Microsoft Won't Bring Back the Start Menu Until 2015 516
DroidJason1 (3589319) writes "Microsoft recently announced plans to reintroduce the Start Menu to Windows in an upcoming version of the operating system. While the plan was to roll out an update to Windows 8.1 and offer the Start menu later this year, it seems like this is no longer the case. Now Microsoft is reportedly looking to release the Start Menu with Windows 9, which is expected in April of 2015. Windows 8 and Windows 8.1 have faced a boat load of criticism and hatred, partly due to the removal of the Start button and Start menu. The restoration of a visible Start button on the taskbar was one of the key features of the Windows 8.1 update, released back in October of 2013."
Many users won't be back (Score:5, Insightful)
to "latest and greatest" version of Windows in 2014 either.
MS may as well start selling retail copies of Win 7 again
Re: (Score:3)
Look at Nokia. Those phones will only be able to access the Microsoft cloud.
That nicely explains Nokia sales figures lately. Something like 30% down this last year.
Re: (Score:3)
I am thinking that has more to do with the massive advertising/FUD campaign they were running. When I was in Spain, for several months the Metro (subways for you Americans) were covered with ads for the Nokia phones and I had friends tell me that they bought the Nokias because the sales reps at the store told them that Android had a virus problem. Now the campaigns have been cut back so the sales dropped right off.
Re: (Score:3)
I was actually being facetious, but this is not far off from the truth. Nokia was already hurting when iOS and Android gained momentum, but it really took a nosedive pretty much the second the decided to support Windows exclusively.
A crying shame, because they sell some very nice hardware.
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
OK. I'll take this on...
You acknowledge that the interface is a serious PITA. So what does Microsoft do to resolve the issues people hav
Re: (Score:3)
It should be pretty obvious to you why windows 8 is way better than windows 7. Seriously it should be blatantly obvious to you. It is out and out going to do a far better job of selling windows 9, I mean, that is the whole point isn't it, selling the same software over and over and over and ad nauseum, again (and the whole idea is really getting pretty bloody nauseous and off smelling).
The "Start Menu" its a bloody upgrade and should you have to pay for upgrades, now all M$ has to do is purposefully break
Why bother? (Score:5, Informative)
Re: (Score:3)
A Start button is a bad idea unless paired with a Stop button.
Any idea what's the motivation to remove START? (Score:2, Interesting)
Re:Any idea what's the motivation to remove START? (Score:5, Insightful)
Wow, force adoption of an un-popular version of your software by crippling the other versions.
Brilliant strategy! What could possibly go wrong? Just piss off everybody, and then they won't be pissed off about Windows 8.
You, sir, have a brilliant future in PR ahead of you.
What next, brick all of the XBox 360s so people have to buy an XBone?
Re:Any idea what's the motivation to remove START? (Score:5, Insightful)
Re: (Score:2, Insightful)
For reasons known only to them, they wanted phones, tablets, notebooks and desktops to all use the same interface. Since a start menu doesn't work well on a phone, they opted to remove it.
Hmm... Sounds like Firefox 29...
Re:Any idea what's the motivation to remove START? (Score:5, Insightful)
It was to push Modern UI (nee Metro) onto every platform to try to bootstrap app development for their floundering mobile offerings and to try to capture the application revenue that Apple and Google were achieving through their walled garden app stores.
Re: (Score:3)
It's not for some reason, it's for a bad reason. They followed customer feedback without understanding what users really needed. Customers made them believe they wanted a seamless device to device experience which resulted in Metro GOOWY!! The intent wasn't bad but the implementation was horrendous. They should have had their own IT staff and programmers work with it. It would have been obvious that it's not friendly to the technical user or even a regular user with a mouse and keyboard.
Re: (Score:3)
you should have downgrade rights.
Re:Any idea what's the motivation to remove START? (Score:5, Interesting)
Re: (Score:3)
Same here. Tried using Win8 as-is for about two weeks, still hated the Metro UI, installed Classic Shell and fluttered on.
