Discussion on:

You don't really need a Start Menu in Windows 8

to create shortcuts on your desktop, or launch programs

C:\ProgramData\Microsoft\Windows\Start Menu\Programs

Right click the taskbar.
Choose Toolbars
Choose New Toolbar
Navigate to C:\ProgramData\Microsoft\Windows\Start Menu\Programs
Choose Select Folder
Now you will see "Start Menu >>" on your taskbar.
Click on the ">>" hover on the Programs folder and all of your programs appear.

Administrative Tools, Microsoft Office, Windows Accessories etc. - They're all there. - right from the good ol' taskbar.

Only thing missing is the Icon.

The right side of the start menu is missing, but the [Windows}-X shortcut gives you everything missing and more. If you really hate the Win8 start screen, [Windows] will take you to the Win7-style desktop.

The right side of the start menu is missing but you can recreate it in the taskbar.

But it's just as easy to say

You don't really need Windows 8

Business is unlikely to adopt it in any serious form on the Desktop the only place it will find it's way into Business is through the BYOD where personal Tablets and Phones with 8 installed start to get into the inside of the business. Some Business may even Bar their Introduction because that OS is not compatible with their existing systems.

So in Business at least I can not see any Dramatic Uptake and 8 will remain on the Low Resource Personal Devices where the End Users may actually even like it. 8 As it currently stands is great on Mobile Devices where people have already got used to the Apple Style UI that 8 is but on the desktop it has a fight on it's hands.

Here at least the Wholesalers are offering big Discounts on systems loaded with 8 anything while the 7 Systems sell at the Premium prices.

Col

To give you a little more insight on the Win8 situation, I'll talk a little about the U.S. Air Force. Typically the USAF upgrades to the latest version of Windows immediately. Heck, they were still doing some XP->Vista upgrades when they started the Win7 upgrades; that's how fast they move. They don't wait for SP1 or anything like that. The USAF is heavily in the MS camp for the desktop as is most of the U.S. Govt. (It is the core of what they call their Standard Desktop Configuration [SDC]).

Not so with Win8. There are no plans to upgrade anytime soon. First, some of their core middle ware doesn't work with Win8. Then there is the whole training issue. Training hundreds of thousands of troops is no menial task even for the USAF. When you jump the tracks as far as MS has with Win8, they're finding that even their hardcore clients are not real happy and are considering skipping this one.

That's a little scary. I hope you guys pay attention to the Early Bug Swarm issue, wherein bugs show up shortly after a release.

No plans to upgrade anytime soon? Considering skipping this one? Seems to me that is what many people did with Vista (which we ran quite successfully and productively for 2.5 years before moving to Win7). What did they get with Windows 7 - mostly Vista (tweaked a bit...but we untweak some things... such as strict UAC setting). If they don't get started now, when Win 9 comes out they'll be hurting...or have to move to Linux or Apple and those training and core systems issues. Just sayin....

Good luck convincing the masses of that one.

Is you most certainly do not need a mouse with your Surface RT which will only have 4 or so years of Support and your Win Phone 8.

8 is ideal for those platforms but I see it as next to useless on the Desktop. Or as my Father would say Windows 8 is as useful as Teats on a Bull.

I just don't see 8 being widely adopted on the Desktop as it currently stands but it's an ideal user interface for Mobile Devices.

Col

As my father would say, "Where's the cord on my home phone?!"

And *never* use a USB mouse on my ASUS TF300. It is a lousy method of interfacing with the desktop on that device.

On Windows 8 on a non-touch device though, I do use a mouse. The form of the device is going to determine the best interface and increasingly, that will *not* be a mouse.

Whoever voted me up out of the basement, thanks. I hate driveby downvotes.

If there is something you disagree with, at least have the courtesy to post your view if you're going to neg another comment.

the up vote that is... I agree the drive-by down vote is the work of a scoundrel. I couldn't see anything objectionable in your post.

BTW I do that routinely, up vote posts that aren't given the courtesy of a reply.

There seem to be at least two roving bandsof down-voters in recent months. One patrols the threads looking for anything good being said about Win 8 and marks them down, the other looks for anyone saying anything bad about Win 8.

Personal experience says that the "defenders of Win8" is the larger of the two groups. But neither group is in the habit of actually responding to posts they disagree with and engaging in debate.

Why care about the opinions of people who can't be bothered to express them?

non-positive posts posts on Win 8. have another up to make you feel better.

I get down voted when I show someone how to do something in Windows 8. What is up with that?

that downvote anything favorable about W8. I still say downvoting should require a comment. If you don't comment, your vote isn't recorded. Even a simple 'No text' would at least identify who disagrees with you.

as a comment and I'd also allow it when the message no longer has the 'Reply' button showing. I like to down vote spammers when I flag their messages - this means anyone using the default show setting gets the spam hidden due to the negative vote.

You really have no idea do you

Have you been to the shops lately? Every Windows 7 device is on sale, get out of the house more

It is in the best interest of big box retailers to carry the latest licences, for MANY reasons. SALES also draw customers, those who have been holding off on 7 will now invest. The software licences seem about the same, the hardware they come preinstalled on gets pretty cheap though.
A shop that doesn't carry mainly new products and software does not look like they are on top of technology. Stock movement is also critical, whereas in a boutique style shop, it is less important as the solution provided.

As for Premium price, the higher end machines are still the higher end/premium machines, around here they still mainly boast Win7, but you'd never see anything more than halfway decent in a big box retailer, FutureShop/Best Buy etc..

You really can not understand what you read can you?

Here at least the Wholesalers are offering big Discounts on systems loaded with 8 anything while the 7 Systems sell at the Premium prices.

The operative word here is Wholesalers not Shops there is a very big difference between the two and if you do not understand that there is no hope for you.

OH and the shops here are all stocked with Win 8 Home which is not of any use to any of my clients who would need Professional or Enterprise at the very least so they are not the ones shopping in the Shops they get me to supply what they need as apposed to what is available in the shops today. As most are on Enterprise and that's not available in 8 on anything but Volume License perhaps you could suggest a shop where I could buy a copy?

Col

SO TRUE! All purists can complain all they want. People are now buying Windows 8 machines and some without a touchscreen. That means the Start screen and Windows key will become the "new normal". The worst thing to be is a tech guy who doesn't know how to work the latest OS on the market.

Don't downgrade to 7 from the new system we sold you with 8 because we are not going to provide Drivers or support for the old OS.

We might provide support for the Hardware but you'll first have to prove to us that it is really a Hardware Failure and not the Software that you have installed on it which is the problem.

Now as I used my newspaper to swat a fly that was annoying me this morning I want to know if my iPad is covered for the damage that it got?

Or do I try to wrap my Fish & Chips in the broken thing?

Either way it's not very good for much that the old media was so great for.

Col

They may be able to get away with that in the consumer market, but their corporate customers are going to raise a heck of ruckus if HP tries to force them onto Win 8 when many are still in the process of rolling out 7.

We load whatever we want, and will continue to do so as long as we can get hardware drivers for the desired OS.

I belong to a few MS Office blogs, and I remember when Office 2007 rolled out with its Ribbon menu -- a high percentage of users swore at the moment that they would never upgrade from their dear 2003, and committed to send nastygrams to MS to get the old style menus back. What they failed to see is that these kinds of UI overhaul represent a big investment for MS, and history tells you that they will stick to their guns and Will Not bring the old interface back. Windows 9 will undoubtedly attempt to improve on Windows 8, not 7.
What's the issue with that? Using the Office example again, it's been 6 years since 2007 came out, and 2010 has been out for a couple of years as well, but you still have people on the boards asking how the Ribbon works :-\
Don't get me wrong: I'm on the "hate Metro" bandwagon like many of you, and don't have any intention of upgrading any time soon... but I'm also aware that this is where the future of the most popular (or rather, most installed) OS is going, and it behooves all of us to get on the train, like it or not, so we're not trying to figure out what Windows 9 is all about when it comes out in a few years.
--vic

Everyone here should at least upgrade one of their machines to 8 or get a Surface RT or Pro (when available). Load it up with your real life software and see how it goes. It will be time better spent than crying about the constant forward march of technology in here.

Personally I'd be buying a NB with 8 for my own needs it's cheaper and more powerful not to mention much more storage space.

Col

To the best of my knowledge, The Surface Pro will be the lightest full Win 8 tablet / ultrabook with a real stylus on the market
I have been using Windows tablets daily since "Win XP for Tablets". Do you remember when it was not part of the XP OS?
I'll probably add a generic USB docking station with a large monitor, full size keyboard, mouse, and a large external HD.

The great thing about the PC platform is that you've got all kinds of choices.

You've got a traditional notebook with a 2-5 hour battery life, a large mechanical drive, probably an optical drive, a variety of screen sizes, and touch-screen or traditional input. In a price range between $250 and thousands of dollars.

You've got an Ultrabook with 5-8 hour battery life, an SSD, no optical drive, screen sizes between 11" and 14" typically, and touch-screen or traditional input - in a price range between ~$800-$1800

In the Ultrabook cataegory there are a lot of variables going on right now. Sacrafices and gains. It depends on where your value is on the features and benefits of the device. 64 or 128GB seems very small to me for the cost of the Surface Pro - but as an ULTRA ultrabook - it has a lot of things that really no other device approaches, for a price comparable to a top end iPad. The Surface Pro seems to be an emphasis on the Modern-UI experience and a tablet heavy use-model that *can* support real IA64/32 code. But both the Surfce RT and the Pro are focused on people who want something that is more of a competitor with the Android and iOS tablets, less so with traditional PCs.

I don't think that will be hugely successful starting out, honestly. I think that PC users who want a PC that has some tablet like features will be what drives adoption of Windows 8 and Windows 8 devices. Once Windows 8 gets some momentum, we might see the more tablet-driven devices like the Surfaces gain more traction. I see the Surface devices appealing to executives. The RT to general executives - and the Surface Pro to power-user executives who require a real Windows experience. Maybe. Also, to Microsoft loyalists. Which... fine. Apple has their loyalists, Android has theirs, and Microsoft also has theirs. The same basic kind of guy who buys a iPad Mini is the kind of guy who will buy a Surface RT or Pro.

An occasionally mobile tablet device might fit my needs. As the IT Director, I do end up going to several in-house meetings each day other meeting attendees have come to expect me to look things up and share them at the meeting.
Everything I have used so far has been a bit of a compromise.
I used to bring my Fujitsu tablet convertible. I like having access to all my network resources while in the meeting so that I can settle issues (or perceived issues) on the spot. It's handy but it is a bit bulky. I certainly would not carry it around all day.
I tried using an 7" HTC Flyer for a year. It's easier to carry but not well connected to network resources.
I just bought a Galaxy Note II smartphone (ultra-mini tablet) which handily replaces the Flyer. It's even easier to carry but still not as connected to network resources as I would like. I can remote into a desktop via citrix receiver but once you connect, you only have a 5" screen.
I think the Surface pro would be better than the Fujitsu because it's lighter yet still has the same functionality but I don't see me carrying it around all day. I see myself docking it at my desk until I have a meeting and using the Note II for those impromptu hallway meetings.
I'll keep you posted.

The RT can see networks and shared folders. The Pro is like one's desktop when out of the office. You know, VPN and hardcore apps and stuff. RT is a natural at home because the majority of our personal use falls in that social/web appliance area. But I believe RT has the basics to stand on it's own at most office meetings.

I forgot to mention one thing that all three of my mobile devices have that the RT unfortunately does not. -a stylus.
I handwrite a lot of meeting notes and draw a lot of diagrams so the stylus is a requirement.
I shouldn't have omitted that.
FYI: I know I am still in the honeymoon phase with my Galaxy Note II but so far, the killer feature for me is when you take the stylus out, a notepad screen instantly pops up even if the phone is locked. Way cool & super useful.

It is a little bulkier, a little more Ultrabook and a little less "executive meeting device", and a little more consumer driven as far as having flexibility to be a relatively powerful desktop PC replacement. But I'm not a director... I'm a lowly middle manager... I have time for a leisure life every now and then...

