Discussion on:

Poll: Is the lack of a Start Button in Windows 8 really a big deal?

Being a Unpaid Beta Tester for M$.

Keep up the good work we in business need people like you to tell M$ what they want. Of course M$ completely ignores you and your fellow Unpaid Beta Testers and does what they like so you really are not doing that much of a service for anyone at all.

Col

When I started using computers, the Disk Operating System (DOS) was required to be read from a 360K 5.25" floppy in order to boot, otherwise the EEPROM made the monochrome monitor show [A:\> no operating system found_]. Then, if you wanted to start a word processing program, the OS) having been loaded into RAM, you had to remove the OS diskette and insert the word processor diskette, and at the A:\> prompt enter the command (*.exe filename) at that prompt to get the program to run. Then you would type your paper, letter or whatever (and it had the capabilities of an IBM Selectric III Typewriter) and save it, yes, to a different 360KB diskette. So, you had to hace an OS floppy, a Program floppy, and a File floppy. I originally typed this post using C:\ as the A: drive--it has been that long. You were king if you had 2 floppy drives back then, an A: and a B:. If you started by putting the OS in drive A: and a program in drive B: then you might see the following screen:
A:>_
A:>b:\zork.exe_
and ZorkI would start
dang I'm old; fudge I'm a geek.

The question of whether the Start button is important is NOT the issue, its just the most recent blaring example of what is the issue and that is Microsoft???s arrogance towards user interface preferences.

The next best example is the Office 2007 Ribbon fiasco in which Microsoft made the decision that everyone would be better off with an interface called the Ribbon and not the traditional Menu & toolbars that users had been working with for as long as decade or more. Microsoft didn???t approach that change from the angle of ???How do we do best by our customers??? and make the Ribbon an option to the Menus & Toolbars but instead made the call that this is what???s best for all. That???s arrogance. Microsoft did justify the move by referring to ???extensive research in how users work??? as well as ???extensive feedback from users??? in which it was said that users preferred the Ribbon over the traditional menu/toolbar . What entity doesn???t tout its next version as being ???User Recommended??? or something similar?

With Windows 8 we now see Microsoft acting in the same arrogant manner. Instead of making a change an option to the user they force in on them and then imply thru marketing campaigns that the new way is what everyone wants and is what???s best and so by default if aren???t in agreement with the change then you are in the minority. The number of office users complaining about the Ribbon is far from being a few and yet even as of Office 2010 Microsoft still refuses to admit that the forcing of the Ribbon on users may have been a mistake. I imagine it???s because they are like all corporations in that they can never ever admit any perceived incorrect action.

The problem isn???t so much that the START button is a critical or irreplaceable starting point for users of the Windows OS but that Microsoft can???t be bothered to ask the user if they want to switch from that which they know to something new that they may or may not like. Yes things do change and change is often necessary but when change is done for the sake of change then that???s a problem. It seems like this removal of the START button for Window 8 Metro may be more about making the product look that much more different from its predecessor (and thereby justifying the cost to upgrade) then because of any actual user improvement.

"The next best example is the Office 2007 Ribbon fiasco in which Microsoft made the decision that everyone would be better off with an interface called the Ribbon and not the traditional Menu & toolbars that users had been working with for as long as decade or more. Microsoft didnt approach that change from the angle of How do we do best by our customers and make the Ribbon an option to the Menus & Toolbars but instead made the call that this is whats best for all."

While I agree that a 'traditional' menu should have been an option, MS actually was looking out for its customers on this one. (Or at least, they claim they were.) They say the problem with the old menus was that people would often request features be added, features that were already present but the users just couldn't find on the old menus. Theoretically it's easier to find features and tools on the Ribbon IF YOU DON'T HAVE ANY PREVIOUS OFFICE EXPERIENCE. That user group probably consists of my Aunt Judy, and Mrs. Cosgrove's first grade class at Mill Creek Elementary.

Thank you for providing a logical rebuttal instead of a bunch of logical fallacies which more often than not is the response typically received from a user who is OK or likes the Office Ribbon.

You are very correct in that users without prior Menu/toolbar experience will take to the Ribbon and like it more than the traditional menu & toolbar. The problem there is that this is proof that Microsoft did not care about its existing users, those it has made its OFFICE profit from but is more interested in the users they don't have.

This scenario of treating new customers better than existing ones is very comparable to how the Mobile Phone providers use to treat their customers where a new user could get a phone for cheap or free but an existing customer willing to sing a new agreement got a lot less. The providers were so focused on new customers that they ended up screwing over their existing users and this action which all of the major cell providers engaged in resulted in an never ending circle of provider swap; where one user would switch providers when their current contract was up so that they could get a new phone for little to no money because their existing provider would not offer them any reasonable deals like they would to new users.

As a whole many industries have made this same mistake, treating new potential customers better than existing customers. It took years for the idiot executives to finally admit the way they were doing business, treating new potential clients belter then their existing customer base, was wrong. In general the corporate executive motto is ???Deny, Lie and then Deny some more???. And so it???s very difficult to ever get them to admit to any wrong doing.