Re: (Score:3)
The wireless network selector with a large font that takes over half your screen and the removal of the wireless network manager GUI (seriously, you have to open a command prompt and use "netsh wlan ..." to see what networks are saved or change their settings if you're not connected to them at the time) are definite steps backward.
Re: (Score:3)
It's not. It's just the new "8 is great, you just don't understand it and you need to get win 8 and use it for a while to understand"-style advertisement that MS shills copy/paste nowadays after their previous one didn't bring any significant results.
Re: (Score:3)
Start up/shut down times are nominally much improved due to hardware states not having to be reinitialized from scratch every single boot. This also assists with a higher function, low power sleep mode.
http://www.pcmag.com/article2/... [pcmag.com]
http://blogs.msdn.com/b/b8/arc... [msdn.com]
Cleaned up timing core meaning that where Windows 7 is hard-locked to a timer cycle, Windows 8 is not and can scale down processor usage accordingly. It is also more efficient in memory usage, reducing the footprint in memory considerably. http [engadget.com]
Re: (Score:3)
I haven't seen a big advantage in startup times, but then I like to power stuff off when I'm not using it.
Win7 seems to do a fine job with idling processors or running one at low speed, though I haven't tried it on mobile. Surface still needs work for battery life, but I could believe it's better than WIn7.
I use VMware Workstation - Hyper-V just doesn't do what I need with snapshotting and cloning. Though I do like the "compatibility through virtualization" approach in general.
I keep hearing about all the
Re: (Score:3)
A command line is powerful for doing some things. A good GUI is powerful for others. Metro is neither, and it introduces an awful horizontal scrolling paradigm that's fine for touch tablets but awful for KB/M computing.
Re: (Score:3)
Now we'll install Windows 8 on the chair. We can still tell it's a chair. It's not the chair we know but it's still a chair.
It just --- unghh... takes some getting-- *WHIMPER* used to. You just need to-- huh... break it in a little bit, ungh. Eventually it will become comfortable and familiar--- gah!
Ahhh. The blood is body temperature, so it's almost like a heated seat. Mmmm... comfy.
CAD - The Upgrade [cad-comic.com]
Re: (Score:3)
Agreed. I've got Windows 8 and it's pretty decent. The two major flaws are the Metro screen (stupidity as an art) and the removal of start menu. Sure there are a lot of people who hated that start menu but it's very useful for many people (I haven't read all the way down yet, but I suspect there are many below who will say that only idiots need the start menu).
On the plus side, Windows 8 got rid of aero and has a much more subdued UI that does not detract from the applications, it uses less memory and fe
Every Other OS (Score:5, Interesting)
After a while, you really have to wonder why they keep doing this.
Re: (Score:2)
Publicists usually say that any kind of buzz is good for business.
And they know people are going to buy it. When J. Random User with $400 walks into a store and wants to buy a laptop, does (s)he have any other choice?
Re: (Score:2)
Well, how much is a Chromebook?
Re: (Score:3)
How much to run most software on it?
$0, because you can't.
Re: (Score:3)
Worse than Android apps, it only runs Chrome apps. Possibly NaCl is supported, I've no idea, but the bulk of the apps are HTML/CSS/JS zipped up with some metadata. I've been tossing around the idea of getting a Chromebook, but only if Linux could be installed on it easily, which it seems like some Chromebooks cannot do. Mostly they seem to support a weird dual-install that boggles my mind and seems really sub-optimal. Perhaps someone with more experience can elaborate.
Personally, I doubt I could do very
Re: (Score:2, Interesting)
Publicists usually say that any kind of buzz is good for business.
And they know people are going to buy it. When J. Random User with $400 walks into a store and wants to buy a laptop, does (s)he have any other choice?
Sure. Buy a mac. And I'm saying that as someone who thinks macs are overpriced trendy hipster-ware. Besides all the shiny marketing, they are admittedly designed with usability in mind, which Microsoft seems to have forgotten how to do.
I'm still using Windows 7, but if M$ hasn't gotten their act together by the time it reaches EOL, I'm actively considering jumping ship. Apple runs the apps I need. (If Linux did, I'd use that instead, but they don't yet.)
