Solved Here's what I think would fix Windows 8:

[Coke Robot]

Mobile phones and phablets?

 

[Coke Robot]

I guess I just don't get it.

For many (most?) people it is still easier and more convenient to do a lot (granted, not all) of their work, et cetera on desktop PCs, not handheld devices like tablets and phones, and Microsoft pretty much owns this market and almost seems to be trying to drive people away from this format (such as taking out even the option for a traditional Start menu on the stock released Windows 8 OS).

As I mentioned earlier, I have a Nexus 7. I use it for what tablets are good at, not as my PC, and I use my PC for what PCs are good at. There is some overlap, of course, but they are still largely used for different things, and they have different user interfaces and I/O methods to better suit those different things. The "Metro" style GUI just isn't very well suited to desktop PCs as is (in my opinion, of course), but I think it could have been incorporated better into a more traditional and desktop-friendly GUI (hence the main reason I started this thread).

...

Tepid, I have considered going the way of Linux myself (nothing against Microsoft and more traditional Windows versions such as 2000, XP, and 7, which I consider to be topnotch OSs), but I'm leery of hardware and software support and compatibility issues.

...

And guys, could we please try and keep the personal banter to a minimum in this thread? It isn't constructive to the conversation. Thanks.

There isn't really a takeaway of the start menu in Windows 8, it basically functions almost EXACTLY like the start menu. From the default settings of Windows 8, it's more into using the apps and "seems" not Desktop based. Take five minutes, and make the Start Screen reflect the Desktop and it's a Desktop based OS. I personally don't find that Windows 8 isn't Desktop based and I use it every day for everything. It's easier for me to use the Start Screen to work with the Desktop, the format is better than a menu.

Of course, to properly use the metro app aspect of Windows 8, you just simply need something touch based, a touchpad, a touch enabled mouse, or a touch screen.

And also, Windows 8 isn't a purely tablet PC based operating system or a purely desktop PC based operating system. This is basically on the user on how THEY want to use it.

I don't understand why the phrase, "desktop-friendly" means. Is this the Desktop UI or is it a desktop mouse friendly? The Desktop can be on a tablet and laptop PC, it's rather friendly. I don't get it.

 

[Ray8]

From now on, I'm going to call then apps/start menu the Mobile Phone Interface (MPI), because that's what it is. It's not a desktop interface, but an add-on to the desktop that makes your program menu look like you're using a really, really, big mobile phone.

The MPI is not traditional, desktop, user friendly. It's not fast. It's not convenient. It's not logical. All of the aforementioned applies, unless you are using a mobile phone, or you simply want to love what Microsoft has concocted.

Most desktop users don't have touch-based anything, they rely on mouse and keyboard. What works for some, clearly does not work for a lot of others. It's not that it's difficult (really and truly it's not difficult to understand and use, I mean it), but it's pointless.

The Windows 7 method of taskbar and start menu just works better for so many people. Call them stupid, ignorant, Luddites, whatever, but it's what they like and it's what they want. What is one person's cheese is another's rotten milk.

 

[Coke Robot]

From now on, I'm going to call then apps/start menu the Mobile Phone Interface (MPI), because that's what it is. It's not a desktop interface, but an add-on to the desktop that makes your program menu look like you're using a really, really, big mobile phone.

The MPI is not traditional, desktop, user friendly. It's not fast. It's not convenient. It's not logical. All of the aforementioned applies, unless you are using a mobile phone, or you simply want to love what Microsoft has concocted.

Most desktop users don't have touch-based anything, they rely on mouse and keyboard. What works for some, clearly does not work for a lot of others. It's not that it's difficult (really and truly it's not difficult to understand and use, I mean it), but it's pointless.

The Windows 7 method of taskbar and start menu just works better for so many people. Call them stupid, ignorant, Luddites, whatever, but it's what they like and it's what they want. What is one person's cheese is another's rotten milk.

The thing is literally point and click for pretty much everything.

This is a rather absurd assessment, if you ask me.

 

[Wrend]

Thanks for the feedback, Coke Robot.

