I've created my own install disc of WindowsXP that by default has all of the hidden/system files shown. File extensions aren't hidden. The 'Documents and Settings' folder is instead 'Profiles'. 'Program Files' is 'PF64' and 'Program Files (x86)' is 'PF32'. I don't install crap, including a virus scanner because I don't need one; email is scanned and I'm not stupid about downloading random junk. I do install Ad Muncher which is a wonderful advert removal app. I use the lightweight Thunderbird in lou of heavy Outlook. I do use Office 2007 because well, it is an amazing office suite. No indexing. Classic search.

Some of you guys prefer otherwise. I respect that. Have your pretty start menu with objects moving around. I suppose many users install so much crap it is no wonder they need a virus scanner and a search engine just to find their programs.

But why are you guys so insistent that there not even be an option for users such as myself that like a lightweight and efficient system?

I'm using WindowsXP x86-64 and I'm happy with it but there is one annoying limitation that Microsoft didn't bother to correct. I cannot hibernate with more than 4GB of addressable memory. I had 4 GB installed in my system, but the BIOS reserves some of the address space under the 4GB mark so some of my RAM gets mapped about 4GB. I've worked around this issue by booting WindowsXP with a /MAXMEM=4096 option but I loose nearly 1/2 gigabyte of RAM because of that. Not a big deal today, but this will be an issue down the road as applications require and increasing amount of RAM to run well. The other issue is that new systems don't always come with WindowsXP x86-64 drivers. But I'm got everything working on my specific system at least.

I'm working my way through 'Windows 7' trying to give it a fair evaluation. My latest issue is that I don't seem to be able to add programs to 'SendTo' for all users (not the default user, 'All Users'). But I'm working through things.

Talk about an off-topic rant...

In any case you made pretty much no arguments against the Vista/7 start menu. You can access your programs in two keystrokes or mouse clicks in the new one too, with less mouse movement. The background *is* a solid colour. The buttons *are* clearly defined.

It's not about denying you, it's about letting the Windows developers work on more worthwhile things, like improving the current start menu, not one that was designed over a decade ago.

And lol that you turn off indexing. I thought you wanted speed? Apparently not.

[insanelyapple]

Classic Start Menu for Windows 7 - Seven Classic Start http://www.sevenclassicstart.com/

=)

burn in deepest abyss of hell :p

[Rudy]

Classic Start Menu for Windows 7 - Seven Classic Start http://www.sevenclassicstart.com/

=)

+1 good stuff

[Udedenkz]

Classic Start Menu for Windows 7 - Seven Classic Start http://www.sevenclassicstart.com/

=)

They want money for something that looks 100% out of place and offers little functionality? FAIL.

Windows 7 start menu is kinda fat but it still looks good.

[iambk]

In any case you made pretty much no arguments against the Vista/7 start menu. You can access your programs in two keystrokes or mouse clicks in the new one too, with less mouse movement. The background *is* a solid colour. The buttons *are* clearly defined.

I'm trying to give Windows 7 a chance, so please educate me on how to do this.

When I press [Windows Key] and then type any letter, that letter gets used as the first letter in the 'Search' rather than selecting one of the displayed programs. What am I doing wrong?

[Guest xiphi]

I'm trying to give Windows 7 a chance, so please educate me on how to do this.

When I press [Windows Key] and then type any letter, that letter gets used as the first letter in the 'Search' rather than selecting one of the displayed programs. What am I doing wrong?

You're not doing anything wrong. That's how it works in Vista/7.

[iambk]

It's not about denying you, it's about letting the Windows developers work on more worthwhile things, like improving the current start menu, not one that was designed over a decade ago.

That's an argument, but not everyone is using that argument. Many claim things like "the new one looks better so the old one shouldn't even be an option because I don't like the old one."

[morphen]

burn in deepest abyss of hell :p

+1

[Guest xiphi]

That's an argument, but not everyone is using that argument. Many claim things like "the new one looks better so the old one shouldn't even be an option because I don't like the old one."

The newer Start Menu looking better is just icing on the cake. Most people like it, including me, because it gets the job done quicker. I LOVE the Search and Jumplists. If you really do want to get things done quicker, you'd be using the new Start Menu not the classic.

[iambk]

You're not doing anything wrong. That's how it works in Vista/7.

You told me I could run a program with two key presses like I can with the WinXP classic start menu.

[Guest xiphi]

You told me I could run a program with two key presses like I can with the WinXP classic start menu.

I did?

[iambk]

I did?

sorry, you responded to me question to +Kirkburn and I didn't realize until now that you are two different people.

I guess I'll wait for +Kirkburn to explain.

[Cartoondad]

Windows 7 start menu is kinda fat but it still looks good.

+1

After using it for so long I have gotten used to it...mind you we didn't have much choice about it.

[iambk]

Windows 7 is allowing me to add folders under programs for 'All Users' but not shortcuts. What am I missing?

[Kirkburn]

sorry, you responded to me question to +Kirkburn and I didn't realize until now that you are two different people.

I guess I'll wait for +Kirkburn to explain.

Keyboard: Easy, type the first two letters of the program name - it'll be at or near the top of the list. This if you're suggesting every single program is right at the top level of your All Programs menus, which invariably it won't be.

