Windows

Video: Get the Classic Start Menu in Windows 7 with Classic Shell

Bill Detwiler shows you how to get the Classic Start Menu back in Windows 7 using a free program called Classic Shell.

IT pros and confirmed geeks tend to develop strong feelings about their favorite technology, whether it's an OS, an application, or even an icon. So, it's no surprise that many long-time Windows users were pretty ticked when the Classic Start Menu disappeared with the release of Windows 7. Some people even refused to upgrade over it! During this episode of TR Dojo, I'll show how to get the Classic Start Menu back in Windows 7 using a free program called Classic Shell.

For those who prefer text to video, you can click the Transcript link that appears below the video player window or read Greg Shultz's article, "Put the Classic Start menu in Windows 7 with Classic Shell," on which this video is based.

You can also sign up to receive the latest TR Dojo lessons through one or more of the following methods:

About

Bill Detwiler is Managing Editor of TechRepublic and Tech Pro Research and the host of Cracking Open, CNET and TechRepublic's popular online show. Prior to joining TechRepublic in 2000, Bill was an IT manager, database administrator, and desktop supp...

124 comments
AceNewsService
AceNewsService

Trying to get away from windows completely and will eventually work in googleapps and nothing else with a back-up.

mysterchr
mysterchr

For years people worked to try and get Win XP to look like what we now call Win 7...Why after all that work would you then try to go backwards instead of forward? The GUI isn't even that different it's just made to look more appealing to a younger generation. Heck it's even easier to navigate. Stop going backwards and start looking forward.

flange1107
flange1107

I still think W7 (even Vista)has a long way to go to come close to the stability and usability of XP and for the majority of users, most of the "New" stuff in W7 are gimmicks.

tpd1001
tpd1001

...then I'm all in favour of it! I'm a Unix Consultant and I still use FVWM v1.24 because I know it and I don't need all the bloated dross that todays offerings come with to do my job and be productive.

mikifinaz1
mikifinaz1

Microsoft has rooms full of people that do nothing but look at user interaction with the OS and the GUI. So, like a country with an army they feel they have to use army, Microsoft feels that they have to use their GUI crowd's suggestions. I think that most of the GUI "improvements" are garbage and I wish they would put in the "GUI switch" in all their operating systems to that installed users don't have to jump through hoops because someone thinks they have a better idea.

rwhold
rwhold

Hello, I discovered the Classic Shell a while back and it is a great tool. I think a lot of people are missing the issue here which is the learning curve that is forced upon a large group of users at both the corporate level (massive retraining is required at a great expense) and at the personal level, like mature users (seniors and others) who do not want to HAVE to learn a new interface and a new way to function on the home or personal PC. Rick Holder rwhold@sbcglobal.net

keeneydj
keeneydj

NO! NO! BAD! The start menus of Win7 and Vista far surpass the functionality of even the XP menu. If you are not using the Win7 start menu, you are losing quite a piece of what makes Win7 (Vista even) so great. Take 2+ mins. to learn how to customize the new menu. You will never even think of wasting resources to go back to classic. If you are having performance issues with the New menu, most likely your computer is loaded with too much junk.

jegan10
jegan10

Does Classic Shell (or another app) allow Explorer windows to be re-sized and retain the size and position. With Aero (Aero Snap) turned off, on a 22" monitor I want multiple folders open with different sizes that I choose, which will be retained when I re-start. I read several months ago a Microsoft engineer's comment that in Win 7 that feature is not available and won't be in the future. Thanks JE

jfuller05
jfuller05

I really enjoy these videos, and plus, I've missed the classic menu option. I think Windows 7's menu is functional, but the classic menu is more organized in my opinion. Thanks for showing how to resurrect the "old-school" menu for 7.

