Discussion on:

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

I liked the article, but none of these methods is good. Most people have hundreds of apps, and they want to see what they have, not start typing in a name or see the alphabetical listing. Handheld and desktops always should be entirely different, and attempts to combine are not just silly, but rude and ignorant.

Not only that, but I demand it.

I have a personal dislike for a cluttered desktop. What I have there is a few important shortcuts and the occasional temporary item that I have dropped there in a hurry and will remove when I complete it. I also dislike a stacked task bar - or to be more correct - stacked anything. A pet peeve is the way printers are stacked - If I set up a printer as a color printer and a b&w printer I want to see them as separate items and not stacked.
Being able to have only a few crucial items in the taskbar and having an uncluttered work area allows me to work the way I want to work and not how some other schmuck wants me to.

Thank you Greg Shultz for the article on how to do things we used to do with the Start button. Very helpful.

However, this is another GLARING example of how out of touch "Managers" and "Executives" screw up something so simple and with no good reason. The Microsoft "brain trust" really blew this one. How hard would it have been to leave the Start button in Windows 8. The code was already there in the early pre releases. I have to say and I try not to use this word loosely but this decision to purposely irritate 95% of Windows users by removing the Start button was an idiotic decision.

I'm an IT consultant and usually recommend to my clients that they try to stay up to date with the operating systems and office software for many reasons. It's pretty hard for me to recommend that my clients upgrade an entire company to Windows 8 when it's missing something that 100% of the users are used to.

Maybe it's just me?

At least one Executive at Microsoft got fired over this. But, I don't think anyone at Microsoft has the rocks to admit they screwed up and push out the Start Menu code in an update.

Windows 8 as a whole is a good operating system. I'm using it exclusively all my personal PCs and laptops. But, they all have StartMenu8 installed...

And NONE of them are good enough for me.
I try to use the keyboard as less as possible and i want to do all with my mouse.
And the LAST thing i want to do is typing in the name of the app i want to use!

I LOVE the "old" Windows Startmenu and i use Classic Startmenu on my Windows 7 64b Ultimate giving me the old W2000 startmenu look. All nicely ordered and grouped so with all progs installed it still takes a 1/3 of my screen.

I dont like the pinned apps and i choose to have multiple Quicklaunch bars.
The icons i use very regular are on my desktop (kept in order by Fences).
The ones which are important for me and use often are in my Quicklaunch and the rest through Startmenu. This setup i love and i do hate tiles and the Metro gui.
I tried W8 CP a little while and i hated it... this one is not hitting my desktop.
If you like/love it.. well, good for you.

Try installing Adobe Creative Suite.

Sure, you get AfterEffects, Photoshop, Flash, etc. etc. on your home screen. You also get every tiny utility that almost never gets launched on your home screen. Launchers that only go to some settings you might have to access some day, image viewers that might be the only program you have that correctly reads a certain format, dozens of things that are there for you if and when you need them.

The start menu was the perfect way to store stuff like that. The application developer defines a list of launchers that they think the customer may one day need. If the app developer makes too many, that's fine. They're all stored in that developer's folder. You never have to remember what they were called, only that you thought you remembered there being this utility, and either the name of the software or the name of the company that made the software, and you can find it. The rest of the time it's out of your way.

The home screen shows all icons flat with no folding, and the only other way to access launchers is to browse the legacy "start menu" folder as a filesystem (very annoying and inefficient) or troll around in the Program Files area looking for the .exe (Dangerous vs. accidental renames or drag-n-drops especially for inexperienced users.)

The Start Menu was an organized, standardized, well-supported, well-understood (both among developers and customers) and efficient way to store launchers. Sure the home screen is great for those things that work well to launch that way, but it does not handle all situations. It is terrible if a developer includes lots of utility launchers. It's awful for things you only launch occasionally. It's only organized by "where you felt like putting things" so as the list of installed programs grows, the efficiency of finding something whose name you haven't memorized goes down FAST.

The Start menu may not have been the prettiest thing ever and it may be old, but it had solved those problems better than any other OS had. Sideline it sure, but getting rid of it entirely was stupid.