Mouse: Click on your pinned program: option one, only one click. Click on the all programs button then your program: option two. Plus your mouse hardly moves to navigate around the all programs menu, unlike in XP.

And while this may be about your specific experience, where I'm sure you optimise your start menu to hell and back, normal users would see even more benefit.

Btw, my name is just "Kirkburn".

[day_chess]

I've been watching this and other forums for a bit, specifically the posts on the start menu.

It's odd how some posters sound like the voice of Microsoft, fervently trying to convince users that they don't want to use the classic start menu.

I understand the old start menu was tied to legacy code; it was time for it to go.

Replicating the functionality of the old start menu would be trivial under the new code.

Microsoft took a similar tack with Office 2007. Many of the same complaints were made, and ignored.

But Microsoft's attitude was not ignored at our company. This is the year 2009, and we have approx 2,200 workstations that still run Office 2003. The reason? Our users did not care for the 2007 interface. We saw no reason to fight that.

Approximately two years ago today, we had closer to 3,000 workstations using Office. We found that a number of our users were open to adopting OpenOffice instead. These were users who did not require us to cross-train them on a new product.

While I can't quite state that we'll be making a similar transition for our XP users (we've had little reason to adopt Vista; less than 100 of our machines run that OS) we are of course open to less expensive alternatives in the new economy.

While I have enjoyed trialing Windows 7 personally, I too would prefer the functionality of the 'classic' start menu. I was actually looking forward to rolling out the OS on a number of machines, but (I'm rather laughing to myself) this arrogant stance on the part of Microsoft, and some of the posters in this forum again make me hesitate to adopt this product. I am the primary person who makes this decision in the case of our organization; a small number of users will overrule me on this, the majority will be stuck with my decision.

Our little company won't make or break Microsoft. But I have to believe there are others thinking as I do.

I've actually been a pretty ardent Microsoft supporter. I'm getting over it. The forums I've read since January have posters using the identical language on different sites. This cannot be coincidence. Microsoft is shaping opinion through shilling - an ugly practice.

Dear Microsoft: Users like the posters of this forum are telling how they would prefer the interface crafted. Each time these topics arise, you use the phrase 'usability testing.' Each time you utter or type this phrase, I would like you to visualize the dollars that you will be turning down. I've explained in number of copies of software we have chosen not to purchase over a period of five years. Think of it what you will.

I'll now take a cue from Microsoft and share my message in another forum.

[Stijn Vandamme]

If you don't like the absent choice for Classic W7 menu's, then vote the petition !

http://www.petitionspot.com/petitions/classicW7

[a1ien]

Awesome! Die classic start menu, die! I always was depressed when I saw someone using XP w/the classic menu. For sure its time for users to adapt.

[sleekgeek]

Awesome! Die classic start menu, die! I always was depressed when I saw someone using XP w/the classic menu. For sure its time for users to adapt.

after using this for months now. classic is a must. I hate how they made vista retard friendly to compete with apple. everything is dumbed down. search is slow and sometimes people don't even know what they are looking for until the read it. seriously I could click the app I was after faster than I could type and wait for 7 to search.

[zhangm Supervisor]

after using this for months now. classic is a must. I hate how they made vista retard friendly to compete with apple. everything is dumbed down. search is slow and sometimes people don't even know what they are looking for until the read it. seriously I could click the app I was after faster than I could type and wait for 7 to search.

Maybe there is something wrong with your setup, my search results appear in less than half a second.

[primexx]

There's nothing wrong with preferring the old menu because you're used to it, but don't pretend like it's more efficient or faster than the new setup, because it's not, and Microsoft would have done a plethora of usability studies before making the decision.

It's quite amusing how a lot of the people whining about the classic menu also disable the search indexer.

[Kirkburn]

I've actually been a pretty ardent Microsoft supporter. I'm getting over it. The forums I've read since January have posters using the identical language on different sites. This cannot be coincidence. Microsoft is shaping opinion through shilling - an ugly practice.

No, we are not Microsoft shills, nor do we have anything to do with Microsoft. It is insulting for you to suggest so.

Microsoft does a huge amount of usability testing. It's how the Office 2007 interface was crafted in the first place.

Micosoft have no obligation to listen to people on random forums. If everything was designed by committee, you'd end up with a terrible, terrible UI. MS make decisions, and they test them. If they don't work, they change them. We get that you prefer the old style - but MS cannot and will not keep it that way forever. They will not continue to maintain and support old code forever, especially when they will have tested out newer code on the general public and got a good response.

Regardless of how easily MS could have kept it, that is not the same as continuing to support and code around it.

[Ambroos]

Gee, there's already a free piece of software that re-enables it, so I guess nobody has a point anymore. In one topic everyone is mad at Microsoft because they leave so much legacy code in, and then when they try to remove some to improve consistency everyone starts complaining again...

[Quillz]

Gee, there's already a free piece of software that re-enables it, so I guess nobody has a point anymore. In one topic everyone is mad at Microsoft because they leave so much legacy code in, and then when they try to remove some to improve consistency everyone starts complaining again...

Microsoft bashing has been the hipster thing to do since about 2006.