JonGauntt
JonGauntt

Why limit yourself to what you knew in XP? Keep learning and evolving. Not only will you stay sharp, but your customers (internal & external) will think you are smarter and worth investing in. Oh, and do yourself a favor and create a GodMode folder and learn how to use it.

lklug
lklug

For blind, visually impaired, and hard-core keyboard users, Classic Shell is a gem. It works greart with screen reader programs. The start menu in Windows 7 is a pain. Especially when the search box is in the way when you try to start a program when using the keyboard. I greatly thank the developer for listening to the rest of us. Larry Tech specialist - Clovernook Center for the Blind and Visually Impaired

Pazman
Pazman

In addition to adding back in the "Up" button and others, there really should be a button for "New Folder", or at least a keystroke shortcut.

jfreedle2
jfreedle2

This is the stupidest thing that I have ever heard of.

brian.catt
brian.catt

What does Vista.Windows 7 do of value for most XP users? Absolutely nothing! Wasting our time learning stuff we don't need to. Arrogant onopoly Totalitarianism that costs us time and money for no gain. If it ain't broke... Why should we have our time wasted by re learning how to use our computers that we have invested years learning because Microsoft is arrogant enough to think it can make us - just to create product churn. A worse example is Office 2007, in which most of the functionality learnt over 10 or more years is simply trashed by the totally new, opaque and unnecessary interface to what is a hardly changed set of actual functionalities, now made differently awkward to find and use. MS are completely arrogant and disrespectful of their customers time and money. They don't deserve us. Its time to learn Star Office.

Oz_Media
Oz_Media

fear of change, fear of the unfamiliar. Fear breeds hatred.

Oz_Media
Oz_Media

The most UNSTABLE and INSECURE OS Microsoft EVER released was Windows XP. The day it hit the shelves it had more exploitable holes than any other OS by any manufacturer to date. As it took them three years and service pack releases to finally patch the flaws, they released another OS that offered greater security than ever before, Vista. People whined and whinged because their old PC's needed upgrading, so they then release the same security and stability in a new OS that is many times more resourceful, Win7. This BS about XP being more secure and stable is simply laughable, a testament to how little you actually know about the operating system.

santeewelding
santeewelding

This is the sum and substance of your first utterance on TR, or, the entirety of your public existence?

dcarr@winning.com
dcarr@winning.com

I worked in the corporate environment for many years, before starting my own business 8 years ago. Corporate end users are very frustrated when being constantly confronted with learning updated apps and a NEW OS, especially when most organizations do not have the money or the time to train them. Productivity in most instances suffers. End users in most instances despise IT, as they see it being forced to constantly learn new apps or a new OS, with in most cases given the "you will figure it out" answer. NEW is not always better, as in most cases "less is more". M$ is in the business of making $$$$$. You can't make money selling the same old product, no matter how good it may be. So, you come up with a New product. It may be better then the previous one, or it may be worse. No matter, as long as you can make a buck selling it. Just like so many businesses in this country that over the last 20 years that have failed (and were thought of (excuse the govt. reference) "too big to fail". I believe it is just a matter of time and M$ will be one of those businesses. They don't and never have cared about outside input. They have a better idea, and you will just have to learn to love it, whether it is smart or just downright stupid. The home user is never considered in this situation, or the mature user, who is just finally getting comfortable with the OS and apps they use, when they are told it is time to start all over and learn something totally new, just so they can do the same thing they are doing today and yesterday!!! Sorry to all those in this post who do not get it. I believe some of them have never heard the cliche: "if it ain't broke don't fix it"

kathybacon
kathybacon

Enjoyed the video as I do all of Bill's TR Dojo vids. I always walk away knowing a little more than I did before watching. Keep up the good work and keep those outtakes coming. They're good for a laugh and make me realize that Bill has a great sense of humor. I cracked up at the writer who suggested Bill wear a green shirt...that would be a riot. Okay...down to biz. I support about 80+ users. Of those users 50-60% do NOT own a home computer. As much as I love Win 7 and use it at home, I can see a serious learning curve issue with my end users who know only how to do their job on a computer. Same goes for Office 2007/2010...the ribbon will cause many of my users to lose it. These tools are helpful for productivity and user sanity. Given the shrinking training budgets of many businesses, tools like this have a useful purpose. I don't want to bring users to tears, nor do I want a full scale war on my hands. I want them to remain productive as does management. If it means using CSM or Classic Menu Manager for Office 2007/2010 so be it. In the end, it is my interface and I can do whatever the heck I want. I'm not going to skewer MS either in spite of often times scratching my head and saying "what were they thinking".