It's so simple to me.

I will *not* allow my client base to adopt Windows 8 in it's current state without the Start Menu like XP and 7. The article is well written for the techie, like me.

What about the user?

As the workplace is very unlikely to use Windows 8 (even though I was partly able to use it in my college), there is little reason as to why Classic Shell does not replace what was once the Start Menu. Yes, Classic Shell is not identical, but it gives you the ability to make it either look and perform a lot like Windows 7 or Windows XP again.

Let's just make everyone go back to command line interface and be done with it. It works! It always has!

Let's also forget about convenience, forget about efficiency, forget about dovetailing everyone's behavior to use a freaking Start Menu in Windows for almost 2 decades. Sure, you can teach an old dog new tricks, but how long will it take and at what frustration level?

The Windows 8 interface is atrocious. It requires the user to perform additional steps that are completely unnecessary. (Actually, the mess began in Vista and Windows 7) Windows 8 requires the user to switch between modes of operation and completely lacks any congruity between comprised components. Since Windows Vista, OS features and options have been progressively obfuscated and hidden and require more effort on the part of the user to perform a task. This is regressive technology.

Computers were and are wonderful because they ultimately made things easier and more efficient for humans, not to mention the incredible speed at which some tasks can be done. Microsoft not only helped to push that agenda, but actually capitalized on it. Now, it seems, they are on track to frustrate and confuse.

Users should not have to "put up" with an OS or have to perform such ridiculous tasks to make it work for them. An OS should provide them with options to make their tasks, their lives, easier, productive and more fun. It should cater to what appeals to them and be easily modified to meet their demands, their needs and their wants.

"To get to the Apps screen, press the [Windows] key to bring up the Start screen, press [Windows]+[Z] to bring up the App command bar, and then press [Enter] or click the All apps button. (If you have a Microsoft Touch Mouse, you can bring up the App command bar with a two finger gesture and then click the All apps button.)"

Wow ! that's so much easier than clicking the Start button. Not.

What exactly is accomplished by taking away the start menu? It has certainly not shortened the launch of applications over what is available in the previous decade or more's iterations of Windows. Having big tiles is no great shakes over icons (other than the silly novelty of doing what gadgets--remember how many of those we ended up seeing--were supposed to do in Vista Me and Windows 7) when using a mouse and as for touch screens, even my clumsy, fat fingers can hit the dinky icons on my Galaxy S with reasonable accuracy. Any of my clients venturing into Windows 8 have begun to call me to find out how to get back to an OS that isn't costing them time/money with gimmicky, unnecessary changes.

'Tis the season to spend before year end for SOHOs. After looking at Windows 8, two clients are switching to new iMacs and two are getting Windows 7 Pros from Dell's Business side.

It seems the MS Rule of Every Other OS holds true; every other iteration is good (Windows 98, XP, 7) and the in-betweens suck (Windows Me, Vista, and now 8).

Let me see if I have this right...

To start an application in Windows 8 without a start button:

First I need to know what name the application uses. This isn't as straight forward as it seems. For example, does Microsoft Word go by the name "Word" or does it go by the name "Microsoft Word"? Same thing about Internet Explorer; is it "Internet Explorer", "IE", or just "Explorer"? This ambiguity isn't limited to Microsoft applications; for example, does Firefox go by the name "Firefox" or is it "Mozilla Firefox"? Note that I would not need to know this if I were presented with the "All Programs" list; I would simply choose the application that I want from the list. In fact, I don't even care what names the apps are going by if I see them in the "All Programs" list since I know their icons.

Okay, let's say I figure out the name that my app is using. All I have to do is type it into the search box that comes up when I press the Windows key, right? Again, not as easy as it sounds since (at least) anyone using their left hand to hold the mouse will have to release the mouse, find the keyboard, and then find the Windows key. This is perhaps easier for righties who can leave their left hand poised over the keyboard, but is an annoyance for lefties.

