Microsoft killed the start button because it wasn't used

The Nexus toolbar is a great example (and free). There is also Nexus Extreme (shareware) that includes a terrific Start Menu replacement that works in "8".

 

indeed.

i keep all my shortcuts in a folder which can easily be pinned to the Taskbar and/or launched from any file manager.

 

Yeah, that was me too. I don't use the search function because I know where things are. I do use the run box a lot though with the Classic Start Menu. Really though, the search function isn't what I would call a part of the start menu because it is right there, just like the run box used to be. The part I do not like is the navigation change. To me, it is more clicking or waiting than the old way. That is really the only thing I don't like about it.

I guess I would agree, once you get used to the new, you might not miss the old way - unless the new way is, like in vista and win7, more "work" than the old way. Of course in my case "work" is defined by how many levels of clicking or waiting for flyout menus there are.

If win8 ends up being tweaked by Microsoft to be as "fluid" as what we currently have, then who cares what it looks like or how it behaves. If they don't tweak it to be such, and there is no way to tweak it, that is where, for me personally, it becomes an issue.

Sul.

 

lol... you have a totally different point of view of the start menu. What you think that made it more "productive" before Vista?

 

You are being serious I suppose.

Have you never noticed, that providing you used the start menu, that in windows xp and previous, you clicked the start button, or the winkey whatever, and the menu pops up. Some people use the control panel from there, and printers. But most probably, me included, use the "all programs" option. It opened a flyout menu for all programs. The amount of space utilized was only limited by your resolution. You could see everything right away, and if you wanted to see one of the options cascade, you just put your mouse over it, and it showed.

On vista/7, you still have the "all programs", but it is so very constrained in size as to be worth doggy doo doo compared to xp and prior. The navigation is simply, to me, a huge step backward. You MUST click an option to view the contents now, or you must wait an amount of time significantly longer than previous versions for it to auto-open the sub-menu.

Explorer is, to me, much the same. Takes more time to do things in vista/7 than it did in previous versions. More mouse clicks, more menus. Other things in vista/7 are the same. Right click on "my computer" and get the system properties sheet, now click to go to some other place, extra click, extra click, extra click. Right click on "my network" and it is more of the same, "please follow these handy dandy menu prompts to get where you want to go" instead of "show me the money with one click" that it was in previous versions.

Productivity. It isn't opening word and writing a document. Well, for me I mean. It is opening the registry, browsing for files, modifying properties, etc etc. Things I do to my computer, just as my sig says. Managing the OS, not using the software installed on the OS.

So, my concerns with win8 are much the same as they were with vista and win7. I do like win7 quite a bit - it brought a good number of features I really like over XP, and quite a few I really don't like as well. Will win8 be so "pretty" and "noob friendly" that there is even more decisions like I mentioned? I understand, they need to make it "noob friendly" because so many are just, well, not interested in learning much about it, so it must be that way. But, personally I just don't see why some things had to be changed which would not have matter at all to those who don't know anything about it one way or the other, but does to those who do know.

Ah well, I am a minority in these types of things I am sure. System admins who might muck with security templates or hardware, they might be in the same boat, having to do more "clicking" and menu navigating. Maybe most don't mind. For me, adding up all that extra clicking and navigating could mean many minutes a day. Is that really a big deal? lol, maybe if it bugs you that you did not have to do that before, like it does me...

Sul.

 

Hmm. You may end up liking the new Windows 8's Start Screen (which replaces the Start menu), I think it address some of your concerns. As for Explorer, its new Ribbon may speed up your tasks: http://blogs.msdn.com/b/b8/archive/2011/08/29/improvements-in-windows-explorer.aspx

 

Just installed Windows 8 and right now i'm posting this through the Metro IE 10 Applet.

Browser is really speedy and ultra smooth. The colorful tiles are meh, but I can "somewhat" live with it. Windows 8 itself is pretty fast, feels like all apps are pre loaded and as soon as you click it, there it is!