MikeG3b
MikeG3b

Please continue including the outtakes. I know it's extra work for you to add that stuff, but they are hilarious! Always a good start to the day.

Bill Detwiler
Bill Detwiler

Glad you enjoy them. I include them just to demonstrate that I don't take myself too seriously.

blaise
blaise

This is just another example of Bill waking up in the morning and thinking, "What the hell am I going to write about today?" He has obviously run out of real topics to blab about. Windows 7 has an intelligent interface. Wanting to make it look like XP is just a sign of old age and stupidity. Hey Bill, let's get rid of the power steering and brakes in your car too while we are at it, who needs em?

Shepps
Shepps

I completely disagree with your appraisal of Office 2007. I went from 2003 to 2007 at work and yes, sometimes I couldn't find the location of functions I had used for years. But I then discovered that all the stuff I did repeatedly almost never needed more than one or two clicks. The ribbon interface is actually ingenious and if you give two people completely new to office a version of 2003 and 2007 they would go for 2007 any day! Now I got a new job... and... back to 2003. I am detesting it. Outlook cannot search for mails properly, Excel is back to its limited 65000 rows, I cannot add internet calendars in outlook either, the list goes on and on and on. I beta's 2010 and can't wait for the workplace to finally catch up. What is more we will probably get 64 bit versions which means... MORE RAM to use!! I don't know how anyone can love staying with 2003. You obviously don't push these apps to their limits. But, that's just my opinion, I guess. Everyone will make up their mind whether they prefer the new stuff or not. I certainly do...

jfuller05
jfuller05

you don't have to use 7, at least for personal use, you don't have to. Also, what's wrong with learning a new OS? It's a great tool added to your IT toolbox. 7's differences from XP are mostly cosmetic. I know the location of things are tweaked, but once you learn the design, you're good. Actually, 7 does a lot more for the user than XP did. For instance, networking now is almost click-free (notice I said almost). :) The search feature is great. Speed and response is better. The action center is a really nice feature too. Bitlocker to go and Power Config are nice additions too.

Oz_Media
Oz_Media

Seriously, just laughing and at a loss for words. What a lot of codswollop!

dougogd
dougogd

If microsoft really listened to what their customers were telling them everyone would upgrade without any complaints at all, and would be pleased to use their software at all times. My main issue is the amount of programs that vista and 7 broke for me almost $10,000 worth. I don't see any reason upgrade for that reason alone. If Microsoft is reading this, this is just one complaint think about how many others there are you are ignoring.

Unkn0wn F0rces
Unkn0wn F0rces

I mean really... First things first, how is MS a monopoly....they don't put a gun to your head and say "You have to use our products or your computers will cease to work". Secondly, how will switching to different software be any different? You complain and whine about how you "have to relearn something". What do you think will happen when you switch to a different software/platform? I don't want to hear that crap about "oh but I've used the software before", that is irrelevant. In the IT field if you are working for a company, you wont be making those decisions. You won't be deciding what office suite you will be using. And deciding to switch up your office suite with another will cause you more headaches through overhead than sticking with office and learning the minor changes that have been made. Office 2007 really is not that much different than Office 2003. Win 7 isn't much different either, things have been moved around a bit and the UI looks different than it has in the past. But again isn't that what sets us apart in the ecosystem? We have the ability to change. Rather than being the old man sitting on his porch refusing to accept the new things and the advantages that come with it, embrace it. After all, there may be these problems in the beginning, but through trial and error one day 7 may turn out to be as great or better than XP (which if I remember correctly wasn't that well loved in the beginning either) :P

ramnet
ramnet

Thank you for your comments. I agree 100%. As an older and much wiser IT Director there are many , many more considerations than just churning the OS for the sake of Microsoft's bottom line.Microsoft just don't get it and are NOT respectful of their XP client base. It amazes me that they don't use the opportunity to keep both market spaces happy and profit from that. If 70% of the market place like and wish to stick with XP why not exploit that . Instead they go overboard to try and convince us we are all old and lazy and out of touch - any kind of dismissive point to try and prove they are right. New boys on the block jump on board and show how naive they are by being dismissive of our concerns. A much bigger one will erupt when W7 builds start falling over as they are starting to do and end users discover there is NO REPAIR/RESTORE option and they will have to blow away the PC and rebuild it over and over and over again. System restore is a waste - no end user actually creates one (nor do they understand it) and the system repair option does not work in a way that replaces damaged or virus infected or boot files.Microsoft are just becoming a dumb and arrogant company and as for the Office 2007 ribbon interface they have an absolute lemon. Ken IT Director Melbourne Australia

edgehead
edgehead

how many Luddites work in the computer industry. I see no problem with people wanting to use a classic interface but it does seem to be clinging on their part rather than "better design" in XP.