Let's say that I've managed to depress the Windows key on the keyboard. The search box is finally presented and I type in the name that my desired app is using. This could be any number of keystrokes, but is typically at least three or four. This is pretty easy to do if you know how to type, but is an annoyance for a "hunt-and-******". Once I've finished up with the typing, up pops a list of programs from which I click on the desired one to launch the app. Again, remember our lefties can't click without re-grabbing the mouse since they had to let it go in order to use the Windows key on the keyboard.

In Windows 8 with a Start button:

I click on the start button, hover over "All Programs", scroll to the desired app, and click it. (This sequence may be even shorter if I don't have to scroll to find the desired app.) All of this is done without taking my focus off the screen or my hand off the mouse.

Total keystrokes without a start button: 4 or 5 on the keyboard plus a mouse click.
Total keystrokes with a start button: 2 mouse clicks if I don't have to scroll the programs list; 3 otherwise.

It's astonishing that Microsoft would remove such a boon to efficiency as the Start button. I use "Classic Start Menu" to regain what Microsoft hath taken away.

I'm with taskman, Windows 8 is a step backwards.

Type the name of the application? A silly idea.
I'm in mainframe technical support and we have to type everything. We have jobs because we know what to type. And typing is one of the main reasons it is called work.

When I go to the start menu at home it is because I don't what I'm looking for until I see it.
You talking about a home users?

At work we go to the start menu because that is where the help desk says to go. They have to support over 3400 company applications. We should get to Windows 7 next year on most of the company's 50,000 PCs.

MS knows about companies like the one I work for. I know we have big MS support contracts.
MS just does not care.

You could always cover your desktop with icons of your apps. You've been able use the windows key for a while now to launch an app. So why didn't most people do that before? Because they didn't want to. They wanted the start menu. Some programs have more than one app. Remember all the names? You've got to be kidding. It's easier to use the start menu to drill down to what you want. I have a "one finger gesture" for Microsoft's touch screen.

i;m sorry, my desktop is clean cause i like the backgrounds-
oh that means i won;t use 8 cause i would always see the metro screen!

but seriously- searching to start? command line? a messy view or just add all the icons? who came up with this idea as being the right way ?

and yeah - my 88 year mom will flock to this os without a problem right?

not

I like the apps page now that I have it arranged the way I use it. Have app for desktop if I need it. I do miss an easy way to shut down. How can I made a shortcut key that will shut down the computer?

The new OS is great for a touchpad and a windows phone. As long as the touchscreen is dead on and sensitive enough like the Samsung or any Apple. It is useless for a Windows 7 replacement. I'll wait, just like the Department of Defense will for Windows 9. It has too high a learning curve for 20+ year computer operators. After we die off then they can chnge whatever they want!!!!!

It isn't that the OS is a bad idea, it is that old-timers are resistant to radical change.

I had a friend who went to automotive school back in the early 90s. When he graduated and got out into the workforce, all the old-timers were quitting because of OBD and later OBD2. They hated it. They felt that these new computer driven cars couldn't actually be *fixed*. You plugged a computer in, it told you what was wrong, and you swapped out the part. That wasn't being a mechanic in their eyes. They dropped like flies.
Now you've got a bunch of mechanics who mostly just swap out parts. But cars are more reliable, most repairs are quicker and less trouble-prone and you can find out all kinds of things about the vehicle that you wouldn't have known until too late prior to OBD.
The same thing is happening in health-care with EHR. Old docs hate EHR and meaningful use criteria. They absolutely resent that they're being measured not by volume or by diagnosis, but by metrics on improved quality of care and results. They don't like a PC suggesting things they might have overlooked. They're retiring in droves, getting out of the practice. The young Docs don't mind it at all.

You guys, the old time Admins, Mechanics and Docs, can all sit on your porches at the retirement community in Florida sipping lemonaid and complaining about the good ol' days - because I don't think this genie is going back in the bottle.



