Here's mine, with Quick-Launch set up and working, and Start Menu 7 installed.
Suits me just fine.....
Believe me, I am not splitting hairs, or trying to make a big issue of this, but I am trying to find clarification for the use of the quick launch in Windows 7/8. It was originally invented, so that users could place their most used shortcuts somewhere visible, rather than the desktop, where they are hidden by other opened programs. With the introduction of the ability to "Pin" shortcuts to the taskbar, in Vista, there was no longer any useful function. It has finally been dropped in Windows 8. Could those who still try and implement it, and are, therefore, using the desktop in Windows 8, please tell me why they see it as an advantage?
Speaking for myself, I have my seldom-used progs in the Start
menu, frequently-used stuff in the Quick-Launch, and anything
current/pending gets pinned.
I don't have a C:\ drive full of junk and clutter, and don't like a
crowded taskbar, so, for me, it works just fine.
I see from your picture you have at least one duplication? Why not just pin those "quick launch" items directly to the Taskbar - even less clutter?
It is puzzling why a lot of people cling to Quick Launch and not only fail to recognize the greatness of the Windows 7 taskbar merging the original window-switching mission of the taskbar with program launching and the new jump lists, progress indicators, etc, but actually hate it. I would estimate at least half my posts on this board have been attempts to educate a number of people on these things, but they just don't get it. People like their systems with slab buttons that appear at semi-random locations and display useless, ugly truncated text, just like they learned it in Windows 95, things I always hated. They moan about the taskbar taking up more space, but I would wager the vast majority of them can afford to give up some space, if they would just try it. As I've written before several times, I'm sympathetic to being reluctant to do that and was surprised that it was not only OK but worked out great. Meanwhile, they don't care that using Quick Launch means you waste space when you run programs because you've got icons in two places on the taskbar. They also don't care about wasting space in the taskbar when it's not full of window icons for active programs and is almost completely empty. Again, I've written a ton of posts talking about these things. Here's a recent one, and it links to an older one where I go into detail on what I use and why and give a screenshot.
The IE icons?
32-bit and 64-bit versions.
I don't NEED educating, Crawfish, and I get it just fine.
And I will use the taskbar whichever way suits me.
As can you. That's it's strength. We set it up to suit US.
There are MANY different ways to get things done in Windows.
NONE are 'wrong' or 'retarded' they're just different.
It's one of the reasons Windows has been so successful for so long.
I'm no more or less experienced/knowledgeable than anyone else,but I
do know what works for me. Why change that, if it isn't necessary?
**Edit: - I do, however, agree with you re the early renditions of the Start
menu, now they WERE horrid. I never actually bothered with it until Vista.
Kat, everything I have to say to that I wrote several months ago here, in response to your statement, "I thought I'd made this clear.....IMO there is no 'right' way or 'wrong' way, no 'better' or 'worse' way.".
"That's a little confused. It wasn't Vista that introduced pinning, it was Windows 7."
Thanks for the correction, Crawfish. It was a bit of a guess and I honestly could not remember. But thank you for emphasising my point regarding the quick launch bar more lucidly!