carlsf
carlsf

It would seem you are only interested in getting your point across. It would appear that your reading interpertation skills need some work. As someone said before ITS NOT that we want WIN7 to work like XP, its the "CLASSIC" and familuar feel we want, and Im sure that MS could have worked that to use the WIN7 new features that you love, and alot of users/clients HATE, and are refusing to go to WIN7.

dcarr@winning.com
dcarr@winning.com

What and who are you referring to. The comment has no context

SgtPappy
SgtPappy

shirt chant here. Green Shirt! Green Shirt! Green Shirt!

mcswan454
mcswan454

I shan't repeat the entire post, but this explains why I expanded upward in the thread: "But I digress... I use all the various UI's daily. I support them. I restrict them. I administer them. Hell, in some cases (OS Dependent), I re-design and or modify them, to accommodate the end-user. It's isn't about us the TECHS! If I want to rollout the new Win7 interface firm-wide, I'll do it as a phased rollout, to best gauge the response(s) of my end user community. This serves two purposes: 1) Maintains productivity during the learning process. 2) Allows me to correctly evaluate the learning curve(s) to provide the right types of support once the phase-in is complete. I might even have an effective Kbase/Best practices of my own to help new hires acclimate after the rest of the firm is aboard. Not to mention, as a right-click option, I can turn it full on when we're ready, or switch back if needed for troubleshooting/teaching purposes. Maybe -- and I can hear it now: "We don't have time for all of that!" I'll agree. But I also don't have time for the rash of support calls and lost productivity because I made a switch WITHOUT considering WHO will be using the interface. (Is that grammatically correct?) Or did I think about this too much from the end user perspective?" M.

SgtPappy
SgtPappy

you seriously either....just kidding. You provide a great service. I'm still waiting for you to wear something green to match the back drop so all we see is your hands and head.

BlueCollarCritic
BlueCollarCritic

Hey blaise, Did you say the same thing about Windows VISTA when it was first released only to have to backtrack later after realizing it was not the end-all / be-all in Windows computing when everyone started complaining about Vista? I bet you were this same way with the Office 2007 Ribbon. Not all of us drink the Kool-Aid that Microsoft serves with each product release. Some of us say BS when we see BS. There's nothing wrong with having a different opinion and or speaking in opposition to what is pushed. Just because you are a slave to whatever is pushed out doesn't mean we all have to be nor does it entitle you to treat the rest of us in such a disrespectful manner. You don't see those of us who dislike these anti-friendly changes in each new Microsoft product release calling you stupid or an idiot do you? At least not until you start throwing down insults first. BTW - The Power Steering analogy is seriously flawed. if you are going to say something like that then you need to word it like this: Hey Bill, don't like the iSteer (an iPad touch screen like interface) that MS Motors replaced your outdated steering wheel with? Then let?s just replace it with out dated tech called a steering wheel. Hah! Not only can the steering wheel not do simple tasks like pay videos and games but it also looks ugly. People like you need to get with the program or get off the road because the next generation doesn't have time for old foogies like you who are hold back steering tech progress. next you'll be telling us we can't play games on our iSteer while driving.