I'll try and explain more clearly what I mean, and this also of course may just be a difference between our preferences.

To start with, I personally love popup menu lists which can expand certain folders or whatnot when they're highlighted. As I had previously mentioned, I also have popup menus for my user folder, computer, games, and links (basically replacing bookmarks/favorites, so I don't even need to open my browser before pointing it to where I want to go, or listen to internet radio stations in WMP, and the like) on the Taskbar, and of course use the Start menu primarily to run specific general programs which I've placed there, to change general computer settings, search the computer, or shut it down/restart/sleep, and the like. I find this to be very convenient for me to get to what I want, whether it be to run programs, open files, folders, and whatnot while still having on the screen what I'm actively using in different windows which can also be very easily switched between on the Taskbar, using alt+tab, clicking on, or even minimizing and maximizing. I find the new Metro style Start to be very cumbersome to use in this regard, and less convenient to use as a list of what I want to run or do with also having to switch between these different styles of interfaces.

I hardly ever use the desktop background icons, and don't even display them, because I don't prefer to find what I'm looking for that way, being less linear and hidden behind everything else, and the number of icons that I would use there if it were the main way for me to access those programs and files would make it inconvenient for me to easily find them, though I can understand the appeal of using the desktop as a kind of temp folder for what I may want to access and move around before deciding what I want to do with it. The newer desktop button does help in that respect somewhat though. So, in a way, the new Metro style interface is kind of like another desktop with a collection of active icons, and it makes more sense to me that this would incorporate the desktop icons and instead use the desktop as the new Metro style interfaces, so that it would run more seamlessly and be more incorporated with everything else in a more traditional and user-friendly way.

I understand that the Metro style interface is designed to replace the Start menu, but I think it would work much better if it instead replaced the desktop itself, while maintaining similar functionality to what it has now, still allowing users to tag whatever they wanted to it, whether traditional icons or app rectangles that you could scroll through, only still allowing for the same functionality without having to switch between screens to access the Taskbar and easily switch between and load windows in the foreground.

 

[Ray8]

This is a rather absurd assessment, if you ask me.

The fact that this discussion ensues, means that it is not pointless.

 

[pcRat]

I was only using 98 SE about 6 months and was a member of a couple MSN computer groups when XP was released.
Despite ME & 2000, everyone was stuck on 98 being the perfect program and not understanding MS change in direction.
MS needs to listen to the customers because they know what they want & it's not change.
The loyal MS fans threatened mutiny & switching to Apple, Linux, Ubuntu, Lindows etc.
Then Vista....
Then 7. Accepted easier than XP or Vista.
Then 8, another Vista with more condemnation.

Besides Desktop toolbar & File Explorer on taskbar, I have Brink's Start Screen shortcut & All apps shortcut pinned to taskbar.
As well as Pin to Start on Context menu for documents. From the Start Screen I can right click the document shortcuts and pin to taskbar. Much more efficient than a Program with jump list for 1 document.

Once I get to my desktop in 8 it's not absolutely necessary to leave. I choose to use the start screen shortcut because of my personal organization on standard start screen & big icons. Or alphabetical organization with smaller icons using the All apps shortcut.

I went back & used 7 for about 15 minutes. Seemed like my computer had the flu. Running slow & groggy, disoriented , slight fever, constipated ...

 

[Ruudfood]

The sooner everyone gets used to the idea that Microsoft absolutely HAD to develop an OS suitable for touch and gesture, and therefore had to make compromises for the 99.9% of users still using traditional mouse and keyboard input devices, the sooner these inane complaints will stop!

If you want the familiar desktop interface use Start 8 (or one of the numerous Start button replacements out there) or go back to Windows 7.

The way Windows 8 could've been improved is by developing ALL of the core apps and Tiles to be consistent with Metro. But this is v1.0 of their new interface so it was always likely to be incomplete.

 

[steveb]

The sooner everyone gets used to the idea that Microsoft absolutely HAD to develop an OS suitable for touch and gesture, and therefore had to make compromises for the 99.9% of users still using traditional mouse and keyboard input devices, the sooner these inane complaints will stop!