Re: (Score:2)
Are there any $400 Mac laptops? Because, that was the specific example you replied to.
If there aren't, then the choices of someone with $400 to spend on a machine are much more limited.
yes, for Linux geeks OSX is nice (Score:2, Offtopic)
>, Apple runs the apps I need. (If Linux did, I'd use that instead, but they don't yet.)
I used Linux exclusively for many years. I was pleasantly surprised how natural OSX felt when I started using it. I knew that OSX is certified Unix, but I expected it to feel at least as different as FreeBSD. I certainly recommend OSX (not iOS) for people who like Linux.
Re:Every Other OS (Score:5, Insightful)
Besides all the shiny marketing, they are admittedly designed with usability in mind,
I used to believe this load of bullshit about Mac usability, until I got one. I've been using a Macbook Pro for 6 months now as my primary machine, and I still hate it. Usability my ass... just TRY connecting the damn thing to a projector or second display in a conference room and making it behave in a rational manner. Or try taking a screenshot... what was that obnoxious key combo again? That's right... it makes no sense and can't be remembered by a mere mortal. Let's jump to the beginning of a line with the Home key, or the end of the line with the End key... oh wait, it doesn't have one. They conveniently replaced those with more key combinations that can't be remembered by us mortals. Apparently text entry isn't an important usability case for Apple.
Any time I want to get real work done, I plug in a Windows keyboard and switch over to a Windows VM. Why? Not because I love Microsoft software and Windows so much, it's because it "just fucking works" unlike everything on the Mac.
Re:Every Other OS (Score:5, Insightful)
apple needs more hardware choice (Score:3)
They should have a bigger mini with desktop cpu and maybe some kind of add in video card choice.
The MAC PRO is nice but it is overkill for lot's of uses and the base system only comes with 256 GB storage.
Why not have an mini mac pro at say $1,200-$1,500? with an I5 - I7 desktop cpu and 1 good mid range to high end video card?
The imacs are ok but the AIO / thin part holds them back a bit and there video chips are a little under powered (even more with the screen size on them) the top of the line Imac does ha
Re:Every Other OS (Score:5, Informative)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3)
So, the list is neither good nor bad, but fundamentally useless?
Re: (Score:2)
Re:Every Other OS (Score:4, Funny)
After a while, you really have to wonder why they keep doing this.
Yeah, they should only release odd-numbered OS's!
Yeah, I brought it back in 2014 (Score:2, Informative)
I installed Windows 7.
Why believe them now? (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3)
Microsoft has lied about this in the past, why should anyone believe them now?
That's actually a good point. The start menu is easy to add -- third party developers have proven this. It's possible their strategy is to keep people using Windows 8 sans start menu, in the vain hope that M$ will fix it some day, and eventually just say to hell with it and use Win8 as it is now. And maybe that strategy will work.
Re: (Score:2)
Also, everybody I know who wanted Start Menu in Windows 8 just use ClassicShell.
They believe it too (Score:2)
flame away, but... (Score:5, Informative)
Windows 8 is not really that bad. I know how to find all the stuffs now. I know how to shut it down. I know how to avoid having intrusive metro apps popping up. I no longer care if the start menu comes back or not. It's all still there. It actually seems to perform quite well. start up and shutdown times are decent. sleep when i close the lid seems to work. I'm through bitching and i just want to get on with my work. At this point, i'd rather it just stay the way it is.
Re: (Score:2, Informative)
With an SSD in a new laptop it boots in about 3-4 seconds.
Re:flame away, but... (Score:4, Interesting)
No flames here. For any new OS Microsoft craps out, there will be people forced for various reasons to try to live with it. That you managed to do so is more a credit to you than to Microsoft.
That said, the solution for me was a system restore to Windows 7, and Windows 8 goes back on the shelf until... 2015 I guess. But I can see where there are some cases where that isn't possible.
(And yes, I know there's third party solutions to many of Windows 8's issues... but like you, I have to get work done.)