Oz_Media
Oz_Media

Why do they build cars that just fold up these days, "they don't make 'em like they used to!". Ignoring of course that the reason they don't make rigid steel cars anymore is because too many people died during low impact crashes that throw them around like a pinball. I still hear people saying how cheap cars are these days and how they 'don't make em like they used to!'. Best thing to do is smile and let them believe it, some people refuse what they don't get, are scared of stepping out of a comfort zone and repel change of any sort. In fact, that same mindset is also VERY common in IT as which requires more focused, singular thinking. People with a more creative and spacial thought process usually welcome such changes. Not saying one is better than the other, just reality.

dougogd
dougogd

car manual in Chinese and expecting everyone to be able to read it. Because the first thing a person should do is read the manual to be certain of proper function of the vehicle. I know I do with every vehicle I get and I don't have any issues with any of my cars I buy. How my problems do you have with you cars? Did you find the start button in the glove box yet? also I think you must work for microsoft and you are trying to push the new worthless start menu.

SgtPappy
SgtPappy

That was harsh. Why the hate Blaise? You don't have to follow Bill's advice/example/general information. He was just demonstrating something that some people obviously would like to have on their Windows 7 machine. To you the new interface maybe perfect to some of us XP classic is the way to go and to others it doesn't matter. Chill out, I don't see you waking up every morning pumping out video blogs. Now how do you take your coffee? Black or with Cream? Sweet or unsweetened?

Bill Detwiler
Bill Detwiler

Don't worry, I haven't run out of "real" topics. In upcoming TR Dojo episodes I'll provide tips for getting the most from Windows 7's Windows XP Mode, examine several Linux-based system recovery tools, and show you how to completely uninstall Windows applications with the Revo Uninstaller. But judging from the more than 70 percent of the over 860 TechRepublic members who said they should be able to do what they want with their computer, perhaps this is a "real" topic. Also, your automotive analogy isn't really accurate. Changing the Windows GUI is more like adding aftermarket floor mats or perhaps even a dash board gauge. Had I suggested a replacement for the Windows Registry or the NTFS file system, your comparison to critical car systems might be more appropriate.

bbbaldie_z
bbbaldie_z

Let me guess, you're both fresh out of school? If you find the big fluffy soft and cushy Win 7 interface better, good on you. Don't worry, I won't call you stupid or anything. My UI is MINE. A rewrite of it steps on my toes.

Oz_Media
Oz_Media

Excellent, intuitive, partition manager! No more Partition Magic or other third party software needed. Bredcrumbs navigations saves a lot of time. Snap and Shake features for window resizing and grouping is unseen before Win 7 making file copying and recovery of related open windows a 'snap' (sorry), the core is far mroe stable and secure than XP (even AFTER they finally fixed XP), hibernation or sleep resume is fantastic, better power management for notebooks, the window previews from the task bar are a great help. Just like ANY new OS, including XP (which was just plain horriffic when it came out)it just takes a wee bit of time to get to learn the changes and find improved ways of performing old tasks. Many times we have taught ourselves to do things one way because that's 'as good as it will work', however with the new OS addressing some of those old problems, newer methods are far easier and provide faster results.

hyoi
hyoi

Oz, you get bonus points for using "codswollop" in a post :)

terryd64
terryd64

Windows 7 is an OS that has rules for programs to follow. It was only available in Beta and developer editions for what almost 5 years? The better question to ask is why didn't your software vendor get on the ball to offer a more secure updated version of their application. Don't blame MS for making their OS more secure by changing the rules of the system. Blame your software vendors for not upgrading their applications to work properly in a more secure environment. Gee, I really want to go back to a less secure OS that let's any script Kiddie with a penchant for destruction come wreck my network because some bone headed company doesn't want to invest in a more secure application. If your business depends on software applications that REQUIRE administrative access to your OS, then you really need to look at a replacement vendor. I guarantee that someone else has software that will work properly on a more secure OS. I remember a couple of notorious virus outbreaks that cost me well over $10,000 in damage because the OS and applications weren't secure. It's well worth a few grand to have a more secure, more stable OS than it is to have an insecure unstable heavily patched OS so a few apps can work in an insecure manner. Back to the question at hand. If users want the Classic menu then they should be able to have it. I for one prefer the classic to the XP Fisher Price or the Vista/7 Mac clone UI. But I'm just old an grumpy. If that makes me Luddite then so be it. But seriously not beginning your upgrade path to a more secure more stable OS because there's no classic menu or some legacy apps that some lazy vendor hasn't upgraded don't work properly; then you're being penny wise and pound foolish and deserve any misfortune or additional overhead maintenance costs incurred in not upgrading.