The Surface Pro does strike me as an executive machine. The lower amount of storage and sleeves-up no-nonesense approach speaks to having a strong focus on professional use. The Stylus also seems to be something that appeals to the higher ranks of the corporate totem pole.

I'm sure with OneNote and the ability to insert doodles, sketches, and do quick and accurate handwriting transcription - the Surface Pro will be a formidable machine even in tablet mode, especially for the kind of uses you describe.

and I was not very impressed with their displays and speed.
It's a whole new ballgame since 2008 though so things might have changed.
I remember doing battle with Lenovo's ThinkVantage program which I alternately called ThinkDISadvantage and StinkVantage.

Tried on my laptop with each of the preview releases. I boot into the copy on my desktop about once a week to check for patches and see if they have fixed whatever is causing the constant freeze ups I am experiencing (they haven't) and spend the rest of my time in 7. I did not have any of the constant pauses/freezes during the CP/RTM testing I did, yet the final product does not seem to work. Other than that, while I do like a handful of the improvements, Metro continues to be a piece of crap for non-touch interfaces and my desktop is effectively unusable while I am booted into Windows 8.

Every article I have seen espousing the merits of 8 and the Interface Formerly Known As Metro seems to offer more complicated ways of doing the same things we use the Sart menu for now. I will grant that I do not often go into the Start menu as most of the programs I use regularly are either pinned to the taskbar or have shortcuts on my desktop. However, I have found the Start menu to be much more useful than the IFKAM whenever I have need to use them.

Conclusion - Metro on a touchscreen device fine, it is well suited to them. But return the Start menu for keyboard-and-mouse centric devices.

Heh, all my real life software is on the desktop side! Photshop, jEdit, eclipse, thunderbird, Libre Office, CoolEdit Pro and Steam games. I've got Windows 8 on my main machine (couldn't resist $40 upgrade to 'Pro' version), but after playing with the Metro interface for about a week, I installed Start8 so I could get back to real work (and games!).

It's a good thing no one here has a job forecasting future trends for any major corp or government entity. I mean, YIKES! The workforce is constantly changing as old dogs and their keyboard-centric ways gives way to new pups and their clickity-swippity moves. OfficeRT brings in a whole set of tools that make you wonder if a keyboard is necessary. (It is, but not as much as you think.) Many more programs... er, apps are soon to follow. Because every third party follows the OS maker or they will become the dBase IV of history.

I know many 35 and over still use clicking keyboards and CRTs... and they don't do this ironically (LOL). But the kids in the hall are playing with touchscreens and Kinects. The text will still need to be inputed but everything else can be done without a keyboard. Just because you've practiced those shortcuts for one score and 2 years or more doesn't mean the babies won't just two-finger swipe themselves into your prime cubicle.

I expected more forward thinking from a bunch of techno-geeks. You guys are becoming your fathers (and not in that hero-worshipping way).

I'm well over 35 and use a clicking keyboard but not because I'm nostalgic. It's a new gaming keyboard with programmable and light up keys - the best kind of keyboard to have if you like playing first person shooters.
It also makes a satisfying sound when you are typing.
The CRT is long gone - and not missed.

"I know many 35 and over still use clicking keyboards and CRTs..."

Why spend money replacing hardware that works? If they're not doing it 'ironically' (how does one use a computer ironically?) then they must be satisfied with this hardware. Why should they replace it?

Drove a 1968 Town and Country Squire Woody Station wagon until he passed away in 1987. It worked for him. Good for him.

But in business, there becomes a supportability factor. I've seen one practice that still has an IBM PS/2 doing daily tasks that are practice critical - on Windows 3.11. They've got no alternative when something finally breaks - and the app they are running won't run on anything they'll be able to find today. They're going to have to hit Goodwill and pray when they have a problem.

I agree regarding computer systems. My comments were directed to myangeldust's position that business users choose (or are assigned)different models of peripherals based on the users' age, not on function or need.

There's a crash test video on YouTube between a '59 Chevy and a '09 Chevy. If you were in that '59 car you'd be dead right now. Also poor mileage, slow, difficult to steer, part availability, impractical size, and that smell... What's that smell coming from the back seat?

Old timers talk about how you could drive an old car into a brick wall, and the frame would still be straight, but you drive a new car into a snow bank, and it is totalled.

Those are called crumple zones - and I'd rather have the *car* absorb the energy and be totalled than have it transfer that energy into the occupants inside, who get turned into jello on the unpadded, sharp metal dash or impaled on the non-collapsing steering wheel tree.

By the way, when I was 4 or 5, my grandfather was at a stop light, and I was resting my head on the dash... he creeped forward until he hit the car in front of him at probably less than 5MPH. The impact launched my head back and then down onto the dash, splitting my forehead open. I still have the scar. Of course, seatbelts weren't mandatory and a 5 year old could be in the front seat with no booster back in those glorious days of deadly metal dashboards.

devices and things, the population is getting way out of hand. Haven't you heard about survival of the fittest? We need people who CAN survive being hit in a crumple-zone-free car, or who can drink tap water without being poisoned. The rest of you, can go back to your mommy's womb and not come out.
Think about it, those cars were built TO LAST. People die, anyway, but will you ever see a '53 Chevy made again? No. The crap they build now, is designed to wear out, and be very expensive to maintain: a thousand dollars to replace a heater core? No thank you (2005 Jeep, where you have to take out the steering column, windshield, dashboard, AC system, JUST TO GET TO IT. ) '53 chevy: Unbolt from firewall. Replace heater core. Done. Under $100 even now. Oh and I'm not riding in one of those unsafe little cars you can't even GET INTO without first kneeling on the ground to get into. Hit one with a '53 Chevy, you'll drive away, and leave the silly little car all crumpled up on the sidewalk where it belongs. Fuel mileage, OH BOY we've come a LONG way. '53 Chevy truck 12 mpg. 2012 Chevy truck: 12 mpg. RIIIGHT.
Apparently
CONSUMERISM instead of QUALITY is the new standard. Sell crap you have to replace instead of stuff that lasts. Sure.
Now, give me my start button back.
Thank you!

The only thing in win 3.11 I could not get to work on new hardware is the power button on the keyboard....

.

A well-run office needs to keep upgrading to remain relevent. It shouldn't have to hold back because one or two employees are uncomfortable with new tools. IT personnel should neither be nostalgic nor regressive when it comes to the office's tech infrastructure. Actually said personnel should understand that there's almost always a better way to do something when it comes to computers. When I work on someone's ancient tech I wonder to myself how I ever got used to that. Every nerd should wonder the same thing from time to time.

Of course, I'm not a techno-evangelist. If you don't want Win8 you don't have to get Win8. Just don't get all Taliban on us when others want Win8.

but on a limited budget, would you rather spend the money upgrading the hardware and software, or the peripherals? I'd rather upgrade the system AND monitor for those CAD users; if that means the factory floor users who just clock in and out may have to put up with CRTs until hand-me-down flat panels become available.

You can easily replace the start button by placing quicklaunch and desktop toolbars on the taskbar on the desktop and managing them. Once set up you don't need to go near the Start window at all. Much better than the Start button.

Many people will look at that post as if you're talking Star Trek at them.

Also, removal of the feature means developers no longer have to support it. And we finally got them all to understand how to organize their shortcuts!

Oh well. At least, this paves the way for Microsoft UI scientists to invent a spectacular new interface in which shortcuts can be stored in hierarchies so you don't have to see all of them all the time, in Windows 10.

can u believe MS actually sells 2012 server with this UI, I hate it already.

That's fine, but the start menu was an infinitely better solution.

We've already had long quick launch bars, and over sized task bars, we gave them up for the start menu.

But in truth, the lack of the start menu doesn't piss me off as much as the lack of customization options for Metro and the new start menu. I can't even figure out how to change a fricken Icon, it insists on using the generic white window main metro screen.

It's nice to see someone not bashing Windows 8 because it's different for once.

The one thing I would have added and the first thing I would recommend to anyone moving to Windows 8 for the first time.

Pin to Start
Clear all the icons you don't want out of the Start Screen and pin the ones you want. This can include all your desktop apps. Then re-arrange them into whatever order you like best. Then just press the windows key or click the bottom left and all the programs you need are right there.

The old start menu was very limited in its ability to customize. If you just deleted all the shortcuts you didn't want it would probably prove troublesome somewhere down the line. Of course you could back them up into a folder somewhere but that sounds like a lot of hassle and beyond the regular user.

The new start screen is there to shape into whatever you want but people seem to miss this. If you were so inclined you could remove every metro app and create an all Desktop app only version of the Start Screen. Later if you change your mind you can just pin stuff back again. All my top 8 or 9 progs are in the first left hand column of my Start Screen and I know exactly where to find them. It's actually made things quicker as I no longer need to drill down three folders to get to things or create a gruesome looking start menu with too many things pinned to the top level.

The problem is that if you had a lot of applications installed then the hierarchical nature of the start menu meant you could find what you wanted without having to hunt as long as you could remember what sub-group it was in. With the start screen you lose that and are left with essentially what I saw many poor users have, a desktop, now start screen, that has so much stuff it you can't find anything.

And you will find everything

I set up the following catgories of programs and apps on my start screen.
(in order left to right / with left most = most frequently used)
Home: Desktop, Google, IE, The Time, Calendar Store
Communication: Outlook, Mail, People, Messaging
Office: Office suite, Evernote, Adobe Acrobat, PDF Touch, SkyDrive
Tools: Remote Desktop, Metro Commander, Control Panel
Entertainment: Multimedia 8, Tunein, & Magazines
This works for me.
What I wish Windows 8 could do is search by category & change the focus to that category. My categories are manageble - spanning two screens but if you have many many programs, it would be helpful to search for categories.
Nested categories would be useful too.
Also, zooming in on the start screen minimizes the icons and you can select a category this way.
All that being said, I usually know at least part of the name of the program I am looking for so typing it in to open it is very quick.

Windows + Q, instead of Windows + x + s + Esc

yes I have used wee eight without the start menu, but apparently if you launch Chrome or Firefox, they use the old desktop, you know........so we put the Startw8 back.
I'm still learning to use the new way of windows, so it will come to me in time...

http://www.redmondpie.com/this-extensive-list-of-windows-8-keyboard-shortcuts-will-help-you-adapt-to-the-new-interface/

I for one do not miss the Start menu at all. I just use Windows+Q and start typing, your application will be found immediately. I don't know what all the fuss is about.

But some people don't want to move their hands to the key board and start typing. I would guess you used to start most of your apps on Win 7 by start/search/ type the name. That is fine if that is the way you like to do it, but not everyone did/does. So what would you say if instead of getting rid of the start menu MS had removed the search capability you like? Would you still say "I don't know what all the fuss is about."?

Because they didn't remove it, did they? It really is very simple:
The Start MENU has gone. Instead of clicking the bottom left corner of the screen, press the Windows key and the Start SCREEN appears. From here you can launch you apps/programs or whatever you want to call them. Alternatively Press Windows+Q or move the mouse to the right-hand corner to bring up the Search charm and type it in there. It honestly isn't hard, it isn't even slower, it's FASTER. If you don't like it, fine, you probably didn't like it when the motor car was invented because you were used to riding your horse and carriage everywhere. It's not coming back. Deal with it. Eventually you will wonder why you ever bothered with it. I adjusted to it immediately and I was fully expecting to hate it.

to appear to find something when I could simply click a button and open it. I don't want my applications I have open to be overcast by a whole screen when that's not what I need. And I'm not typing "math" or "figures" or whatever I might think of to open Calculator, when I could simply click my shortcut to it from the start buttons menu, or from my Quickstart floating toolbar (I do the same thing on Linux by the way) from an easy list I've created, or failing that, I KNOW that it's in start/programs/accessories/calculator, just a few moves of the mouse away, without eclipsing the screen, OR typing ANYthing. Makes no sense to do it any other way.