If you want the familiar desktop interface use Start 8 (or one of the numerous Start button replacements out there) or go back to Windows 7.

The way Windows 8 could've been improved is by developing ALL of the core apps and Tiles to be consistent with Metro. But this is v1.0 of their new interface so it was always likely to be incomplete.

No they didn't they invented a problem to justify the solution. The tablet market is consumers, people who want a bit of email, a bit of browsing, a bit of social media, a bit of watching video. Microsoft has consistently failed trying to make a tablet do everything a PC does, nobody wanted it and it never took off, they tried several times and failed. Apple re imagined what the tablet should do and it sold millions. That's what the iPad did brilliantly, it redefined the tablet, Now the cheap copies are selling big. Consumers who never needed the power of a PC have stopped buying them in favour of simple tablets that do what they need.
Microsoft has decided all the people who just want a simple tablet are wrong and what they really want and need is the full power PC again but in a 10 inch tablet. They are wrong again and will fail in this market again and whilst doing so they have pissed off the people who really make them their money, business and professionals who do need a proper PC and a proper desktop OS without a mobile phone interface.

 

[Mark Phelps]

Microsoft has consistently failed trying to make a tablet do everything a PC does, nobody wanted it and it never took off, they tried several times and failed.

NOT ... in my personal experience. I bought one of the ORIGINAL Fujitsu Tablet PCs, running XP, and used it at work with greate success. It had a twistable screen that allowed for the use of a stylus -- which worked great with Windows Journal. I was able to use it to completely replace the printed Day-Timer that I had used before.

With added memory, and other hardware upgrades, it provide a 10-hour (that's right - 10 HOURS) battery life, which lasted me all day such that, unlike everyone else that was carrying around chargers, I was able to take it around all day and never had to plug it in.

I was able to upgrade it to Vista, and then to Window 7 -- and all along, ALL of the hardware worked without any problems at all.

I only retired it last year (after SIX years of use) when the project I was moved to prohibited folks from bringing in their personal laptops. I even tried Win8 on it, and that worked well, as well.

But ... it was clearly aimed at the Enterprise market, where folks wanted an alternative to a laptop -- which worked well for me because I was able to write on the surface and have my notes transformed to text -- and since I could train it to recognize my handwriting, it got better than 90% conversion rate.

Everyone who saw it was amazed and wanted to find out where to get one -- and, of course, once they found out what it cost, no one else bought one.

Apple re imagined what the tablet should do and it sold millions. That's what the iPad did brilliantly, it redefined the tablet,

Agree, but unlike the original Tablet PCs, Apple redefined the Tablet as a consumer Entertainment device, basically, a TOY for the well-off.

Now the cheap copies are selling big. Consumers who never needed the power of a PC have stopped buying them in favour of simple tablets that do what they need.

If you mean the Android tablets, you're right -- but, once again, they're primarily Entertainment devices. Quite a few folks I know bought these and were SURPRISED to learn that they could NOT install MS Office on them! (Don't get me started with the recent Wine for Android -- that's an entirely different subject).

Microsoft has decided all the people who just want a simple tablet are wrong and what they really want and need is the full power PC again but in a 10 inch tablet. They are wrong again and will fail in this market again and whilst doing so they have pissed off the people who really make them their money, business and professionals who do need a proper PC and a proper desktop OS without a mobile phone interface.

Sorry to say, but you're probably right in this, too -- although -- the recent Acer announcements of tablets (the new SLATEs) that include a stylus might resurrect the features of the original Tablet PCs -- but I'm not sure anyone really wants those anymore.

 

[Tepid]

The largest majority of the corporate world can do only one thing (MAYbe 2) on an iPad or Android and even Less on a ChromeBook.

The ONE Thing, Email. That's it. Nothing more for work purposes. Unless that company provides BYOD and a virtual environment, and not all of them do. There are a minority out there that can do more because apps were developed for them to do so, or because of BYOD.