john3347
john3347

Someone who wants to work significantly more efficiently with an intuitive interface in which one step logically leads to the next and requires 1/3 to 1/2 fewer mouse clicks to get any certain chore completed, and requires a familiar workpattern to acheive this increased productivity, is NOT being a Luddite! The person who wants something different simply because it is different is being the opposite of Luddite, which is even a worse trait than Luddite. More efficient MAKES a computer interface a better design. Classic interface is more efficient!!!

dougogd
dougogd

The new start menu even though at least 50 of all people I have talked to can't stand the new menu and want it to work like the one in windows xp. The only thing they did say was that the new versions of windows were pretty. The only thing they don't like is the start menu. Also you are right oz does not listen and he wants everyone in the world to do things his way. If he wants that he needs to take over a communist country and rule it so he can have his way. He reminds me of half the children I see on a daily basis, he has to have his way. Everyone should have a choice of how they want their start menu. That is why there are so many companies doing Microsoft's job for them and creating programs like the one mention in the article.

BlueCollarCritic
BlueCollarCritic

@mcswan454 Don't sweat the Oz. For some unknow reason he believes his way is not only the best way but the only and that anything differnet is ignorant, stupid and or just lazy. I believe he's a Brit based on his 'american' comments (notice how he uses lowercase for a subtle insult) and also becaus eof his logo. I say that because I thing he's one of those anti-American people (not that all Bris are mind you) and so he takes cheap shots were he can get them in. Just do like the rest of us and ignore him because you'll have better luck engagaing a wall in the details of String Theory then convincing Oz_Media that hes a self righteous little p.., well you get my meaning.

mcswan454
mcswan454

Who do you think you are to tell ANYONE what they should desire to accomplish their tasks? You're THAT good? Then WHY - pray tell - like me are you on this board instead of living the high life from your sensible investments into various companies or whatever? You SHOULDN'T even have time to read these boards; you're too important to concern yourself with this patter among others. Or do you honestly believe that YOU are the only technicially proficient person here? I've admitted when I was an A**. Read my posts. Do I care if you find them useful? No. Just my opinion. But I get the sense, were it up to you, you WOULD decide for all of us. And some of us actually have much more experience than you. Rethink, and fast.... I would NEVER welcome you to work for me, with this attitude. And don't reply by saying you wouldn't want to, because, I know that. We understand each other. If I have come off sideways, I will apologize now. But the vitriol is stifling the benefits we garner from working with other techs across the planet DAMMIT! I said this in a different post: We may not always agree, but what if we put our minds together? Or does that concept bother you as the "be all - end all" of techdom? M.

Oz_Media
Oz_Media

In case you are suffering from reading comprehension issues or are unable to click links and read my other responses, I KNOW YOU DON'T THINK YOU WANT WIN 7 TO BE LIKE WIN XP. Now that you can hopefully grasp that simple comment; by wanting the classic look and feel, which was available in XP as you have all touted, you are thus expecting Win7 to be LIKE XP. If you want your new vehicle to have a soft top LIKE your old vehicle, then you are in turn saying you want your new vehicle to be LIKE your old vehicle. I understand that, for some people, such simple concepts can be somewhat perplexing but, perhaps if you ask a few friends and neighbours to help, it's quite easy to figure out.

dougogd
dougogd

them mindless or stupid? Are you trying to cover for some short comings oz?

Oz_Media
Oz_Media

They used to offer a decoder ring in teh cereal boxes for Santee's mindless babble that he feels makes him appear more inteeligent, instead of just old and out of touch with society. They don't make that cereal anymore, so it's pointless even trying to work with him.