The calculator shortcut is still in Start Menu > Programs > Windows Accessories.
If you don't want to type "Calc" on the Start screen, don't do it. You can continue accessing it the way you know.
Personally, I get to my calculator program by pressing the calculator button on my keyboard which also still works.

I think that simpy using a mouse to open the Quick Launch bar pop-up menu and selecting the favourite program you want sounds a lot quicker and easier than hitting the Windows key + Q on the keyboard and then typing in the first few letters of an app!

Chances are your fingers are already on the keyboard and it is quicker to press Windows+Q, then type 'w' + hit than to move your hand to the mouse and then do several clicks. Try it.

I'd even venture that you're a touch typist. My 200 or so 'hunt and peck' users reach for the mouse before the keyboard, using the keyboard only when they have to enter data.

I'll get done showing a user something using the keyboard and say "here, now you try it..." The almost always grab the mouse and sit there thinking for a lengthy pause, before realizing the mouse isn't involved.

The computer is an extension of the right hand to most people. (of course left, if a lefty, but I find most lefties are a tad smarter than average)

You could say, "Here, if you want that program, touch this tile." (touches tile)
"Now you do it."
It would certainly be easier for a user to follow your finger.

If your comment is strictly in regards to small devices, I agree. But monitors are often out of reach, especially when using multiple ones. Even if they are in reach, you're looking at some serious repetitive stress problems. In Basic Training, one punishment was simply to hold your arms out for extended periods.

Where we keep our monitors today.

Maybe instead of standing up vertically at the back of our desks, they should be closer to us and at an angle more parallel to the surface of the desk - you know, in the kind of orientation you hold a textbook when reading it... at about desk-height, with the top of the book angled a little bit higher than the back of the book. The keyboard might be on a shelf beneath and just slightly in front of the monitor.

And then when people come to your desk, the desk surface would be clean, as opposed to having them sit on the opposite side of a wall of monitors.

Things are in a period of drastic change right now - and your argument against touch-screen desktop systems isn't very visionary. If touch is superior enough, maybe the paradigm for desktop PCs needs to evolve completely. The monitor on our desk is the artificial barrier that limits productivity - not our inability to hold our harms straight out for extended periods of time.

I can't help but think if people found it comfortable having monitors positioned anywhere other than directly in front and vertical, someone would have already positioned them at an alternate angle and position. Arranging them otherwise may even require semi-circular desks.

I'll admit I can't abide fingerprints on my screen; I'd spend more time cleaning it than using it. (Aw geez, would I have to turn the dumb thing off before cleaning to avoid the wiping being inpreted as input?) I also question the use in gaming, where your forearm may be obscuring a vital portion of the screen. That's a class of software that may require major overhauls, but I'm specualting as a non-gamer.

Is mostly a tradition. You had a keyboard, you had a CPU on your desk (a "desktop"), and your green screen CRT sat on top of it. The tower moved off the desk, and the monitor grew bigger. That is why the Horseless Carriage became a carriage without a horse before it became simply a "car". Someone said, "Hey, this thing goes faster, and goggles are a pain. Let's invent a WINDSHIELD. Someone went, going that fast at night is dangerous. Let's invent headlights. Someone went, Now we've got this big windshield in front of us, and it sucks getting wet. Let's put a roof over it. Someone else went, what if you had windows on all sides you could roll up. Someone else said, "steering with a stick is kind of awkward... let's use a WHEEL"... The forum started to follow the function.

It certainly isn't ergonomics.

I bet technology itself plays into it. With CRTs, it wasn't a practical viewing angle. You had the big old flyback transistor sticking out of the back of the CRT... making it go downward would have lifted the CRT from the desk awkwardly compared to the face of the screen. When we moved to LCD, the problem was initially viewing angle. By the time we got those both figured out, *custom* was so ingrained that no one has *thought* about it yet... Here is another million dollar idea I'm giving away on Tech Republic.

It is also a matter of it will feel *weird* at first. I really think I'm onto something. All these companies making "All In One" touch-screen desktop units that haven't caught on... make the monitor tilt radically from the bottom toward the user, raise it just a bit, give it good viewing at that angle, and have the keyboard on a tray that slides out a little but mostly has your hands *under* the display. I can imagine it right now, and it would be *awesome* sauce... *especially* as touch-screen.

When you go into a library and they've got a big, unmovable book that sits on a pedastal, what kind of orientation is it in? When you lay out a cookbook in the kitchen, or you're transcribing papers onto your screen, what orientation are they in?

Basically the one I am describing. A little elevated at the top, with the end nearer to you and closer to the working surface, on some sort of stand designed just for this purpose. "Propped up". Most ATMs or other touch Kiosks, is the panel FLAT and facing you, or slightly inclined? When use the automated ticket kiosk at the movie theater?

The problem isn't that touch-screen is uncomfortable on a desktop - it is that a desktop is poorly oriented for a touch experience.

Huh? Did I just fix that problem? I think I did. I am so much wasted talent and potential. I should be designing things for Apple, not managing unruly IT workers and writing Tech Blogs.

I'm not sure about putting the keyboard under the leading edge of the monitor. Most people I know look at the keyboard while using it. This may change as schools put more emphasis on teaching keyboarding but I doubt many 'Millennials' can touch type. I know few Boomers and Xers can.

I hear you on fat reference books and kiosks, but few people use those eight hours a day.

I don't see it quite *under* the display, just recessed enough under it that you would be able to see it the keys but it would minimize the space between the keyboard and the display - because reaching OUT and forward is part of the problem. You want the display as close to you as possible, like a book - so you can reach it with your arms bent at the elbows - if that makes sense.

Maybe make the bottom of the bezel on the display clear, so you could see through that part - figure a bezel is going to be an inch or more thick... you could make that less of an obstacle.

Most keyboard trays that slide under the work area are designed to facilitate this kind of thing already, so you can have a book or papers laid out on the workspace, the monitor upright at the back of the desk, and the keyboard is on a tray slight recessed under the workspace. This will probably get me flagged for SPAM, but check out this link:

http://www.amazon.com/Complete-Computer-Workstation-with-Storage/dp/B003FSTNAM/ref=sr_1_5?ie=UTF8&qid=1354756786&sr=8-5&keywords=workstation+desk

Those designs work GREAT...

I spend most of my time with my hands on the keyboard. If I had a touch screen, I would angle it differently than a traditional monitor and use my fingers to slide screens, choose tiles, and draw with a stylus. That's about 15% of what I do as far as computer input. The other 85% is keyboarding.
(I am having a real feeling of Deja vu here. We discussed this before.)

@myangeldust, your post has been removed because it was offensive.

You are entitled ti your opinions. You are entitled to express those opinions. You are entitled to disagree with the opinions of others.

You are NOT entitled to attack others because you disagree with their opinions.

What Microsoft used to call their Surface Project where the desk was the monitor and input device and everything was built into the desk.

That would work with Touch Screen though to be perfectly honest just Touch isn't enough we need to make sure that the Monitors used in things like that also have some way to separate the different users and not just rely on being touched.

When you look at something like that used to control some device it needs more than what Touch by itself can supply. Imagine a Computer Input/Display device in say a Nuclear Power Station being able to accept any input that was put in through the Touch Screen.

Way too dangerous and the chances of something going wrong because the wrong person used it or some other reason are way too high.

At least with a Keyboard and Conventional display a Password is better but when you move the Control Elements into the Desk itself you need much more than just touch.

However just using a conventional type Monitor as a Touch Screen in a Desktop for business is going to fail the Occupational Health & Safety Test every time.

Col

If changing the angle of a monitor to accomodate touch input was not ergonomically sound then the OSHA should be coming down on drafting tables.
The ideal set up for me would be a touch screen with a stylus and traditional keyboard. The screen would be at an adjustable angle of between 30 and 45 degrees directly in front of a standard pull out from under the monitor keyboard. My second and third monitors would be on adjustable arms that I could pull in or push back as needed. (I can dream. Can't I?) It's actually a similar configuration to what I have now (minus the touch and the drafting table style monitor).
I don't see this set up being harmful or ergonomically unsound.

Doesn't anybody remember Tron?

I honestly think that's what Microsoft is aiming for: the display and keyboard embedded in the touch-enabled desktop. It would truly suck for touch-typists, who would lose all feedback, tactile or otherwise, but it would be great for the hunt-and-peck typists.

they take up screen real estate.
Who wants 1/4 to 1/3 of the screen taken up by a virtual keyboard?

what I said was

However just using a conventional type Monitor as a Touch Screen in a Desktop for business is going to fail the Occupational Health & Safety Test every time.

The point being Conventional Monitors can not currently be placed in such a position and that is why they will fail Occupational Health & Safety.

I'm not implying that at some time in the future that things will not be different but now it's a different story.

As for not liking Keyboards on Monitors I'm very much the same but and it's a Big But if you are talking up Touch Screen UI's then you have to accept that they are designed and work at their best on Touch Screens and besides the current obvious things like dirty Screens that need constant cleaning so that they are readable and them currently being at the wrong orientation they will eventually come and be the sole and considered Best Input method till Unique Speech Recognition or something better comes along to replace the keyboard.

As a Control Device a Touch Screen may not actually require a QWERTY style keyboard and just be a series of Tiles to press to do something. Just like Metro as it was called was you pressed that Tile to open that App and this other tile to open that App. To go all Star Trek on you you could press that Tile to Arm the Phasers and this Tile to fire them.

However in reality it's more likely to be on something that produces a series of predefined objects from a 3D printer or the like when we first see things like that as the Input Devices for things.

I also am not a great Fan of Virtual Keyboards but they are endless better than the small keyboards that used to be available on the Older Generation Smart Phones which are what prevented me from ever being interested in them. Something like the Apple iPhone or the Nasty Samsung Galaxy which Apple finds so reprehensible are a different kettle of fish and if I really needed Internet while being Mobile I would get one. Currently I only need a phone to allow clients to ring me when I'm out and occasionally make a phone call when something goes wrong. Maybe latter I could justify a Smart Phone but currently I'm flat out running up a $30.00 Phone Bill over a 6 month period so I really don't have any use for one.

Besides while I do carry at least 1 NB with me when I'm out at clients, as they all have an Internet Connection if absolutely necessary I can connect one of my NB's through their ISP and get what is required but even that doesn't happen often. Mostly only when they ask for a Solid Price on some hardware and that to be perfectly honest isn't that often.

I do however have very Fat Fingers and without using a Stylus I find it impossible to use the older generation Smart Phones.

OK I've now officially forgotten what it was I was replying to as it's getting difficult to go back up a level and not being able to read the post. So I hope this makes some sort of sense, I'm sure that I've missed something though.

Col

"...a Touch Screen may not actually require a QWERTY style keyboard..."

The introduction of touch keyboards might have been a great opportunity to switch to the Dvorak keyboard. It's probably too late for that now.

You said, "However just using a conventional type Monitor as a Touch Screen in a Desktop for business is going to fail the Occupational Health & Safety Test every time."

I agree. Using a touch screen monitor in the conventional 90 degree angle with respect to the desktop could put a strain a user's arms and shoulders.
BUT
A touch screen monitor should inspire us to use it in new ways. Maybe the conventional orientation is wrong for a touch screen.
Using a touch screen monitor closer to the keyboard and at a 30 - 40 degree angle with respect to the desktop would be quite confortable. I also think it would also be easier to use for people who are not touch typists as the monitor would be much closer to the keyboard and at a more complementary angle.
For example: The Acer T232HL is a ten point touch screen monitor that can be adjusted to 178 degrees.
If it only accepted stylus input. (sigh)

We're already seeing them announced for smart-phones. Maybe our monitors will run horizontal to the desk top then transition into a 90 degree vertical display at the back seamlessly in the near future. Think of a skateboard half-pipe - or even a half bowl. Interfaces and displays are going to get revolutionarily different in the next 20 years. I'm sure of it.

I don't want to touch my screen, I hate finger prints on my screen.