(Late edit: where are the grammar police when you need them? I am so ashamed).

won't tell you that your heater core, which is located in such a place as to require 10 hours of labor to get to it and replace it, is leaking. You won't have any notice of that until the floor mats simply RUN with coolant. PLUS you add about 10 feet of UN-neccesary piping to locate it UNDER THE RADIO, where if it spews, it ruins not only the radio, but some navigation computer, a circuitboard that does absolutely NOTHING but tell you that a fuse you can't reach is blown...

.

What would a normal brained person need Windows 8 for? We've got XP, Windows7 and Linux. Let alone the Mac. So... What's it good for? I've got a car and a driver's license, Who needs to learn to drive a tractor?

You won't have XP for long. The Start-menu-less Mac is for the those who can afford it. And Linux? Linux is a pipe dream. As I've stated before Linux is best in customized environments where it can be molded into dedicated service. Smartphones and tablets and interfacing with proprietary hardware is where Linux excels. On a desktop is not where Linux is at home. It's not a Jack o' all Trades, not even close.

I want my desktop OS to do what I want it to do, to run the applications I want it to run, and allow me to configure it the way I like.

The last few releases of Windows appear to be designed to take that capability away from me. Every time I use Windows 8, I come away from it feeling like I've been stuffed into a box.

"The last few releases of Windows appear to be designed to take that capability away from me. Every time I use Windows 8, I come away from it feeling like I've been stuffed into a box."

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

"Now if you are an expert who really craves all of the traditional flexibility and customizability of all of the knobs and levers in the system, you can still access them just as easily as you could in Windows 7. These settings are still there, and they still work. The Control Panel and gpedit.msc and PowerShell and all of the other places you do expert customization of your PC are still there for you. People who dont have the knowledge to use these advanced settings effectively can just enjoy their devices. And for those who do want that power, it is there for them."

Some features are deliberately not where we've learned to expect them. It's a question of learning how to get out of the box into which we have been stuffed.

You got it, Palmetto. Now, start using Windows 8 RTM for a couple of weeks and forcing yourself to dig into and find the things you're missing, and at some point you should really get it. Nothing is *gone*, really... it is actually just more flexible for a changing PC landscape.

http://www.techrepublic.com/forum/discussions/102-397765-3723311

This has become quite the crowded little discussion, with at least three branches of it still active.

So run Linux but keep a Windows or Mac machine within reach. At some point you'll need to get stuff done.

Every day. The only reason I use Windows is at work to run OEM utilities for the equipment I support...or when the equipment itself is running Windows.

The only reason I'm even interested in Win 8 is because I know I'll eventually have to support it at work., so I need to get to know it. That doesn't mean I have to like it, nor does it mean I'm "holding everybody else back" by not adopting it for use on my home PC or laptop.

So you run on up the hill to catch one of those cows. I'll be along to catch the rest in a little bit.

Tiles, Icons, Shortcuts. Is there a difference?

I have W8 on one of my laptops and freakin' hated it. Hated it until I discovered the third party start button apps. I'm currently using Pokki (I believe). I think there's no denying W8 is faster all around than W7. Now, with Pokki, I'm thinking of installing W8 on my media editing/gaming machine.

I played with W8 when the last RC was released, there were a bunch of improvements I was impressed with, but the fact you are forced into the new way of working is going to be a pain for users, whom i have just migrated to W7 from XP. I am going to force myself to use it because I am already proficient enough in W7, and given my work environment I will be encountering a whole heap of W8 machines in the next 12 months and better be bloody good with it soon to help people with their (numerous) frustrations, since (almost) all new OEM machines will be preloaded with it.

If you just migrated to Windows 7, I see no reason to turn around and replace it with Windows 8. Windows 7 will continue to be supported until 2020.
I would recommend waiting until Win 8 has matured and a few of your staff get familiar with it by using it at home.
I would also recommend thoroughly testing Windows 8 on all of your corporate applications before switching.
I am not sure what type of business you are in but if you are buying computers for a single enterprise, I would suggest that you leverage Microsoft volume licensing and install Win 7 over your new Win 8 machines or consider stocking up on Win 7 desktops. Also, it is much more efficient to set up corporate computers by using some type of desktop imaging process. Some vendors even offer enterprise-specific imaging as a service.
If you are a consultant or you are buying computers for different companies, you have fewer options to stick with Windows 7 but the option to remain on Windows 7 is still out there. It really depends on where you are buying your computers and at what volume.
I certainly would not panic at his point.