Re: (Score:2)
It isn't that Windows 8 in general is terrible, it's that the UI is horrendous. Things that I used to be able to do by clicking a button now require me to stop my workflow and load a full page "Metro". Yes there are workarounds and once you do so, Windows 8 is very good.
Lack of Discoverability (Score:5, Insightful)
I partly agree. Windows 8.1 isn't as tragic as it seems at first. But they've forgotten one of the primary goals of a UI: discoverability.
I'm a Linux geek, so I'm used to typing arcane commands into shell prompts. I can find whatever I need in a Google search if I don't know it already. Command line interfaces require you to specify what you are looking for. It's expected that you should know in advance what you want and how to ask for it. This is somewhat less true for the double-tab interface in bash, but still, the basic idea is to specify.
What made Windows and MacOS such a big deal back in the day is that they were "discoverable" - you could figure out what options you had available by reading the menus and picking one, with the basic expectation that, if there was an option or command to run, there'd be a menu entry in a hopefully sensible place to allow it. Thus, anybody could "use" a computer by finding the obvious start button.
Windows 8.x tosses discoverability to the wind. You just have to know in advance which combination of swipes and from which side in order to get what you want. Because of this, it's not discoverable. What makes Windows 8 so damning and frustrating for the new user is that stuff happens and there's no obvious reason why.
With this recent statement, Microsoft has made clear that they're going to try to double down on the Metro Interface, and hope that by promising it at some distant, future date, the haters will shut up long enough for people to get used to the not-discoverable Windows 8 interface.
I have mixed feelings about this.
As an OS, sure, as a UI, no (Score:5, Insightful)
Microsoft has been on a long-term trend in the name of ease of use of burying everything behind complicated and convoluted UIs since at least Vista, although the default XP UI was also in on it a little.
Little things, like changing your computer's IP address seem to require more and more clicks, dialog boxes and window changes to accomplish the same tasks as before. More and more settings seem to default to "idiot light' mode where basic information is deliberately turned off or hidden.
This might be tolerable for a "home" edition of something designed to get grandma on the internet with a minimum of long distance phone calls to her grandkids, but it's absolutely maddening for "professional" editions and simply uncalled for in "server" editions.
I just cannot fathom what group or individual decided that Server 2012 needed the same UI as the most basic desktop OS. I don't mind the concept of Metro and the execution seems OK on a Surface Pro provided you stay in Metro mode, but there should be a switch or something that just completely disabled Metro mode for server OSes (and should be the default) and it should be switchable for desktop OSes.
Further, the desktop UI needs an "expert" mode where some of the "wizards" are disabled (can't I just have my network connections without the network and sharing center) and more details and technical information are presented to the end users without being filtered/turned off.
Re:As an OS, sure, as a UI, no (Score:4, Interesting)
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
Windows 8 is shit, from top to bottom.
Then how come the only criticism ever levied against it is the UI? Performance? Better than 7. Stability? Better than 7. Security? Better than 7. System requirements? Better than 7. The only thing you can legitimately criticize are subjective components like the interface, which some people like myself actually *prefer* to the start menu.
Re: (Score:2)
...if you try using Win 8 without a touch screen for long enough you'll smash the screen anyway.
I'm not sure about that. I have a Windows 8.1 laptop with a touch screen. I never use the touch screen.
Once I got a Start Menu replacement (Classic Shell) and disabled all but the most hidden ways to launch some Windows 8 full screen apps, I can use it quite productively as a real computer. Otherwise, it's a shiny tablet for watching videos and fumbling at fake screen keyboards with.
Besides, my Galaxy Note 10.1 2014 is a much better tablet.
Re: (Score:2)
Windows 8 is shit, from top to bottom. There is no redeeming this pile of shit. Microsoft knows it. the rest of its userbase is just deluded in thinking it's good.
Heh, I am seeing the same thing with open source. It's sometimes rather crusty, but the userbase is deluded into thinking that it's good.
I do agree though that Windows 8 is a garbage OS.