Enter Windows 8 Pro Tablets. Windows IS the corporate OS of choice. You can not deny it, it's undeniable.
So, what do those users do? They spend a whole lot of money for a device that can pretty much do only one, maybe 2 things.
And still have to lug around their corporate laptop. And the tablets of old, which were generally the swivel tablets running Windows XP which was not designed for Tablet (yes I know there is a tablet version) and is not very conducive to tablet use at all.

But now, Windows 8 IS conducive to Tablet use. All those people that shelled out for an iPad just to work on email will be shelving that device for something they can actually use Desktop Software on.

This is the points being missed, overlooked, drowned out by BS and misinformation.
and it's a good opportunity for the corporate world to look at the possibilities of Windows 8 for Field and Off Site employees.

Here's the biggest thing of all...........

Remove Metro and what do you have? That's right, Windows 8 Desktop. it's there, it's usable, it's better, it's faster.

Trust me when I say, the majority of base users have no idea what the start button is. They just don't.
They put icons on the desktop and away they go.

So, this whole Metro thing is totally over blown and the detractors and naysayers thrive on it's existence to trash the whole OS.
Which is why there are so many articles out there that do so.

But once you get past the new Start screen and Metro aspect, you have an underlying Desktop OS that works very well on a Tablet.

We will know much more in the very near future.

 

[Mystere]

To start with, I personally love popup menu lists which can expand certain folders or whatnot when they're highlighted.

Unfortunately (or perhaps fortunately), the vast majority of people do not agree with you. Popup menus are difficult to navigate, needlessly hide things (how many times have you been trying to find something that was in a folder you didn't think it would be in?) and extremely difficult to use once they exceed a certain size (we've all seen the scrolling menus that are a PITA). In particular, popup menus do not scale, and they are difficult for anyone with poor motor reflexes (like the elderly, or people with MS or Parkinsons or other diseases that affect motor control) or bad hand-eye coordination.

Frankly, most people just don't care. Microsoft is not going to design their OS to placate 1% of the users at the expense of many others, particularly when the vast majority doesn't care either way.

I hardly ever use the desktop background icons, and don't even display them, because I don't prefer to find what I'm looking for that way

And yet...,

I understand that the Metro style interface is designed to replace the Start menu, but I think it would work much better if it instead replaced the desktop itself, while maintaining similar functionality to what it has now, still allowing users to tag whatever they wanted to it, whether traditional icons or app rectangles that you could scroll through, only still allowing for the same functionality without having to switch between screens to access the Taskbar and easily switch between and load windows in the foreground.

So, you say you personally don't like to use the desktop for such things, and yet you claim that this is how it should be?

I don't get you.

 

[Ray8]

How on earth can anyone suggest that the vast majority of users don't like cascading menus? Where's the evidence? It's what we've all learned to use, to live with and which still exists in every aspect of Windows, Office and every program out there. The fact that Microsoft has created a single-screen start menu does not mean that it's been done because that's what people want; it's Microsoft's misguided venture into the mobile phone and tablet world.

The only people that I can see so fervently arguing for the new interface are Microsoft employees or those with some vested interest in Microsoft.

 

[HippsieGypsie]

From now on, I'm going to call then apps/start menu the Mobile Phone Interface (MPI), because that's what it is. It's not a desktop interface, but an add-on to the desktop that makes your program menu look like you're using a really, really, big mobile phone.

The MPI is not traditional, desktop, user friendly. It's not fast. It's not convenient. It's not logical. All of the aforementioned applies, unless you are using a mobile phone, or you simply want to love what Microsoft has concocted.

Most desktop users don't have touch-based anything, they rely on mouse and keyboard. What works for some, clearly does not work for a lot of others. It's not that it's difficult (really and truly it's not difficult to understand and use, I mean it), but it's pointless.

The Windows 7 method of taskbar and start menu just works better for so many people. Call them stupid, ignorant, Luddites, whatever, but it's what they like and it's what they want. What is one person's cheese is another's rotten milk.

Of course it's not a desktop interface and wasn't designed or intended to be. You continue to have your desktop portal.

