Discussion on:

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

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.