Reflexes are Good! Re:flame away, but... (Score:5, Insightful)
But we have invested years learning those habits. Productivity kicks in when the tool becomes a reflex. Reflexes are not a bad thing: they speed us up because we don't have stop and think.
I have nothing against the octopus body design, but there is a big learning curve for a brain used to a human body to suddenly be shoved into an octopus body.
Unless the "new thing" offers about a 20% productivity improvement, it's generally best to stick with the existing interface because the learning curve will eat up that 20% for a few years. In biz investment terms, the ROI is too far out. Why can't MS just give us both interface choices as a user setting?
Change for changes' sake is a productivity drain. (There is a reason I kick kids off my lawn :-)
FTFY.... (Score:4, Insightful)
"Microsoft will not have a new desktop-appropriate operating system until 2015." Fixed that for you.
I'm not sure why they're doing this -- third party developers have proven it's easy to do.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Maybe they realized that they were already making too much UI changes in Windows 8 and wanted to cool things down to not confuse people anymore.
That's possible, but I'd argue that they stopped at the wrong place.
Re: (Score:2)
8.1 !=Start Menu.. Why Win8 was doomed... (Score:2, Flamebait)
The Start Menu in 8.1 is crap. Most of the features that were in Win7's start menu don't exist in 8.1. Typical Microsoft, screwed up their "second" OS release:
Windows 3.1x (1992) - Good
Windows 95 (1995) - Mixed bag, at the beginning it sucked
Windows 98 (1998) - Good
Windows ME (2000) - Sucked (hard)
Windows XP (2001) - Good
Windows Vista (2006) - Sucked although not as hard as ME
Windows 7 (2009) - Good
Windows 8.x 2013 - FAIL
Windows 9 - ???
Re: (Score:2, Insightful)
Windows XP (2001) - Good
And this is where all these "every other release" lists derail. Windows XP in 2001 was terrible. It wasn't until SP2 and arguable SP3 until it was usable. Prior to that it was a security nightmare. I mean, Slashdot at the time was ground zero for railing against XP and its "Fisherprice" interface. How do you people not remember this?
Re: (Score:2)
Fair enough.... although from an NSA perspective, every single OS is hugely insecure.
Re: (Score:3)
Before people say I forgot the server stuff... They did a little better here:
Windows NT 3.5 - Crap
Windows NT 3.51 - Useable
Windows NT 4 -- Good
Windows 2000 --- crap
Windows 2003 --- Good
Windows 2008 -- Good (after R2)
Windows 2012 -- judgement still out
Re:8.1 !=Start Menu.. Why Win8 was doomed... (Score:4, Informative)
Re: (Score:2)
I used to run WinNT 4.0and Win 2000 (Abit BP6 dual Celeron 266 MHz o/c 550 MHz) as my primary desktop.
Both were good. Us game developers would typically use Win2000 to develop Win95/Win98 games until we switched over to Windows XP. (Some would argue that WinXP sucked until SP3.)
Re: (Score:2)
Windows NT and 2000 were NOT "server". 9x and Me literally did not even exist as far as I was concerned. I was happily using NT and 2000. Yeah, on the desktop.
Re: (Score:2)
Windows 2012 - I''ll have to say crap, due to the new UI, and mainly because there are a lot of bad Windows admins.
Anecdote: Something about AD or DNS was corrupted on the only 2012 DC in the domain because it was not being shut down properly. It turns out, one of the Windows admins couldn't figure out where the shut down/reboot buttons were, so he was simply right clicking it in VMware and hitting reboot. To his credit, VMware tools was installed so it did a smoother-looking shutdown than just yanking th
Re: (Score:2)
I was fortunate enough to have administered a network that had a few Windows 2000 Pro machines on it, and man oh man what a great OS. Very snappy even on some of the lower end hardware. I used it at home for years, until XP SP2, at which point I felt XP had patched enough bugs to take over. But still, Windows 2000 was one of the better versions that MS put out.
Re: (Score:2)
3.1 wasn't good, people just didn't know what a GUI OS could really do.
Windows 95, stunk too.