Now if the screen was on a touch pad, or a mouse pad, that always showed the metro tiles screen so you always had 1 press access to applications, that would be sweet.
I would love it if it were by my hand, always displayed so I could quickly tap applications. The tiles would never disappear, the win32 apps would show on another screen, I could then fire off multiple programs in quick succession.

I can't really help you use a touch screen without touching it.
Keep your hands clean and dry? Wear e-tip gloves? Get one that accepts stylus input.

You raise an interesting idea with the touchpad with tiles display. This could be achieved with a Windows 8 tablet or tablet convertible. Lay it flat on your table, connect keyboard and a secondary non-touch screen monitor to it. Use the tablet screen as a touch pad.
The only problem I see is, depending on what you want to do, the Windows 8 tablet may be underpowered and / or overpriced.

Personally, I would just lay off the meatball subs and cheetos while I was working on the touch screen and keep a micro fiber cloth handy to occassionally wipe the screen.

I can't abide fingerprints on my screen.

My skin is so oily i leave cheekprints on Blackberrys when I'm configuring them for our BES. I make a point to clean them before I distribute them, but after dialing the activation number I can't read through my own secretions.

Though Dirty screens do drive me crazy personably, but what I do worry about is what is going to happen to these screens when they are effectively lying on the desktop and the End Users drop their Coffee or Coke onto them as they have to drink while working. I'm also not so sure what will happen to the crumbs that get dropped onto the screens from the food that they eat as well.

Old habits die hard and I'm parotid about seeing liquards and food around current generation NB's let alone when the Touch Screen is nearly horizontal on the desk.

However on the finger print thing I'm constantly asked how to prevent the Cel Phones screens getting covered with finger prints by their users and I suppose when Tablets get more commonly used I'll be asked the same thing.

Col

Actually, I am thinking of one system

Pretend your using a desktop, the desktop monitors always show the desktop and win32 apps. Metro apps are possible but not by default, not while the device is plugged in.
A device that is essentially a thin screen, is attached via USB and sits next to your mouse, (or under it, if it can). This screen always displays the metro tiles and metro apps and win32 app launchers(as they show in the same list).
So this would be like having the start menu always open. You could tap the program you want, and if it is a metro app, it launches on that screen (unless otherwise configured) and if its win32, it launches the program on your desktop monitors.

This solves the inefficiency of the new start screen when using a mouse. And its not a big deal to arch my head and use a touch screen for a moment to launch a program.
Bonus points if it can function like a giant laptop touch pad or as a drawing pad to draw into a win32 app. Where moving my finger on the screen, moves my mouse pointer on the desktop. (again, for drawing, or people that hate mice and like touch pads)

My fingerprints don't show up as much on this type of screen. Keeping a glossy screen clean would not be difficult though. I don't worry about fingerprints on my smartphone so why would I worry about it on a monitor. I'll just wipe it every once in a while like I do for my smartphone. I wear glasses so I always have a small lens cloth in my pocket to clean the glasses and the smartphone. I take good care of my stuff.

Hal - I too would worry about people spilling coffee and food crumbs on a horizontal surface. You have probably seen some disgustingly dirty keyboards and monitors as I have. I keep Cyber Clean putty, a can of compressed gas, and screen wipes nearby. I wouldn't recommend a horizontal screen set up but I suggested that Slayer might.

Slayer - When I am at my desk, I dock my Fujitsu Convertible Tablet to a full size monitor and use the Fujitsu screen for the Metro-style start screen and the full size monitor for desktop programs. I could spin the monitor around so that it is parallel to the desk but I don't find that position very comfortable. I usually keep the tablet's touch screen at a 60 to 70 degree angle while it is in the dock.

I'd never heard of Cyber Clean putty before today. That knowledge alone has made all the rest of this worth the trouble.

Thanks! Now, excuse me, I gotta call Purchasing!

I was a fanatic about not touching my LCD at one point. Especially on laptops that have that plastic film - it is simply *difficult* to clean them off without screen cleaner designed specifically for LCD screens (which used to be outrageously expensive, too).

But modern *touch* LCD screens are generally glass - no plastic - no film, and therefore easier to clean even with a dry cleaning cloth and... when the smudging is caused for a purpose, it is less irritating than having someone reach and and point to a place on your screen to leave a single distracting smudge.

It is the downside of a touch-oriented post-PC world. Us A-Type OCD suffers are going to have to deal with a world of smudgy screens going forward. Let go and find peace.

Ever see the pictures of people pouring entire cups of coffee on running Thinkpads and the channels direct the liquid around the electronics and right out the bottom with no negative impact?

Pretty cool. Check YouTube for examples. It can be done. But LCDs and LEDs are cheap. Soon enough a 21" touch screen LED will probably retail for $99. Buy an expensive one with spill protection, or buy a cheap one and replace it when someone drops their Mountain Dew on it - just like we approach our laptops today.

http://technet.microsoft .com/en-au/jj860459?loc=zatfz_zTS1z&prod=zWin8z&tech=zOTtechz&prog=zOTprogz&type=zpagez&media=zOTmediaz
yep you all know about removing the space from between microsofta nd the .com for a working link.

So how many are rushing out to deploy 8 tomorrow?

Like so many I doubt it will be any for business as 8 is out of sync with their upgrade cycles.

Col

As I have said before, I am piloting Windows 8 in my IT Department first.
Heck, most of our machines are more than three years old and running on XP. We will have all of them upgraded to Windows 7 in less than six months. The work is underway.
I worked as a research immunologist for over 15 years. We had an expression in the lab. "Always the control, never the experiment."
I do not experiment on my users by giving them new software until I have used it and feel comfortable with it. My users are the control. My IT staff are the experiment.
In addition, waiting a year or so has some added benefits:
1. Any major flaws and vulnerabilities have probably been worked out.
2. SP 1 is probably already released
3. Many users are probably already familiar with it from home use.

We just have different ways of describing how we personally view 8.

However saying that we both need to get with the program and roll out 8 to keep Microsoft happy after all what Microsoft want is what's really important here not what makes or lives easier and the companies we work with ability to continue working productively.

Col

Not really. I played with Surface Project in a couple of hotels I stayed at... the flat coffee table approach to a digital desktop *beneath* a flat working space isn't ideal either. You want a slight incline of the display surface toward the primary user. Sitting over a table looking straight down is hard on the neck. I'm talking about something somewhere between the parallel to the work surface approach of the Surface Project and the 90 degree verticle of a traditional monitor, that brings the bottom of the touch screen forward almost to the *edge* of your desk. Basically, your touch surface would be where your keyboard is now, at maybe a slightly steeper incline. There is a reason the keyboard is in that orientation. There is a reason that a touch-screen would make sense in that orientation, too. A reviewer of the Dell XPS hybrid suggested the same configuration, where you could have the monitor flipped and tilted with the keyboard underneath it so you could type. Dell missed the boat on this one, but it would be an *excellent* configuration for using on an airplane. We'll see this arrive soon, I predict... and business professionals and road warriors will love it. You could also use this kind of configuration with dual screen traditional monitors to have your keyboard and a screen in front of you on your desk, and two monitors behind it. That would be *awesome*.

Start screen + Word tile. No keyboard. 'nuff said.

why complicate use of Windows 8? It's so easy just press start menu.

I don't miss the old Start menu at all. Though I think Windows8 isn't eventually as smart as it could have been, I tend to avoid the desktop as much as possible and I'm reasonably happy. I appreciate the contemporary use of 2 applications on the "modern" screen layout and use it a lot. I hope many more applications I use will soon migrate to the new layout.

Re: "I tend to avoid the desktop as much as possible"
I use the desktop as much aas possible, because I can double-click an icon to start an app.
I am "visual", i.e. I wish to see the layout of icons; I wish not to hunt through a list.

Windows 8 desktop is so messy with icons all over it, I prefer a totally clear desktop. As for typing in the name of the program you want to use, lets all go back to the days of DOS if you all prefer typing so much, and do away with GUI altogether.

I insist on gazillions of icons on the desktop. Gathering icons into folders reduces clutter. Automatically expanding folders upon mouse roll-over would be nice.
Windows XP would capriciously rearrange my icons occasionally; W7 seems less high-handed, though one or two updates changed my desktop.
I totally agree with taskman about typing program names; it's so last century.

"...lets all go back to the days of DOS if you all prefer typing so much, and do away with GUI altogether." I totally agree with you.Windows 8 is a disaster on the desktop without a "touch screen" because it means learning a new way of interacting with the computer.
Windows/PCs over the years has become very popular to the point where you could call them information appliances. The Internet was the last component to make that reality complete. Why is it like an appliance? Because people without training were able to buy a machine and begin using it almost immediately just by clicking on icons and buttons which were all visible. Many of them do not know 1 keyboard shortcut, but they get tasks done.
In terms of file organization and general housekeeping of a computer they may fail miserably (files accumulate on the machine and there are a lot of empty "new folder" folders all over the place), but they are able to get stuff done.
With Windows 8 its a whole new ball game the interface is no longer intuitive. It is no longer look, click and go.
It just seems to me that Microsoft is trying to force a tablet/phone interface on everybody even if the hardware is not suitable.

That's exactly what I thought when I started reading about Windows 8 and realised immediately that it was primarily targetted at touch screen devices! Yes, for tablets and phones, touching the screen IS easier than having to use a mouse or other pointing device to navigate through the menus. But if they even upright, desktop touch screens (?) I imagine it would be quite tiring having to keep raising an arm to touch the screen to launch the start menu/programs!

A touch screen is definitely not required for Windows 8.
I have been using Windows 8 for many months on one convertible tablet with a touch screen and one traditional desktop without a touch screen and I can efficiently navigate on each system. In my opinion, a touch screen does not make Windows 8 better. It adds more options.
In fact, for many operations, I find that the mouse and the keyboard can be faster than touch in Windows 8.

as much as not understanding WHY it was removed. We know the capability to use it was in the first Developers beta release. What was gained by removing that registry hack?

I'm going to load W8 Enterprise in a couple of weeks. I've decided the best way to approach it is as I would Linux or OS X, as a completely different operating system where it is a mistake to expect it to conform with my previous Windows experience.

But remember, as I note in my tip below - a lot of the short-cuts and tips you love in Windows 7 will work fine in Windows 8. Get your mind around thinking of the Modern-UI interface *as* the Start menu. Same thing, just a different graphical presentation that lends itself to supporting a wider diversity of input methods.

This isn't the radical redesign everyone has implied it is. Imagine if they blew up the Start Menu so that when you clicked Start the menu filled the WHOLE screen. Now imagine all of the icons were bigger in the Start Menu. Now imagine that some of them are "live" and can display dynamic details.

That is *it*...

That you're using a traditional PC or laptop. Put it on an Ultrabook with a touch-screen or a convertible... and now you've got a whole new way of interfacing the Windows platform. It still works the old way... but it also works in a new way that can be more convenient in a lot of situations. Devices with crazy-long battery life, slim profiles, low weight, low noise and heat output, fast starttime, sleep time, wake time. You don't have to want or need those things, you can still use it the way you used to - but they're there now, for the people who do.

And I don't know of any plans to roll them out. I agree Metro / Whatever probably does rock on a touch device, but I don't have any to support at work and no plans to use anything at home except a desktop. I'm still left asking, 'Why?'

And still, 10-12 hrs a day on a touch screen on a desktop is NOT a workable option. Nor is pinning everything in the world to the taskbar.

The tile screens are a clutter disaster and full of useless junk. The required mouse gestures to bring up screens or functions decreases workflow.

When W8 allows me to completely clear/delete all screens of tiles (obviously excluding system functions) and then ONLY put back the ones I want to use, then I might consider it - and not in touch screen mode. Right now, it reminds me of my Droid that came 'equipped' with about 100 apps that are locked onto the phone that I'll never use - and can't remove unless I root it.

I generally go with a totally clean install .. devoid of bloatware. That's no longer possible.

One of the original suggestions to offer a version with a choice on install of 'classic' or 'Metro' was ignored. MS went for the total 'entertainment/consumer' option and appears unwilling to change. Expending all the effort to catch up to that market at the expense of losing the enterprise means losing both.