Microsoft is doing this same thing to its existing MS Office user base by not making the Ribbon an option. If something is as good as its advertised then you don???t need to force people to use it.

Without getting into a very technical discussion, this forced use of the Ribbon in Office and more recently in Windows as well as the removal of the START button in Windows 8 also shows that poor design was used to build the interface. The Menus/toolbars in office as well as the ribbon should be skins (for lack of a better term) meaning that they are the presentation layer and therefore set apart form the workings behind the scenes. When in Excel if a user wants to format the cell, the action used to indicate this to Excel be built behind the scenes with a skin being used as the presentation layer. If Windowblinds from Stardock can change the presentation layer in Windows then there???s no excuse Microsoft couldn???t do something similar and make all these major interface changes optional to the user.

I've been an Office user since the beginning of the suite and I'm fine with the ribbon. I first saw it as a really big toolbar then discovered it replaced the menus too. With 2007 on one PC and 2003 on another I discovered that the menus slowed me down. The ribbon kept me from getting deep into menus and submenus and whatever. Now all my machines run 2010 and my coworkers have simply adjusted... all but one. He's still cries for Lotus smart suite. Wha?!

I would like to see ribbons added to Project, Visio, and Expression Web. If I were given an option to use the old way I would fall behind in my field. Plus all that extra stuff would bloat the software.

@myangeldust
Its great thatthe Ribbon works for you even as pre-Ribbon Office user. That doesn't change the fact that Microsoft forced the change disrespectful of its existing Office user base who consost of persons who dod not want to be forced to use the Ribbon. Keep in mind this is not a security improvement that was forced in users in whcih case it would at least be justifiable as to why users were forced to accept the change. Its a design change to the interface that affects how users interact with the product.

I will cope by finding a desktop shell, free software giving me a Start button, or learning the Windows 8 substitute. The average user may not cope so easily. I see how difficult it is for
an average user to cope with change every day (I work in a library with 40+ PCs): I teach such "simple" tasks as cut-and-paste, minimizing and maximizing, NumLock and Caps Lock every day, several times.

I object to the tendentious restricted choice in this survey: we get to choose only that it's a big deal or feigning angst. Surely there is room for genuine concern!

Pw2buz

I've been reading a lot of these complaints. Most touch on the same features and give the same reason for never ever changing anything ever. But in their writings I read how they switched to other operating systems and applications. They switched to Linux or Apple or moved to free-source office suites. All of which have different interfaces than what they were previously using. At the least, they're contrarians. And at most, they're flat out liars.

If anyone reading the above and immediately thinks that their new system is better because it's similar or reminds them of their old system then they have essential recognized that their new choice in wares is a copycat of Microsoft's old technology. So which is it going to be, geniuses? Attack MS for changing and improving or put down Linux and Apple for doing their best to copy Win7 and XP, respectively. Fo' shame, people! Fo' shame.

Your argument posits that all changes are valuable. What you and several others fail to acknowledge is that "change" in and of itself has no intrinsic value - it is simply change. Change is evaluated as valuable when it improves on a previous method, or invents a new method for accomplishing a task through time savings, intuitiveness, etc.

If I take something that was once four-colored and make it solid blue, is that valuable? It is change, is it not? Take that thing and paint it speckled pea-green pink and it has once again been changed. Is it now more valuable than it was before?

Your question is now "Well, what is it?" or "That depends". Precisely. But if your argument held true, it wouldn't matter - it would be change and it would be valuable. This simple illustration shows that your argument is patently absurd.

Value in any economic transaction is in the eye of the customer - what is something worth to that customer. Not all people are the same (no two people are not on fire - Strongbad), so no two people are going to evaluate any change with the same value. This is the critical point you continue to ignore.

To replace the start button it has been easy to simply add back the quick launch toolbar (%userprofile%\AppData\Roaming\Microsoft\Internet Explorer\Quick Launch) and then also add a desktop type launch pad (I use tbox297g). Place in those two things all the goodies you want from the old start button. Not a big deal at all.

I am an 81 year old grandmonther and I have installed Windows 8 on my laptop (that I use for teaching) and presentations at a PC user group. Once I got over the initial misgivings about the Metro Interface, I like the entire concept. I realize that many people that don't like change will critisize but I for one love it. It gives me the same type of interface that I have on my android tablet and makes me feel that I am not stuck in the 20th Century. I will definitely upgrade my laptop in the fall when the final version of Windows 8 becomes available and will make sure the laptop has a touch screen.

People who cannot survive without the Start Button should stick with Windows 7. People who like inovation, and the young generations that live with the Smart Phones and tablets will wellcome and Metro Interface. I installed Win 8 on my laptop that I use for tutoring and presentations. After two month of using the Customer Preview, I rarely even think of the Start Button. I just wish I had a touch screen. And by the way, I have been in the IT business since the late 60's and am a retired senior person.
Rosita