Windows 7 Support for the Department of Defense will be extended, just like XP support was no doubt! That's the words out of my customers mouths. If you listen to their requests, I've reinstalled Windows 7 as the SIPR and NIPR primary system for over 1k computers this quarter alone! Windows 7 is the replacement for XP. There was Millennium, Windows 2000 and Vista between these 2 OS and the DOD will get their way!! Windows 9 will replace Windows 7, only if it looks and feels the same way. The DOD doesnt use 3rd party programs like Pokki to try and get the feel of Windows 7 back, they reimage computers to Windows 7 and drop Windows 8 completely. There is a marked shift from Dell to HP computers since HP offers to drop back to Windows 7 with all their DOD purchases!!!

All this whining about Windows 8 seems quite silly to me. Before posting, I read through 2 pages just to see the types of things people complain about.

"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. "


This is a ridiculous complaint. All you have to do is start typing for the thing you want on the start screen and it instantly appears front and center. It is in fact FASTER than having to click the start button (or hit the Windows Key, whatever your flavor) and then either 1.) hunt and peck for programs or 2.) attempt to type them in. If you've ever supported a slow desktop that runs vista/7, you'll know that waiting for that search option can be terrible.

"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. "

You have got to be kidding me. Did you not go into the settings or options at all? You can customize the color, size, and position of all the live tiles on the Start Screen. RTFM.

Congratulations! You are the first person to use "RTFM" in a discussion about windows 8!

Wish I could tell you what the prize is... but my desktop is kinda hard to navigate since I upgraded to win8... ..saw it just a minute ago... somewhere on the start menu if I recall correctly...

Start > All Programs > Accessories > System Tools > Prize
or maybe it is in Start > All Programs > Administrative Tools > Prize
or maybe it is in Start > All Programs > Prize
or maybe it is in Start > Documents
Oh hell! I'll just type it in the Start > Search box.
Wouldn't it be better if I could just type the name of the file without having to click the start button?
Oh wait a minute...

That's Windows 8.

First off... the difference between the Start Menu on XP and before versus Windows Vista and 7 is significant enough that going back and forth between THOSE two platforms I find myself doing the...

Open Start... go to All Programs... Hover the mouse up and down through the menus scanning for where the app is... several times. Is it an icon that sits right in the top level of Start -> All Programs? Or is it a sub folder off of that? Oh, there it is. I've got it. Except, my mouse moves a little as I go to click the icon for the app and the sub-folder's icon list window disappears, and everything shuts back down to the start menu. Ok... start all over from the beginning. Wash-rinse-repeat.

That is on a Windows XP machine. I go to a Vista or Windows 7 machine, and everything has been moved around... but still has all the same problems I described here with searching through a bunch of tiny icons to find where what I want is located to only have it disappear if the mouse jerks even a little bit.

The Start Menu is dead. Long live the Start Screen.

NT

Miscreant, I mean Microsoft, has always been good at obfuscating menu items. Why is EVERY user assigned a "MY documents folder" when it should have been "USERNAMES documents." And why is there a USERNAME/application data a USERNAME/local settings/application data (all the same for every user?) Or, C: windows and C: USERNAME/windows.
Never made sense, and that's just XP.

you actually make a good argument for using search a-la win8. Touche!

How do you type in the name of a utility whose name you don't quite remember?

If I want to scan the Adobe Master Collection folder to see if there's a utility that does what I need, I now have to do it through windows explorer. That set filled up two and a half panels of icons on the start screen when installed, and only half of one of those were the launchers for the actual programs I use.

I do not understand how anyone could say throwing out a hierarchial tree structure in favor of a pure flat view is reasonable, unless that person does not use very many programs.

I've gone through and removed a lot of chaff, and it still takes me four or five seconds to swipe my way to the end of the start screen. I've only installed Office, Adobe suite, and Houdini.