Yes, what a great idea it would have been to have given consumers the option to install Windows 8 with either a Classic or a Metro interface! I think MS seriously slipped up when they dismissed that idea, as I'm absolutely positive that the uptake of Windows 8 would have been SO much quicker if they had shipped it with that option!

I've been saying that exact same thing on other sites. I'm glad someone else thinks so too.

I don't miss icons on the desktop. I haven't put icons there in years. I miss icons pinned to the Start Menu. Pinning them to the Taskbar confuses me; I can't tell the active ones from the inactive ones, and I hate the stacked format.

The Modern UI is the start menu - except more flexible.

I've been using a non-touch laptop for 3 weeks now with Windows 8, and I've been focusing on using the Modern UI and Modern apps instead of the desktop apps. It took me awhile, but once I got it - there is a lot of superiority to this approach *even if you're not going to use a touch-screen*. Now, Logitech has a "magicpad" type touch-pad that is evidently getting GREAT reviews on giving the touch-screen experience to desktop devices, as well. Touch is *frequently* a superior method of interface depending on the task you're doing. A system that supports both touch and mouse/pointer is almost certainly in the future.

My example about putting icons on the desktop was simply that it *IS* Windows 7. Everything works the same - you're just looking at it from a different perspective. Really, it is much ado over nothing - this rage over the start menu being gone.

But... two years down the road, you'll probably know I was right all along.

I thought that's what I said at the start of this branch.

What do you consider superior, and is any of it of use to an existing desktop user?

Well... I'd probably write a blog about those observations rather than post them here in the forums.

Speed, all over the place. Serious improvements.

Easier to navigate... *once you understand*. Easier to find.

Mobile OS features presented in a useful way that enhances value and experience.

Integration of information throughout the Modern UI. That whole Windows Metro concept from Windows Phone 7 where the information is provided proactively through live tiles that you can dig down into - putting a focus on content instead of app delivery - is solidly implemented in Windows 8.

Most people didn't or don't get that concept about Windows Phone 7. I didn't get it when I reviewed the WP7, and actually talked to MS WP team members who tried to explain it to me. I never quite got it with WP7. With Windows 8, the people tile in particular, brings it home.

All of it is a serious improvement over the Windows 7 model. But part of the reason I get it is because I've been using mobile devices so much for the last few years. You've resisted *that* too. I've leveraged social media heavily. You've resisted that.

But almost everyone else in the world has *embraced* all of those things. Ask Apple, Google, Twitter and Facebook.

If not seeing a reason to pay for a mobile device and the required monthly service fees is 'resisting', then I'm guilty. From that point of view, I'm also 'resisting' golf because I won't buy clubs or pay the monthly club dues. Is it 'resisting' to not pay for something I don't need or want?

Unlike mobile devices, I can claim to have tried Twitter a half dozen times for a minimum of two weeks each, and LinkedIn twice for several months each time. After all, they're free and didn't cost me anything to try except leisure time. I didn't find any personal value to either. That may be due to an inability to use either effectively, or maybe my overall lack of interest in social interaction, or maybe I just guard my personal life too jealously, especially where Facebook is concerned. But I don't consider trying something repeatedly and losing interest as 'resisting'. Ignoring, perhaps.

I will venture that my lack of interest in social media is a large part of why I find no use for a 'smart' mobile device. I've got a low-end 'flip phone' and a pay-as-you-go service, and I charge it for road trips. I don't need or want it any other time; it's a 'just in case', nothing more or less.

I don't care what the rest of the world has embraced. I care about the screams I going to hear from the users I support when we can no longer get W7 drivers for new systems and have to shove Metro down their throats.

But aren't you really the exception to the rule? Most people in my organization are highly connected through social networking. I actually feel like I should pay more attention to LinkedIn than I do. It is a growing and important part of professional networking that I neglect far too often. Twitter has taken a back-seat to me for Google+, but that doesn't mean Twitter is something that can be ignored - it is still a huge source of social networking traffic.

So while you're thinking your users are going to be irate for the same reasons you are - you're missing the features that most of them are likely to really appreciate that you just don't have any use for.

Our organization recently deployed Microsoft Lync. There was a lot of hesitation in our organization about deploying something seen as a corporate re-branding of Microsoft IM. I was among those that were dubious. It turns out that yes, IM is an excellent tool for corporate communications. My biggest a-ha moment so far was when I was on a conference call, and I needed to communicate something to another person on the same call without interrupting the call itself. I sent them an IM, even heard it chime over the teleconference, heard them pause as they read it, and then they addressed the point. This is an efficiency *gain* for an organization. Just because everyone thinks that it will just be used by employees to chat all day doesn't make that true.

But again, there are other benefits. Tangible benefits in performance and security. Do you know that prior to Windows 8, AV wasn't guaranteed to be the first things to load? Now all systems files are digitally signed, and AV will load before any additional resident programs, services or other vectors for infection. There are *enterprise* security, reliability and availability benefits to the design of Windows 8. You're ignoring those because you're unhappy the start menu is gone... when it is actually the FIRST thing you see in Windows 8 and it takes up the *entire* screen.

I haven't seen you this fired up about something in awhile Palmy. It *really* isn't that bad. I get why you don't want a smartphone, I get why you don't like social media. I understand *why* you're not embracing Windows 8. I haven't *tried* to convince you to adopt mobile devices, even though that is "my thing". I've given you a lot of examples of how *I* enjoy social media - but I've admitted I gave up almost all of my anonymity in doing so and I think I've been frank about how social media works best for people who *are* self-promoting. If I wasn't trying to generate more hits, more followers, more readers, social media outside of connecting with friends on Facebook wouldn't interest me very much, either.

But getting hung up over the Windows 8 Start menu I just don't get. It is there... and the OS has quantifiable improvements that can't be ignored. More than anything - I don't think you'll skip it and Windows 9 will address your concerns. I think Windows 9 will take it even further than Windows 8. Back-tracking on this isn't on Redmond's roadmap, in my opinion. Instead, if you skip Windows 8, it will be like going from NT 4 to Windows 7 when you finally make the jump.

My only objection to your points on my use of social networking was your repeated use of the word 'resist'. I've taken the cotton out of my ears several times, but the siren song doesn't seem to have any pull on me. It's probably because I'm tone deaf to many forms of social interaction. I didn't engage in these behaviors before they were automated; moving them online hasn't made them any more attractive to or easy for me.

We discourage the use of social networking at work and block most sites. Those aren't my policies, but I agree with them. Even if we let much of the Metro live tile candy through the firewall (and I suspect we won't), 90% of my users run all their apps maximized. They'd never see the content anyway.

I admit I'm still trying to 'get' IM. We're upgrading Office Communicator to Lync in the spring. Other than saving costs on international calls, I can't find a reason to use it. I don't think I'm 'resisting' it; I'll respond when others initiate a conversation instead of ignoring it or closing the client. But I rarely initiate a connection myself; I don't get what it does that can't be done with at phone call or (in the case of your example) an e-mail. I realize that I'm an exception here too, but I have no problems with rolling it out if that's what the PTBs want.

Yes, I'm letting the Start Menu issue override my acknowledging some of the benefits. But I'm still missing why including them mandated the Metro interface. The registry hack for the Classic desktop was already there; they had to work to remove it. We skipped W98 and Vista without performance or user efficiency issues; I've no reason to think skipping W8 will be any different, but it isn't my call. Fortunately, training isn't my problem.

Yeah, I'll figure out how to use the damn thing and capably deploy it when told to do so, but acceptance isn't affection. If I beat my head on it long enough, I'll eventually go numb and stop feeling it; that doesn't mean I'm enjoying the pain.

I just think that by dreading it, you're setting yourself up to make it worse on yourself than it has to be. Did you read my blog in Tablets in the Enterprise on how I realized Windows 8 was probably inevitable for me? I'm committed to Android tablets. I've invested in this ecosystem. Heavily. Then I realized my most current PC is a Core 2 Duo and that I'm still using some Pentiums for my daily heavy lifting. I haven't upgraded my PCs since I first moved to Ohio. If I'm going to buy a new i5 or i7 PC I realized that there were a few facts.
1: It should be an Ultrabook with long battery life, and quick resume and boot times.
2: If it is going to be an Ultrabook, it might as well be a hybrid convertible for around the same price.
3: If that is the case, it should be Windows 8.

This is a machine where I do my more intensive tasks. Running VMs, ripping content and managing media libraries, manipulating very large files and doing conversion from .iso to mobile-friendly formats. *wink-wink*. An I5 or i7 is going to make those things go faster, and save me time, and allow me to do more of it in less time. These are all things I need. But I was *and remain* a little shy of Windows 8.

So I went into Best Buy and sat with a Lenovo 13 and I was impressed over a 30 minute demo. Real impressed. I don't like the *price*. If it were $900 and offered a 256gb SSD and 8GB ram I'd buy it today. Configured like that, I'm going to have to do the upgrades, and it'll be more like $1500. That is the *only* significant thing that is holding me back.

But initially, it wasn't just price. It was Windows 8. So I figured I have a corporate TechNet, and those 3 Windows Pro licenses were for *exactly* this kind of purpose - testing to see if my clients and my users were ready to migrate to Windows 8. What better way to find out than by eating the dog-food myself?

So I did. I found an older core duo laptop I had in the basement, I popped Win8 on it, and I decided to use it... a lot... to see if I'd like it. I used it over the entire Thanksgiving break. And I liked it... a LOT.

I assigned one of my engineers to try it too... the one who HATES change... as a control - to see what his bias would be. I was shocked when he liked it as much, maybe even more than I did.

as I am dreading SUPPORTING it. I've had people reject larger monitors because they didn't want to lose the desk space (including one who clung to a CRT). Just this quarter I had two engineering managers and an SQL programmer cling to out-of-warranty 2008 laptops with XP as long as possible because they didn't want to futz with W7 and the hassles of transferring to a new laptops. Only an incompatibilty with a new required tool forced their hands. I don't know the skill level of the users in other companies (or much care), but I do know the skills and attitudes of MY users.

No, I missed your tablet blog. I saw a potential use for tablets in our warehouse, but that department has since been outsourced to another company's management and support. At this time we don't have any, although two other people on the help desk have been tasked next year to look at them.

Because of the nature of our work, you and I have radically different hardware needs. Mine only has to mirror a relatively small pool. When the budget process coughs up new ones, I take one off the top of the pallet.

"a lot of the short-cuts and tips you love in Windows 7 will work fine in Windows 8."

Yeah, but I think I'm better off pretending they don't. Using those that work will only lead to my expecting ALL my existing habits to apply. I've allocated a two-year-old HP 8440p laptop with 4 gig for the task.

You'll learn the new habits. Eventually you won't remember how you did it before, and if you have to, you'll wonder why you ever thought that way was better. I've been there myself too many times to not believe this.

I haven't seen you this fired up about something in awhile Palmy. It *really* isn't that bad. I get why you don't want a smartphone, I get why you don't like social media. I understand *why* you're not embracing Windows 8. I haven't *tried* to convince you to adopt mobile devices, even though that is "my thing". I've given you a lot of examples of how *I* enjoy social media - but I've admitted I gave up almost all of my anonymity in doing so and I think I've been frank about how social media works best for people who *are* self-promoting. If I wasn't trying to generate more hits, more followers, more readers, social media outside of connecting with friends on Facebook wouldn't interest me very much, either.

But getting hung up over the Windows 8 Start menu I just don't get. It is there... and the OS has quantifiable improvements that can't be ignored. More than anything - I don't think you'll skip it and Windows 9 will address your concerns. I think Windows 9 will take it even further than Windows 8. Back-tracking on this isn't on Redmond's roadmap, in my opinion. Instead, if you skip Windows 8, it will be like going from NT 4 to Windows 7 when you finally make the jump.

I don't know that the pre-W8 ways are better (or worse). The GUI in W8 just looks like change for change's sake. We're back to my not understanding the advantages of jamming a variety of device feet into a single sized GUI shoe.