*What I don't like is that they are now forcing us to have a Hotmail/live account in order to be able to use Windows 8 to it-s full potential. I had to create another e-mail account . . .
*As everyone knows this GUI is for touchscreen devices . . . There's an annoying problem that every pre installed applet it has, information/content is loaded sideways to facilitate navigation by using a touchscreen but in my case I have a frigging mouse and a keyboard and if I try to use the arrow keys it won-t move, I actually have to use the pointer and grab the bottom navigation bar and then i'm able to swipe through content what a PITA . . .
*Since this Windows 8 is "New" theres not much apps pre installed but I wonder how will this thing look once we have dozens of apps installed, it will look like a total mess of tiles . . .

Time will tell if I get used to it or not.

 

Haven't your mouse a scroll wheel?

 

Well said. Anyway I do not think MS cares; nonetheless I'm sticking with Windows 7 in my VM. .

Thanks.

 

Just restarted PC and used W8 again, now it does scrolls with the wheel :O:O LOL-ed

 

you don't really have to; you can enter an email adress and create a *Local Account* instead of a Windows 8 'cloud' account.

i didn't really care for the "full potential" features that were offered so i stuck with the Local Account.

 

Hahahaha i created a dummy account, after the preview ends ill just let it expire.

 

Hotmail is better than Gmail in several aspects, so, if I were you, I would take advantage of the moment to switch email providers as well.

 

i got tired of the penis enlargement adds on Hotmail so i am using Opera Mail to read my Hotmail.lol

 

Hotmail is best used with Windows Live Mail or the Outlook Connector for Hotmail.

 

i don't run Outlook and i don't want to install an app in order to read my mail.
the browser is doing just fine as i don't have too may emails to process.

Windows Live Mail is an app if i recall...
it's all fuzzy

 

I think when Windows 8 is released we should all move to existing copies of Windows XP en masse that'd show em

I use my start menu for EVERYTHING, I keep it perfectly organized and wrote an application to synchronize it across all accounts and notify me of changes (So I don't get far behind maintenance wise).

 

Agree. MS should make want users want, not what they are able to make or they think users should want.

 

Data does not lie, but human interpretation does.
As well as corporate monkeys trying to justify their decisions.
Mrk

 

You should probably relax. These mails are free, no MS fee.
Mrk

 

I was thinking of what to post that best describes how I feel in regards to this 'issue'. If I could vote, this would be the best post in this thread so far. Simple and straight to the point.

 

My main E-Mail in fact is a Hotmail account but i won't use it as a guinea pig to test W8.
Actually i have multiple accounts from different webmail providers and my favorite is Hotmail.
Got used to it's interface and i find it really simple, been using GMail in the last 6+ months and i still find the interface a bit harder than Hotmail.

 

Analysis: Why the Start Menu needed to go.

Interesting read, very decent arguments IMO.

 

actually, the Start Menu has not been eliminated but transformed into Metro Start and the Charm bar.

not a big concern to me as I find the new way of working fine enough.
it's just the Windows 7 Start Menu divided in 2 sections; Metro Start and the Charm thingie.

 

He makes some decent points, and actually backs them up instead of throwing out "people just hate change," but I'm still not sure if I agree. Although, he was wrong about the Windows key, which actually pre-dated Windows 95. It was on the MS Natural Keyboard at first, but it wasn't long before it was adopted on others.

I just can't help but think it's pushing us towards touchscreens and touchpads, and I really don't want one in a home computer. He even says it's more to augment a mouse and keyboard rather than replace them, but even then I just don't see why I would want one. Maybe I just haven't seen an application that benefits from it yet?

But there's something I was wondering about, and it came to mind when he talked about how one of the supposed benefits of Metro is how MS has fewer versions to support. I remembered how they're offering an upgrade to Pro and how odd that seemed to me at first glance. Why Pro instead of Home, and why for so little? Most home users don't need the Pro features.

Is it possible that they could eliminate the separation between Home and Pro in Windows 9? Maybe there will just be one version for everyone? Maybe Pro users would get the upgrade cheaper than Home users of previous editions, and that's the reason for the low cost Pro Win 8 upgrade now. To keep the price reasonable, they could always split out certain components to purchase separately (as they're doing with Media Center in Win 8 ).