Windows 98, Combined the stinkiness of 95, with a web browsers embedded just to kill netscape, however
Windows ME, Failed in some hardware support, made people deal with windows 98 for compatibility.
Windows XP, Got better as it used the NT Kernel. However it did break a lot of compatibility of the old DOS programs, and no one really liked the Phiser Price colors.
Vista, Driver Compatibility problems yet again. Took w
Re: (Score:2)
Not sure why you are merging Windows NT in that list.
You missed Win95B, and Win98SE, amongst others. A *complete* 16-bit list is:
* Windows 1.0
* Windows 2.0
* Windows 2.1
* Windows 3.0
* Windows 3.1
* Windows 3.11
* Windows for Workgroups 3.1
* Windows for Workgroups 3.11
* Windows 95
* Windows 95B
* Windows 98
* Windows 98SE
* Windows Me
But yeah, every second major release was usually good (or bad.)
Re: (Score:2)
One of the chief reasons that Windows 2000 never took off as a consumer OS was because of the lack of drivers. It was a pretty decent OS, but if you were using it as a home OS you really had to pay attention to the HCLs. Once XP took off in a big way, I could use XP drivers in a lot of cases, but after XP SP2 I saw on reason on a home or office computer to run Windows 2000. I was still running it as a server OS up until around 2009 or so.
Stop with the fucking Start Button bullshit. (Score:3)
Windows 8 and Windows 8.1 have faced a boat load of criticism and hatred, partly due to the removal of the Start button and Start menu.
Start Menu. A button is just a fucking button and only necessary to show you where to click. That's how the majority of 8's blatant mistakes with all the hold mouse here, charms bar, and other nonsense.
Who needs it anyways (Score:4, Informative)
Who needs the most used button anyways?
I don't understand (Score:5, Interesting)
Re:I don't understand (Score:5, Informative)
It's never as simple as you think: http://www.joelonsoftware.com/... [joelonsoftware.com]
Re: (Score:2)
Do you get that they are stupid bastards yet?
Re: (Score:2)
Meh.
Its been 15 years now I'm STILL waiting for them to implement the "any" key.
I am using Windows 8 (Score:5, Informative)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Yes. Classic shell is better than the start menu that came with any version of windows.
If Microsoft reintroduce the start menu it's likely to mess with classic shell and make things worse.
Smart business move. (Score:2)
What a great way to make sure Windows 9 sells like hotcakes!
1. Remove a well-loved feature from a system with sufficient vendor-lock in.
2. Only provide the feature in a paid upgrade
3. Profit!
Is this a patentable business model?
Re: (Score:2)
Is this a patentable business model?
Prior art: New Coke.
Microsoft: No Start Menu Until 2015 (Score:2)
Me: No more Windows on my PC until.... forever.
Linux... I heart you.
"restoration of a visible start button" (Score:5, Insightful)
> "The restoration of a visible Start button on the taskbar was one of the key features of the Windows 8.1 update, released back in October of 2013."
Apparently this needs to be pointed out yet again: A button that takes you to the start screen is not a start button. What users requested was the start menu back. What was delivered was at best a condescending "we know what you really want better than you", and more like a calculated insult.
Touchscreen or don't (Score:3)
Windows 8.x is pretty good only as long as you have a touchscreen.
What is really atrociously stupid is Microsoft's idea of putting the Metro interface onto Windows 2012 Server. It is just breathtakingly stupid to put an animated, graphical user interface onto a system that is almost always accessed via Remote Desktop Connection.
It's about the apps stupid (Score:4, Insightful)
Too Late Microsoft (Score:4, Insightful)
Windows has jumped the shark. It's all downhill from here.
Many folks have finally tired of Microsoft just churning the interface just to make a new product. All that did was alienate the users that had grown accustomed to menu interfaces in Office and the Start menu. Paying to buy a whole new version of the OS and then dealing with the headaches of just trying to figure out how to just get back to the capability the user had before the change got really old.
The problems with Windows 8 are not necessarily with the features. Windows 8 may be the best OS under the sun, but most users won't ever know that because it is buried under one of the most craptastic PC user interfaces contrived. Folks probably would be happy to have the core features of Windows 8 if the menus and buttons looked familiar to the last version. They do not.