The market is changing. I'm sure people didn't understand cars when horses were perfectly good solutions for the last 1900 years. And at first, those who adopted automobiles did it not because the automobile was superior, but because they knew the potential was superior - and that the potential would never be reached if we said, "eh, horses are as good as it gets, why bother struggling with anything else when we already have something we know."

Seriously. Tablets aren't a fad. I know you and a handful of other Tech Republic users have made this claim at several points over the last several years. That touch is novel but doesn't really add any improvement. The growth of touch-driven devices argues against that claim. There is something substantial to this way of interacting with our PCs. It isn't just that it is FUN, it is more natural, more intuitive, more powerful, in too many areas. It can be quicker. It can be easier. Not just on a phone, and not just on a tablet, but on any device we interact with. It makes sense in cars. It makes sense on ATMs, it makes sense in a bunch of usage scenarios - including the desktop... maybe not as the desktop is laid out today - but the original automobiles were literally a horseless carriage. That carriage design wasn't ideal for an automobile. That didn't mean the carriage was superior, it meant it was actually inferior and had to evolve to deliver the improvements of automotive transportation.

Likewise, this tired old PC interface that we struggle with today - is about to have to redesign itself from the hardware to the UI, in order to be a better platform for productivity and entertainment tomorrow.

I don't recall saying tablets or touch are fads. I do recall saying that I don't personally have a use for them, that W8 is optimized and well-suited for touch systems, especially content consumption devices, but at the expense of non-touch systems.

Cars? I'm violently opposed to anything that requires taking eyes off the road. I can operate my heater, air, audio, lights, etc by touch, because the controls are physically tactile. I don't have to look at a screen, scroll through options, hit the stopped vehicle in front of me...

Touch makes plenty of sense on ATMs and other single-purpose kiosks, partially because no one spends their entire day working on an ATM or reserving hotels at a travel stop kiosk, and there are only limited types of data and transactions involved.

As to initial designs being inferior, the same could be said of the W8 interface. It's MS's first shot at this, and their history shows every reason to believe it will be much more refined in the second version.

There seems to be enough market demand for having left things alone to generate a viable market for third-party augmentation. I'll swallow this pill, but there ain't a big enough spoonful of sugar, Mary Poppins.

take up a whole screen, and "dynamic details" that I need are easily seen ALL THE TIME on the taskbar in XP. Sorry this argument doesn't work.
You had some other ideas I could see working though, like the touchpad with all those tiles or whatever TO THE side of the screen where the mouse resides, maybe, and putting a screen at an angle in front of the keyboard.

I dislike the concept of searching my own desktop.

I've always known where applications, files, etc. are on my computer because I put them there. Then in Vista unusual shortcuts began appearing in the file management window that I couldn't immediately see the purpose of. This continued in W7 with 'Libraries' and other tree pane options that I found confusing and cumbersome; where exactly do these things point? I read how these would be useful to those who didn't have a good background in file management.

Now we're offered an OS where one highly recommended approach is to search for everything - files, applications, etc. I can see having to do it once in order to create a tile or shortcut, but to rely on it to regularly start an application? I don't mind searching for information on the Internet; there's no way to know where everything is. But I've never had any use for desktop search tools because I know where things are; mostly where I put them. To me, the inability to manage one's files without constantly having to search for them has been a sign of poor computing skills. I'm finding insult in a perceived implication that I don't know and am not capable of managing where things are stored. It's as if the recommended way to find my own bathroom is to use a bloodhound. "C'mon, Cletus; show me where the john is one more time, even though I built this house."

This one is definitely an attitude problem on my part.

I mostly agree with you on the topic of search.
One should be consistent on how one names their files and where one stores them. I am often asked to pull up a document that I wrote 7 or 8 years ago and it takes me a minute or two to find it. I am pleasantly surprised at how consistent my naming and storage conventions are. I suspect this habit comes from my days with DOS where consistency was essential.
If you are not consistent with naming conventions, then any Search tool can be The Great Enabler. It allows you to get very sloppy about where you saved things and how you named them.
BUT
Where Search tools come in very handy is when you are asked to find something someone else saved on their computer, file share, or in a pst. This is a big part of my help desk staff's job.
Search also comes in handy for finding programs that you don't use very often. (see my previous example of finding defrag.)
I caution my users to be consistent but some users don't listen. (sigh)
Not surprisingly, I find that a user's messy workspace is often a good indication of messy file storage habits. Occasionally, I come across a user who has a messy workspace but somehow knows exactly where everything is (in their office and on their hard drive) but in my experience, that kind of user is very rare.

Indeed, I expect to have to use it when helping others find what they're looking for.

I'm not as comfortable or adept with the search in W7 as I was with XP. That Search 4.0 upgrade MS pushed several years ago really threw me for a loop. Both it and the W7 search don't seem as flexible or have the same filtering capabilties as XP. I'm sure it's more a training issue, but what I want to do isn't apparent. That's not a W8-specific issue; it's the concept that I should rely on search for daily navigation that rubs me wrong.

I has a user once, a QA engineer who had good reason to take multiple pictures of product defects. He understood the value of storing them where they would be backed up, but he'd upload the photos to directories named:

AAA
AAAAA
AAAAAAAB
AAAABBBB
AAAZZZ
ZZZ

There were HUNDREDS of these in his network share when he left. Of course, the individual photos still had the camera-generated file names. Per procedure, I burned DVDs of his files and turned them over to his supervisor. The QA department spent a couple of days trying to figure them out, questioned my ability to burn a DVD until I showed the original directory, and then soon abandoned the attempt to get any value from the data.

http://blogs.msdn.com/b/b8/archive/2012/05/18/creating-the-windows-8-user-experience.aspx

I don't want to hear any "TL, DNR" bull. If you too want to know what MS was thinking, read it. I don't know that I like the Metro interface any more after reading this, but at least now I know where MS is coming from.

Palmy, old boy, MS says your perceptions of general computer use are more outdated and off-base than you could even begin to guess. See that XP paragraph that starts 'By 2001...'? You're still living it, but few others are. See that chunk beginning, "7. Make your PC work like a device, not a computer"? THAT is where almost everyone else is. You may never have any of this ... stuff personally, but consumerization is going to force a lot of it down your corporate workplace throat. Pull your head out, set your watch forward 12 or even 15 years, and fuggin' deal with it.

The queue for 'I told you so's' and b!tch slaps forms below and to the right. For those of you who get the reference, I'll leave the helmet off.

nt

I read it. I even linked to it on G+. If you would hit some social networking sites, you would have known this. Great source. I appreciate the link.

Why does no one ever mention the Desktop toolbar that can be added to the Task bar? I use it with WIndows 7 and its still available in Windows 8. Great way to display all the icons on your desktop with one click without minimizing the current window. Simply right-click on the Task bar and select Toolsbars, Desktop. You can create folders on the desktop and add shortcuts give you a Start Menu effect. Give it a try...
K

If I ever do get a Win 8 machine I suspect that is what I will do, at least it was what I did with both of the previews I tested.

...something that I considered adding to this article, but decided to leave it out this time around because the toolbar menu is so pitifully small. Probably should have mentioned it anyway. Thanks for doing so as it definitely is a viable solution.

Alternatively, you can check out an article that I wrote back in April:

Easily revive the Classic Start Menu hidden within Windows 8
http://www.techrepublic.com/blog/window-on-windows/easily-revive-the-classic-start-menu-hidden-within-windows-8/5945

The menu would be hugely more useful if it was sorted.
If by "small", you mean the character sizes, I agree. And one cannot get Virtual Magnifier onto the menu.

On my notebook it contains 37 icons. OK, you have to delete the ones you don't want and reorganize/sort it by drag and drop, but it is immensely useful. You can also add a Quicklaunch toolbar, which adds up to 37 more apps/programs/features. Plus pinned programs on the taskbar gives me 96 programs/apps accessed with one or two clicks. For me, this covers about 99% of my needs. I use metro UI about once per week.

Does anyone else here regularly (or even infrequently) use 170 different programs?!!! It sounds like a hell of a lot of programs to me!

That when you install any Suite of Applications like for instance Microsoft Office each component has a Tile and all of the subcomponents have tiles. Not such a bad thing for Major Applications like Word but a real issue for some of the other very rarely used things that create their own tiles in the Start Menu.

Also as they roll off the screen they are great for Hand Held Touch Screen Devices but more than a bit of a nuisance on a Desktop or NB.

The Test Rig that I had 8 Preview running on before it's release had 350 Tiles on the Metro Interface and finding things in that was a nightmare. Might sound like a lot of Apps but really there where only a few programs installed Video Editing & Recording, Graphic, Office and the like.

Though the things installed where not apps per say but full applications which the desktop was suited for. For instance you install Corel Draw and get about 30 new tiles.

Col

unpinning the majority of the tiles from the Start Screen and just using the desktop to access your programs?
For example; Install Corel Draw, go to the Start Screen select all 30 tiles it installed and unpin them. The Corel icons will be the last 30 tiles on the Start Screen.
If you do all of your work on the desktop, then all you need is the Desktop tile in the upper left corner of your start screen and the desktop toolbar on your taskbar.
Boot up the computer, hit the enter key and work in the desktop all day.
While you're at it, make a shutdown shortcut and put it on your desktop taskbar. Then you don't need Charms to shut the computer off.

Up to 37 on desktop toolbar, 37 on quicklaunch and 22 on the taskbar. That includes numerous accessories and control panel items. It would be good if Greg would pick this up and write a blog on it. I think it would cut off 90% of the whinging about W8 by non-touch notebook/desktop users.

tell you guys but no one whated to hear me for months

tell cnet and zdnet "reporters" the same thing for last few months but no one caired

My friend's daughter has a Mac and I literally cannot bear seeing the icons dotted all over her screen! I only keep the Recycle bin and Internet Options on mine, mostly because I just prefer a clear desktop but also because most computer sites say that having loads of icons/program shortcuts on your desktop slows Windows down? Anyway, then I have my six most frequently used programs are in my Quick Launch folder on the Taskbar and the next seven 'fairly frequently used' shortcuts are pinned to my Start Menu. I very rarely need to use or find a program in the start menu: I just put my mouse over the Quick Launch bar or go to the programs pinned to my Start Menu and select one as quickly and easily as you like! Seriously, what could be simpler?

Easy answer is not needing to setup that in the first place. Honest.

Col

that you installed Windows XP, Vista, or 7 (whatever Microsoft OS you use as your desktop) out of the box and made absolutely no personalization changes to it but don't expect me to believe you.

In XP or 7 is to Sort by Name and I don't have a issue with that.

No need to make any other changes and to be perfectly honest the amount of time I spend setting up Desktops for Clients is already way too great I really don't need to be adding more steps and time to the process. Not to mention finding the networking and other Setup items in 8 is more complex/time consuming.

Col

I'm talking about your personal desktop.
You don't show hidden files?
You don't add frequently used programs to the taskbar?
You don't pin frequently used programs to the start menu?
You don't disable Aero and other windows animations to save the processor for more important things?
You don't change the default page file size?
You don't change your default home page in IE?
You don't change your default browser?
You don't add bookmarks?
You don't add the "My Computer" and the recycle bin icons to the desktop screen?
You don't disable notifications in the task tray?
You don't change your desktop theme?
You don't redirect "My Documents" to a private network drive?
You don't change your default printer?
You don't do all of the above once, create an image and use that image to save yourself from doing it in all subsequent installs?
That is interesting.
These are just the things I can remember to do off the top of my head.

sorry, couldn't resist.

I think he's got ya here, HAL. Time to open the pod bay doors and let the atmosphere out..

You don't show hidden files?

Yep sure do but it's not on the Start Menu.

You don't add frequently used programs to the taskbar?

Nope I don't as what i use has Icons on the Desktop and because of what I do I can not have more than one thing at a time open when I'm doing Real Work as apposed to looking at E Mail.

You don't pin frequently used programs to the start menu?