Oz_Media
Oz_Media

Seatbelts were used in cars worldwide for years before America FINALLY started to accept their need and even then the injury rate in low speed accidents was immense. Yes seatbelts 'aid' in keeping people properly restrained but the rigidity of the cars caused so many injuries it's not funny. The old comment that a seatbelt will kill yo umore often than save you was based on; 1)the fact that you couldn't 'escape the vehicle' if it was submerged (I think I'll take my chances on that one) 2) People were wuffering major internal injuries because the car was still TOO RIGID, causing theirn internal organs to be rattled in a collision. The heavy steel bodies were STILL the reason behind most of the serious injuries, especially internally and especially when the occupant was wearing a seatbelt. Thus the great dissention of American adoption of seatbelt laws. When the car absorbs the shock, the seatbelt is merely an aid so the occupant is not thrown out of the car. If you had the foggiest clue about vehicle engineering, you may have had a point, but as your next paragraph describes, you have so little knowledge of the subject it is a joke that you even try to discuss it. Crumple zones and breakaway panels are what people consider 'cheap engineering', it is actually one of the most expensive parts of building a car, far mroe expensive than bulding a heavy steel body. The MATERIALS used in the interiors are also seen as cheap, compared to the old days, but even THOSE materials are carefully selected due to impact resistance, ability to soften occupant impact etc. The R&D to meet safety standards for the 'cheap interior' alone is more expensive than building entire cars just 30 years ago. It costs a LOT more money to design a safe car than it does to build a rigid steel car, LOTS, in both materials and R&D. The weight issue is a key concern merely due to marketing needs, no cost. The lighter the car, the better the mileage, the better it sells. That means a manufacturer spend even mroe building a car that is both lightweight AND safe than ever before. Face it, consumers are cheap as hell in NOrth America and won't pay for quality anymore. Only very recently have North Americans started to understand the value of a well made European vehicle (even those sold in Europe by North American manufacturers), they are just now willing to pay more for a Ford engineered in Europe as opposed to the exact same model made in North America, in fact there is a long waiting list for American companies to bring their European models to North America. people were scared of them, until they now realize that even though they are small and light, they are more economical and last longer than the North American built equivalents. Until now it has been the delusional, "avoid the compact car, it's a death trap" mentality, which is false. Today's whimpy looking little SMART cars are actually safer in an accident than a 1974 Plymouth 'boat'. When you are talking, to an automotive engineer, your false argument falls on deaf ears, sorry but nice try anyway.

BlueCollarCritic
BlueCollarCritic

"Ignoring of course that the reason they don't make rigid steel cars anymore is because too many people died during low impact crashes that throw them around like a pinball." ~ Oz_Media People got tossed around because the lack of use of a seatbelt and not because in some way the use of steel made a car less safe for the passenger then the newer models do. People often quote the "They don't make'em like they used to" saying not because the new cars are unsafe but because they are often cheaply made. Companies (and not just car companies) are always looking for the cheapest way to make something and the end result is often a cheaply made product. The age of pride and craftsmanship has been replaced with "give me, give me, give me now!" and " give me now and for free or at least dirt cheap". These same people who go to Wal-Mart and argue to get nickel off the already marked down item because the packaging looks worn also demand top pay at their own job. We call them hypocrites.

Oz_Media
Oz_Media

Are the new Windows features and HELP menu written in Chinese so people don't have an opportunity to learn about them? No, Windows offers an English manual to indentify and describe the changes, just like your car should.

Fnshman
Fnshman

He obviously takes his coffee black and unsweetened----he seems to be quite bitter. :)

blaise
blaise

You guessed wrong. I have been a computer programmer since 1970, that's right 1970. I have worked in basic, Cobol, Dos, remember when Windows was invented and run a $5 million a year computer consulting firm in New York City, with over 180 satisfied clients, not an easy thing to do in this town. And I am 58 years old, far from being a newbie. I have become successful embracing change, not repelling it. When we first saw the new Win7 taskbar we were a little put off by it also, but instead of figuring out a way to revert it to something more comfortable, we learned how to use it and discovered it really is intelligent after all. Your arguments are flawed. I remember when people complained about the XP shell and actually tried to change it back to look like Windows 98. That was stupid then and it is stupid now. Also, and this is very important, we have found that it is never a good idea to use third party apps to screw with the shell. When your computer starts having performance issues, how the hell are you going to troubleshoot if the shell itself has been messed around with? Bill, instead of teaching people how to mess with Windows, teach them how to use it properly and embrace it as times change. Without Microsoft and Windows and Linux in the business environment, we would be living on a different planet. We have a lot to thank them for. Change is always good even if the unfamiliarity makes you uncomfortable for a while. The ability to learn new things is what makes us human. Stop being Microsoft haters, or Apple haters or whatever and learn new things. You might end up liking them.