I finally went to Linux simply because they kept a lot of the UI features like menus and start buttons that Windows abandoned. Linux really is now at a point where it is an easier OS to transition to from Windows XP and 7 vs transitioning to Windows 8. That is not because Linux interfaces improved dramatically (though they are better than they were) but because Windows 8 broke a lot of UI features that the users really liked and wanted.
Happy trails Microsoft, best wishes from a formerly happy customer from the Windows 3.1 days. Friendly advice - stop pissing off your loyal customers and give them what they want to see.
Re: (Score:3)
Linux really is now at a point where it is an easier OS to transition to from Windows XP and 7 vs transitioning to Windows 8. That is not because Linux interfaces improved dramatically (though they are better than they were) but because Windows 8 broke a lot of UI features that the users really liked and wanted.
Happy trails Microsoft...
This. Although I mildly disagree about the Linux interfaces. Ubuntu is kind of weird, but Mint is nice, and I've been fooling with lubuntu, also nice for a minimalist package.
But the point to me - like you - is that even the gnarliest linux interface is now immensly better than Metro, or whatever they call it these days. And a whole lot more intuitive for an XP user.
But the problem of course is that many of the XP faithful are not all that likely to change over now
Re: (Score:3)
While I'm more than happy to criticizeWin8's looks, that's not the crux of the problem. It's the behavior. Randomly switching between Classic and Metro, hidden functions that have to be swiped or god-knows-what if you don't have a touch screen, two control panels, one in Metro, one in Classic, and neither can do everything so you get to hunt within both, and
Re: (Score:3)
If users are confused and frustrated by trying to do simple things with the OS, the "advanced features" are pretty much invisible, no matter how great and innovative they may be.
When your business leaves your customers wondering "What the fuck am I paying for again?", you have a problem.
The Good news! (Score:3)
Re: (Score:2)
Macs, consoles, Chromebooks, and tablets (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Microsoft needs to listen to their customers and bring back the start menu that was removed in Windows 8's beta period.
What bothers me is that they extensively gathered user feedback during the two free-to-test Windows 8 preview versions and they still stubbornly went with the clunky Start Screen. I guess the pressure to reinvent things to have something new to sell was so high.
Re: (Score:2)
First you have to dry and age it for a long time.
Re: (Score:2)
Re:Windows is now like Star Trek (Score:4, Funny)
Also, only the even Star Trek is good. Fuck it, this analogy is collapsing faster than a... something something.
Re: (Score:3)
Wish I had mod points, I think this is the key:
I recently switched to Win 8, and the problem is not so much that it is worse that win7 but that it is different . I know how to do everything I want in win7, now I need to learn new ways to do the same things. Since I still need win 7 at work, I need to remember the old ones as well. This takes time and slows down my work. In return for that time I get.....well pretty much nothing. I haven't found any way in which the win8 interface is better than win7, its ju
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
The ribbon gui in msoffice drove many people to switch to LibreOffice.
Given the proportion in market share between Open/LibreOffice and MS Office, by "many" you mean something like 0.1%?
LibreOffice didn't exist before the stupid ribbon gui was launched. Today million users use LibreOffice instead of propriety msoffice, more like 10-20% market share. And most of the people still forced to use msoffice hate the ribbon gui. Still HATE it.
The missing start menu drove many people to switch to Linux.
See above.
(in practice, most people who don't like the new Win8 UI just stay on Win7)
Windows8 is preinstalled to a larger degree than msoffice is. Ordinary people cannot be bothered to reinstall windows7.
The destruction of win32 (a good API in it's time) drove many developers to switch to Linux/posix.
What destruction? You can still take a program written against Win32 API as it was in NT 3.1, recompile it, and it'll run on Win8. Heck, you don't even have to recompile if the architecture matches.
win64 was a lost opportunity to fix win32 and make it good, instead we got "win32 for 64-bit windows", which is stupid and wrong. MS got col