Nope they are there already and when I'm using 7 which incidental I might add only 2 users of my clients are currently using what I use a lot of pins itself to the opening Start Menu. Though I have to be perfectly Honest I don't use 7 that much either. Only open it once a day to do Updates and check TR late at night after the system has been shut down for the day most days as I don't get many help calls for 7 systems where I need to be sitting in front of a system running version of 7 or 8 for that matter.

You don't disable Aero and other windows animations

My Oath I do as I only have a i7 and 24 GIG of RAM on this system it not powerful enough to run that junk when I'm using 7.

You don't change the default page file size?

Most times no I don't as now any new systems go out with at least 8 GIG of RAM so Page or Swap Files are not an issue. Well at the moment at least.

You don't change your default home page in IE?

Most defiantly but you do that in the Browser which is opened by pressing a key on the keyboard called Web/Home.

You don't change your default browser?

Actually no because most clients use IE and no matter how much I hate it I have to support it.

I actually had one of them complaining that when they Opened Firefox and tried a Web Site that they got a message that they had to be using IE8 or higher to view this page and they wanted to know how they should proceed. I know End Users.

You don't add bookmarks?

Sure do but again this is inside the Browser and nothing to do with the Start Menu. On a new load they are coppied in with the End Users Data, not really sure how else you could do it for a reload either.

You don't add the "My Computer" and the recycle bin icons to the desktop screen?

With XP both are already there even with the version of 7 I'm using 64 Bit Pro the Recycle Bin is on the Desktop and the My Computer key on the keyboard opens that so no I don't really need it on the Desktop. Though to be honest that also applies to 8 except for the recycle bin if I remember correctly.

You don't disable notifications in the task tray?

Actually no I don't mainly because for myself I need to have some idea of what the clients are seeing as they'll ring up say something along the lines I got this thing on the screen what's it mean? None of my clients are very computer literate but all are Professionals who may use a computer during the day but it's not what they do for a living.

You don't change your desktop theme?

No not really but that is changed when I slipstream the Install so it apples to all OS's of the Windows Variety not something to do after the OS is installed.

You don't redirect "My Documents" to a private network drive?

Sometimes, Sometimes Not depends on the client and what they actually do. I should however add I don't do work for Large Business any more as they have enough people both inside and outside their doors I specialize in Small Business with most times under 20 users so I tend to work in a different environment to a lot of IT People. What can I say I'm lazy and the days of needing to change the product key on 1500 systems to get them running again after a service pack installation are way behind me. Sounds Too Much like Hard Work. The fact that the Government takes ages to pay didn't help me want to continue doing the work either.

You don't change your default printer?

On my personal system most defiantly but on client machines hardly ever. Only time I can remember changing a Default Printer was when installing a new printer to replace a broken one.

You don't do all of the above once, create an image and use that image to save yourself from doing it in all subsequent installs?

Sure do but as things stand now I have to do more work to get the same results with 8 as I did with XP and 7. So I'll say it again 8 is Plain & Simple more work for me. Though to be perfectly honest Subsequent Installs don't count I make the Image before the First Install. It's one of the advantages of using Volume License all of the time.

Though I hardly see how any of the above in any way remove any steps from what is required to produce a working System for Clients where I can walk in the door drop the unit on a desk and not need to do anything else. Though I do add the Clients E Mail Accounts and all of the Clients Data as well after the install as I've not yet found a way to not need to do that.

So how many of the above are changes to the Start Menu?

To be fair that is what you asked not System Changes. Not really sure how you add Bookmarks from the Start Menu even in 8 as I've always needed a Browser open in the past to add a Bookmark.

Remember whatever they want to call Metro now is still the Start Menu and to be perfectly honest I've in the past other than Sorting By Name have not needed to make any changes there.

Rebuilding the Start menu on the Desktop is another Step in the setup of Windows 8 that is a waste of my Time.

Col

I apologize for that.
I was trying to illustrate that most people, especially those in IT, make a ton of changes to the out of the box install of Windows XP, Vista, and 7 on their personal machine.
I call these "personalization changes". I was not restricting my examples to the Start Menu.
If most IT people execute these dozen or so changes on their current personal systems, it is a bit presumptuous to expect a new "out of the box" Windows operating system to exactly meet your specific needs.
Everyone's needs are different.
That goes for most operating systems. I make a lot of changes to the "out of the box" Linux and Android installs too.

We where talking at cross purposes.

Personally I don't mind Metro or whatever they want to call it now it's just that I don't see it as the best user interface for End Users at the moment who have been using a GUI for all of their Computing Lives. Remember that these people are not paid to be IT Experts many have real jobs who are required to interact with computers sometime in their working lives.

Like a Surgeon who's main job is going in with his Knife and Fork and cutting things out of people or adding things to replace broken bits.

These people have to use a computer to get things like E Mail which is used to send them Patient Records so that they know what they will be facing but even they hand write their Patient Notes up in Longhand and then get some other staff member to transcribe them to computer.

I have a bunch of Earthmover's who willing crush computers that don't do as they want and these guys are not going to be told that they have to change how they interact with their computers just to do what they have been doing for years. They all ask so it's new but why is it better for me?

The truth of the matter is that for them individually it's not better just something that will come eventually.

Though the more that they use Interfaces like Metro on their Phones the less of an issue it's going to be when they have to use it on their computers. Sorry but at the moment I just don't see Metro as an Improvement, however when every boy and their Dog uses Windows Phones having the one User Interface would be an advantage and they could seamlessly step from one device to another without thinking.

It just till that transition is complete there is a problem.

However I do find it funny how many people say it's easier typing to open an app when for years M$ and all of their Fan-people have been telling us that Typing is so Old Hat and it's better using a Icon to click on. After all that is why Windows was such an improvement over DOS/Unix because you didn't need to remember the names of things and there was no typing just a couple of button clicks and quite often just the 1 Button click.

Col

I hope you didn't fall off your chair after reading that.
I too have to deal with users who do not live behind their computer so they are not as computer savvy or as willing to learn as those who do.
As I have said before, I do not plan to install Win 8 in the Enterprise right now. Eventhough, it is very simple to use (in my opinion), I can visualize the panic, cursing, gnashing of teeth, and burning effigies of me around the campus if I gave it to some users.
Over time, I think it will work its way out of my IT department and into other departments just as other computer systems have. and that's the way it should work.
I ran into not so much resistance but an inability to see the usefulness of other systems we have deployed in the past. Live Communicator and SharePoint come to mind. Eventually, the users figure out that it is useful and that they can no longer live without it.
I resist the temptation to say, "I told you so!"

I've been trying to figure out uses for SharePoint in our facility for at least three years, and uses for Communicator for myself for at least two. I can't fault users for not seeing all the benefits when I don't really get them myself. I can see value in SP, just not how we can effectively use it in the facility I support. The users seem content with traditional file sharing. Communicator continues to elude me, except that it can save us the cost of a long-distance call. To me it's just lightweight e-mail. Maybe its advantages will become more apparent when we roll out Lync next quarter as our primary communications tool and (theoretically) drop POTS.

Maybe I am getting too old for this industry.

We collaborate on a ton of documents at my BioTech company and we needed a better way to manage version control. Collaborating in a file share is difficult to maintain since it is so vulnerable to accidental modification and deletion. Plus, file shares do not automatically notify all parties when someone has made a change to the document. Collaborating through email attachments is a mess. It's easy to forget to inform everyone of a document change they need to look at.
SharePoint pages can be hierarchical and project based. We use it to manage the construction of a new building, new laboratory, new research projects, clinical research, collaboration with other companies worldwide, production scheduling, company announcements, etc.. It's a very versatile tool.
If set up properly, SharePoint maintains version control, automatically alerts others when a change has been made, integrates with MS Office for file check in and out.
SharePoint is "presence aware" when used with Live Communicator, A green dot next to the collaborators' names in SharePoint (and Outlook) indicates that they are at their keyboard. Right clicking their name allows you to immediately email of "im" them or even call them via VoIP. I use it to launch Live Communicator all the time.
I treat Live Communicator like a light version of email. I use it if I need a quick reply. I use email if I need to send a detailed message or I need to send a message outside of our network.
Live Communicator is restricted to internal messaging only.

but apparently the users don't need or want them. The majority of people in our other location love it, but they're more project, development, and engineering oriented than the manufacturing plant I'm in. I did a couple of dog and pony shows when the server first came on line, but I had almost no interest expressed. A large part of it is that we have too much data in too many other document management systems already; people don't want yet another place to search.

We use it for departmental data, but I frankly don't like it for our purposes. For example, why have a Sharepoint List for hardware inventory, with individual items that must be opened one at a time to edit them, when a spreadsheet could handle it all? I'm sure we're using it so ineffectively as to be counterproductive, but the department head set it up and likes it. It's about the only disagreement I have with her, so I'll pick my battles.

I agree that turning a SharePoint page into a glorified spreadsheet is not an efficient use of the tool.

We too have a formal electronic document management system (EDMS). One of the ways we use SharePoint is as an informal draft stage collaboration tool - a pre-EDMS. Once collaboration is done, the final document is published to EDMS where it is routed for approval and end user training. We didn't want to clutter the formal tool or confuse the user with all of the intermediate drafts and collaboration notes.
Our EDMS is web based so we link to it from SharePoint. Interestingly, I found that some users thought that our SharePoint and EDMS were the same application. When we shut down SharePoint for maintenance users started calling me claiming that EDMS was unavailable.
Our Help Desk system and ERP are also linked to SharePoint. My Help Desk "How to" documentation and videos are stored in SharePoint.
Our conference & training room class schedules and room reservations are built into SharePoint.
I guess SharePoint is kind of like our corporate glue.

I've been begging for funds for Sharepoint for over 3 years now, asking to bring in consultants, get sent to training, get funding for hardware and licensing. My users are *also* content with traditional file sharing.

On a regular basis they lose files and entire folders when someone accidently drags and drops something somewhere else or otherwise manages to bungle saving or updating data in a shared file on a shared folder. They lose data. Old stale files that can be archived or removed are outrageously difficult to locate so the shares grow exponentially in size. It is an IT administration nightmare where everything that goes wrong is pinned on the IT team when it is really about how impractical file shares are for document collaboration. Speaking of which, we maintain VPNs with partners and clients to allow them to collaborate on documents - an unnecessary security risk and potential vector for virus infection.

SharePoint answers *all* of these problems, implemented correctly. It is one of a handful of solutions available to deliver this solution.

But I couldn't get my wife to see the value of a big screen TV until years of nagging wore her down. Then the same thing happened with our first flat panel projection screen, which made her receptive to the Plasma, which lead to LCDs. The same thing happened with my PCs. "What do you need an LCD for when your CRT is fine..."

"Why should we change the way we've always done it, the way we're comfortable with, to learn something new when we don't see any value in it..."

Hearing that question is the story of an IT Manager's life. It says, "finds new and innovative solutions to enhance workflow, increase producitivty and maintain competitive advantages," on my job description. It always says something like that - but very rarely do I get asked to exercise that role.

"Don't want or don't need" doesn't mean anything. Users should not dictate technology roadmaps - IT innovators should. (Wives shouldn't either, unless they are the technology innovator in the household).

We missed OneNote collaboration integration via SharePoint as one of the benefits - and it is a big one if you can get the company culture to adopt OneNote as their universal meeting note-taking solution. Multiple people in the same document at the same time capturing their own responsibilities in a meeting notebook with multiple tabs and pages and available hotlinking to IE and Outlook. Such an incredible productivity and management tool suite. Adoption is easy once you show it and explain the benefits in meetings. "If an AR or deliverable isn't captured in the OneNote meeting notebook, it doesn't exist - the person who assigns it notes so in their area, and the person responsible for the deliverable or action item captures it in their area, and people who aren't involved can safely ignore it. Meeting note self-accountability.