Oz_Media
Oz_Media

I often try to use terms that are somewhat odd to North Americans, when selling a product. I find it keeps the audience more attentive and makes things a bit more colourful, as demonstrated by your reply. :D

dougogd
dougogd

and the companies that bought them just wanted to buy them to scrap their software. Microsoft could have made the operating system 100% compatible with older software but they didn't. Why because you force people to buy new software that doesn't do what the old did and make them pay to get the functions back that they lost buying the new software. I personally think that if software isn't updated or supported then it should be force released to open source so that patches and upgrades could be a possibility. And to give some examples of software that should be released to open source, dos windows all up to 2000 me soon to xp. Any software that is not supported by the company that released it should be released. But however that would create a problem for microsoft since they are relying on xp dieing so that people will have to upgrade. If it was released to open source many different companies would pick it up and start releasing their own versions of it and could upgrade the core and make it as stable as vista and 7.

SmartAceW0LF
SmartAceW0LF

When you say that what you could accomplish with a few clicks in XP now takes 5,6 or 7 clicks in Win 7. Bring it to the table. I havent found it yet. But I do have a fairly knowledgable sounding board to bounce it off of. Nearly without fail, my peers have been able to answer all of the same beefs professed here in such a fashion that makes me approach the subject of these changes with a little less whine and a lot more caution. Its easy to get on a rant and lose focus out of sheer stubborness. Please, bring some real world examples to the table. Consider yourselves challenged.

SgtPappy
SgtPappy

MS is not breaking Office XP it just isn't supporting it anymore. You can continue to use it on a Windows XP machine. Sooner or later you will have to upgrade to another version of Office if you want to run newer operating systems because the code used to write the older version is too complex with all the patches to continue to maintain. It's a fact of life, things are new then they are old then they become a thing of the past. Sooner or later you have to renew. Old software becomes too cumbersome to maintain patching vulnerabilities. I tried explaining this to my Mom when trying to dispose of her 50 year old Toaster that had two settings....burnt and burnt more. As far as UAC is concerned they finally set it up the way it was intended. It is done that way to help prevent end users from installing unapproved applications. Just like they do in your favorite flavor of OpenSource OS's. You have to su or sudo to root to install software. What's wrong with that? It's much more secure and you don't have to be admin just to run Office or Outlook. It makes perfect sense. 6 or 7 mouse clicks....try GodMode it makes getting where you want much easier.

Unkn0wn F0rces
Unkn0wn F0rces

Because it was secure in 2002.....nowadays saying that you use Outlook 2002 is a joke. Yes partially it is about business...but it is also about security. Go ahead and continue to use XP or what ever you use...just remember...support for it will be over soon...what then?

dcarr@winning.com
dcarr@winning.com

M$ breaks its own apps in Win-7. I personally like Outlook XP (2002). Well, M$ decided that they will NOT support Outlook 2002 in Win-7. EXCUSE ME!!!!!! That is THEIR app. which they outright refuse to let function in Win-7. They will NOT fix Win-7 to work with Outlook 2002, or have a patch for Outlook 2002. Their compatibility mode is an absolute joke, and printer sharing is virtually impossible for the average user to figure out. Their adds that it is windows made simpler is really sick. When many functions I could accomplish in XP took a few mouse clicks, and now take 5, 6, or 7, I fail to see how that is simpler???? If auto manufacturers every few model years decided things were just getting stale, they would do like M$ and move the accelerator to the back seat, the steering wheel to the trunk, and the radio controls to the glove box. It would be new and different, but certainly not functional. Oh, lest we forget UAC. I thought M$ would get rid of that absolute useless piece of crap after Vista. Imagine driving your car, and when you went to start the engine, it asked you if you were sure, or putting the car in reverse, again asking you if you were sure you wanted to do that, and then turning on your right turn signal, and it asked you if you were sure you wanted to do that. I think we would push our cars off a cliff, or find a car manufacturer who had a clue. Win-7 was definitely not my idea, your idea, or anyone's idea. It was strictly M$ idea, and a bad one at that

Editor's Picks