JJ - your organization sounds like Nirvana. Are they hiring?

of the benefits of SharePoint.
The thing that finally convinced them was a presentation I gave with a trial version I built with my vision of how it could work. I walked them through a typical day using SharePoint "integrated" with our other programs.
I could talk until I was blue in the face but it was the actual demo that really sank in and sealed the deal.
We recently put up a SharePoint instance outside of our network to collaborate with outside partners. SharePoint is so much cleaner and easier for users to understand than what we were using (sFTP).
We have used ssl VPN's in the past as well but the collaborators often had trouble connecting as their computers didn't pass minimum OS, browser, and security requirements.

The only job opening I have now is for a Senior Oracle DBA.

I think it's another one of those things I can't visualize without seeing it in effective operation. It doesn't help that the SP server is at another site, and the file server is here. The difference in response speed is noticeable.

For once my users appear to be better trained than someone else's. I don't see the accidental deletion problems Col does; maybe every couple of months or so. We recently upgraded Exchange, and training room calendars remain there. (They were planned to go into SP; I don't know why that changed. Inability to schedule a meeting and reserve an SP room from one Outlook action?)

And I hear Ford is coming out with a new model of car. You have to get out and go to the front of the car and turn a crank...how ingenious! MS has created a new category of software......"Anti-Productivity software"

Cars must have been impossible to start when it got sub -30C

Hell, I'M impossible to start when it gets sub +5C!

nt

it was actually the only way to get it to start in the winter! HA! It was probably one of the most reliable cars I ever owned because of that. No battery power? No problem!! It made good gas mileage, but you had to yell BANZAI! when you attempted to pass anybody on the road. Not quite a hot rod! My school chums liked picking it up by the bumper and parking over the parking blocks so I couldn't leave the campus. We had contests on how many chums we could pack in it at one time. More fun than a barrel of monkeys!! 1967 Renault Dauphine. http://www.bing.com/videos/search?q=1967+Renault+Dauphine&mid=E8C1F4CD257454E75923E8C1F4CD257454E75923&view=detail&FORM=VIRE1

There's no small irony in that choice.

I value personal difference over chick magnets. I'm a dyed in the wool individualist - to the point of personal pain! HA!

It doesn't matter to me what the crowd likes or is buying. If I don't see a need for it or want one for myself, I'll leave it on the shelf.

On the other hand, when I find something I like, I'll use it until it falls apart. Thus, 334k miles on an Escort!

My next car would have been a Ford Fiesta had the dealer not messed up the sale. I love them fuel sippers! They are more fun to drive too!

People can laff all they want - they are jealous when they see what I can do with my money savings from the gas though!

Mileage reimbursement was anywhere from $.405 to $.445 while I was driving it for work. My actual cost, including repairs, was somewhere around 29¢ a mile the year I put the new struts on it.

And my 5-speed LS would hold 77mph on an 8% grade without a downshift and p1$$ the rednecks right off when I pushed their trucks up the hil!

It got 80 to 90 miles per gallon. I rode it back and forth to work for 11 years.
Yeah, some people snickered at me. big deal

7 Gears and it returns in excess of 125 Kilometers per Liter.

Of course being a 2 Stroke it emits a lot of smoke and I need to mix 2 Stroke Oil with the Fuel before filling the tank but it's really cheap to drive and acceptably fast.

If you work your way up to top speed it will hold 80 KPH on all but the steepest hill or strongest head wind. It takes about twice as long to go 50 K's as driving a car so it's slower but far more economical.

Col

I got ya'll beat! I had a recumbent bicycle that the cops clocked a 50 mph, that didn't use gas at all. Just grocery bills - HA! I must have put 10,000 miles on that thing before my brother bought it from me.

just kidding...???

.

and some time folks hands would be broken too. i should know own a model t at one time.kid. and for all the folks who took the time to vote me down on my lats post check my pryer post that i had try to tell folks about a easyer way around windows 8 . hell even sent post to the so called "reporters" but eveb this nut would not tell any one even in this report. so bite me

I have to admit that to me, Windows 8 sounds as if it would be counter productive, what with no start menu and the touch-screen design of the awful Metro screen! But not having tried it, I certainly wouldn't slate it as being Anti-Productive: I would only do that if I had tried using it for a couple of months and still found it tiresome.

I can name so many stupid issues, many have existed since Windows 95. For example, why does the OS start locking up if you perform heavy hard disc access tasks. If you are copying to one hard drive, why should the second get slowed down? Are read/writes not multi threaded?

Why do we still have blue screens? If a driver crashes, the OS should automatically reload it.

You might have chosen a counter example. If the computer has only one disk controller, traffic on one drive will slow down all drives, depending on how many data paths the controller has.
Your point is good, though. For example, in W7, if the USB disk "ejector" refuses to eject a disk because it finds that some app is using the disk, why can't it tell me which app? (Maybe W8 corrects this issue, in which case, I take it back.)

The bandwidth available to Sata far exceeds what can actually be used by a single drive.

to kill apps that won't release USB drives, etc.

Surely, it should, shouldn't it?

There are so many things that Microsoft could and should have improved in the Windows 7 interface. Why after all of these years are we still unable to resize dialog boxes that do not show all of the important information they contain. Instead you have to go in, resize fields and scroll around to locate your information. Then when you find what you are looking for you can't see the entire row at once. MSConfig is just one example of many. Is this rocket science or total ignorance on Microsoft's part?

This is just one of many things that could have been fixed without reinventing the wheel. I once thought that a one-size-fits-all aproach was a good idea. Now I realize that this is a bad idea - at least for Windows 8.

I couldn't agree more Astringent! Can anyone explain why this hasn't been adopted?

Different teams work on different things. Sometimes they make a quick app in OS version. Those guys get reassigned to another app or to the new OS version. If they can move that original app into the new OS version, it gets done. If not, they will have the original team fix it. Or, they will assign another guy or team to create the app from scratch. Multiply this by thousands of coders. Then add a new innovation that turns the organization in another direction or multiple directions. Imagine trying to be in charge of any organization that size. Sometimes you have to leave things for later to get the product out. Sometimes you have to dump something altogether. And always know that you can NEVER make EVERYONE happy at the same time.

Yes, why on earth can't the system tell you which app is 'currently using' a drive? Then you could end the process/close the app and be able to eject your drive. Of course, you can always tick the enable 'quick removal' rather than sticking to the better performance option, which forces you to use the safely remove hardware facility

It won't tell you which app, but it will let you close the file.

You can get there quickly from the Start Screen by typing "co" enter "a" enter "co" enter
Or you can go the old way: Click the Desktop Toolbar on the taskbar > Control Panel > Administrative Tools > Computer Management > Shared Folders.
Better still make a Control Panel tile on the Start Screen.

To me, that was one of the big advantages of a mouse-driven menu - I didn't have to remember keystrokes if I didn't want to.

I'm not in the Control Panel often enough to require any form of shortcut in W7. I hope I'm not in it often enough to require one in W8, but I hate that I'm going to have to learn a new method of doing something I already know how to do, having to fight 15 years of Windows habits, and not even gaining anything for the effort.

Since you know in Windows 8 that you can open any file or program from the Start Screen by typing in the some of the letters in the file name on and you know ever since Windows XP that "Shared Folders" is accessed through Control Panel > Adminstrative Tools > Computer Management and you know how to spell "control", you can "walk through" to Shared Folders. Just type "co" and follow the prompts.
Control Panel > Adminstrative Tools > Computer Management = Co (enter) A (enter) Co (enter)

Besides, your way still works.

Control Panel locations and presentation and MMCs have changed *radically* several times over the evolution of Windows. It was different in Win 3.11, it changed again in NT4, it changed again in Windows 95/98, then again in W2k and XP...

It is one of the most common prizes Microsoft seems to tweek and hide and redo. My first time with a Lenovo Yoga 13 at Best Buy, I wanted to see if it still did "Windows Experience". It took me some searching in all the usual places before I figured out one of at least SEVERAL ways to get into that screen.

I hate it EVERY time Microsoft moves this stuff and I have to go looking for it. Then I find it, and after awhile with the new OS I can't remember what it was ever like before and I'm irate when they move it once again.

This is not a Windows *8* problem.

That's why I'm STILL automatically looking for 'Add / Remove Programs', instead of 'Program whatever it's called in W7'. Old habits die hard. Heck, it takes me four to six weeks to get a replaced password out of 'muscle memory' and those are habit that are only six months old.

And do either of you use the 'new' style Control Panel introduced in Vista? Tell me you don't switch to the old icon view the first time you open it on a system; I dare you.

Heck no!
And guess what, the old style large and small icon views are still available in Windows 8.

Why don't you use the new style? MS obviously thinks it is a better way to access those utilities, and yet you insist on using the old, outdated method.

How is that any different from my wanting to continue to use the Start Menu exactly as it was?

The constant reshuffling of where the system meets the the UI is just 'make-work' for techies and educators, a MS jobs program!

Whilst teaching an A+ course I was showing the 'evolution' of various things, those little tweak zones that inexplicably change places and get renamed something unintuitive... and complaining about it. (me to class: "sorry, but you do have to learn all this stuff")

A student rightly knocked me off my pedestal: pointing out it was these changes, and we techs' knowing the new 'secret handshake' to get to various features, that made work for us all, and for educators teaching MS courses like word, excel etc.

Dang easy work at that. In the shop you hear techs telling customers "you pay me for my knowledge," which often amounts to knowing *where* Microsoft hid *what* this time around.

You just have to know how to put it's features back.
So here goes:
Put the following things on your Desktop taskbar
Programs: add C:\ProgramData\Microsoft\Windows\Start Menu
Search, Libraries, Documents Pictures, Music: add File Explorer
Shutdown etc: add a shortcut to c:\windows\system 32\Shutdown.exe & add the shutdown switches to Shutdown, Hibernate, Log off, Sleep and Restart
Recent: C:\Users\UserAccount\AppData\Roaming\Microsoft\Windows\Recent
Your favorite programs: Pin them
Help and Support: Pin Help and Support to the taskbar

I guess I could sympathize if the functionality was no longer available (For example, if you had to use the Charms menu to shutdown.) but the same Win 7 exe file name is still there in Win 8 if you want it.
Personally, I don't want it.

to Programs and Features but it is still in Control Panel and if you don't want to read the forty or so icons there, there is a search box in Control Panel.
If you type "Add Rem" or "Programs" or "Remove", or "Uninstall" you will jump to it.
Incidentally, if you type Uninstall and click the settings icon on the desktop, all of the various ways to get there will appear. - just sayin'

Clicking the Start button to shut down.
I'm not saying that Charms > Settings is any better.

PGit - You're right. These changes, they determine who keeps working in information technology, and who decides to retire or become a laborer along side their long-haired neighbor from their apartment complex.

I did go back to the old style control panel for a long time, and still do occasionally. But more and more frequently, after repeated visits, I just use the default view and it works transparently for me, possibly even "better", now that I've learned the new habit. Which is why they make it a pain to go back to the old way. As they move forward, SP by SP, version by version, eventually that old way gets depreciated. They do that through ALL of their platforms.

"Here, you can do this the way you USED to in Exchange/SQL/Windows/Office/SharePoint/whatever... but you've got to go through some hoops to get that to work. Eventually, you'll stop bothering with the hoops and learn the new way... and a version or two down the road, the new way will be all that is left. Can't deal with that? Here is your orange vest and hard-hat, the deconstruction crew is busy tearing down walls in the south wing..."

I mean... everyone is right... this is the scab, and I picked it off with this comment. This is Windows evolving, and it does it gradually and in leaps and bounds, and has since the start. So has every other OS... But a lot of controversial changes end up being wildly popular once they're accepted. Ed Bott has been highlighting this for the last couple of months on ZD Net, and he is right.

This is a pretty radical change. It *could* go badly... but from what I've seen using the platform myself... I don't think it will. People will get it, and there is a lot to love about it.

Why does Ubuntu move on to newer versions and never fix broken things in previous versions, like the SAMBA issues that exist previous to version 10?

Because the fix *IS* moving to the latest version.

The same thing that Microsoft is doing with Windows 8.

They haven't been fixed since 1995.

Also, Ubuntu does fix glitches, Windows leaves them behind.