You can call it anything you want, but technically it's called the Start Screen and All Apps. And it is by no means a phone UI, although it will be familiar to Windows Phone 8 users.

Please see my next post.

 

[HippsieGypsie]

Instead of replacing the Start menu with "Metro" (or whatever they're calling it now), I think they should have replaced the desktop background and icons with it as a customizable active desktop, where you could still have your app icons, only they could be these more active icons as in "Metro," and they should have left the Start menu alone.

I think this would have gone over a lot better, and I might have eventually updated to it instead of deciding to skip Windows 8 altogether whenever I can, waiting for what's next and hopefully better.

So this is what I think might have helped Windows 8 be accepted. Let me know what you think. (But this isn't a discussion about the validity of my opinion one way or the other. Windows 8 isn't something "I need to get used to;" it unfortunately is something "I don't want to use.")

A good idea, Wrend, but I think a lot of the decision to go their route was based on the touch popularity and trend to navigate. It is a rather complex issue to solve. I think MS did a good job on their first attempt.

MS keeps data on users habits through their Customer Experience Improvement Program (CEIP): Microsoft Customer Experience Improvement Program

From what I understand they saw that hardly any used the Start Menu, for they used the Task Bar and shortcut keys. Personally I didn't use the menu much. I've always opted in on the CEIP. Perhaps enterprise would not rather opt to it? I don't know. Pros here may. I'm a novice. Here's a read that may help to answer that: Reflecting on your comments on the Start screen - Building Windows 8 - Site Home - MSDN Blogs

Does the data support all customers?

@Andrew wrote:

"I'd like to point out that this data you collect is most likely from non-corporate users, you're basing all your statistics around home users and not business users. Most enterprises will turn off the CEIP by default in Group Policy as a security precaution and to prevent chatter from the network."

Andrew, while it’s true that some enterprises choose not to enable the CEIP (Customer Experience Improvement Program, which gives us anonymous, opt-in feedback about how people are using Windows,) we still receive a huge amount of data from this program, including from enterprise customers. In addition, knowing the region, language, edition, and deployment attributes of the product allows us to further refine the data as needed. We often refer to this data as a full "census" (again noting that the data is opt-in and anonymous) as the number of unique data points is magnitudes beyond a "sampling."

In addition to the CEIP program, we have a wide variety of channels to our corporate customers to understand their needs. For example, we collect feedback continuously during direct engagement with customers (such as during on-site visits and in our briefing centers around the world), from advisory council and early-adopter program members, and at public events such as TechEd and //build/. We also work closely with industry analysts (via consultations and their research) and execute a wide range of our own research studies directly. From these interactions, we know the kind of functionality and control that enterprises want over the Start menu and we are definitely taking these into account as we are designing and developing the changes for Windows 8

.

Here's an interesting read on that with stat charts and other good links as to the "whys": Evolving the Start menu - Building Windows 8 - Site Home - MSDN Blogs

The design of the Start menu began in 1992 for its debut in Windows 95. The menu was conceived in a world where PC towers and 15" CRTs dominated cubicles. The Web was still an experiment and people had to drive to a store to buy software. It was a very different time. The fundamental goal of the menu was to provide an obvious place for people to start their computing tasks. It replaced the venerable Program Manager, that Windows 3.x concept that placed shortcuts in a floating window which happened to interfere with the desktop and other applications. Anchored to the taskbar, the Start menu was a consistent and consolidated portal to your apps and system functions. It was essentially the fastest way to start programs without hunting down an executable somewhere in the system.

The way I see it, the Start Screen and All Apps are the two of the three segments of the obsolete and omitted Start Menu. The Start Screen replacing the "Recently used programs and files" which are compiled at the top of that menu (if configured to be in properties) and the All Apps replacing the "All Programs" at the bottom. The third segment being the right column is replaced by the Advanced Context Menu (power user task menu) right-clicking the lower left corner or WinKey/X.

I think the Start Screen to be rather ingenious way of opening to an OS. Customize by arrangement of tiles and personal info at a glance. "A house made from the internet" to quote a VP from Microsoft.

So far as this big change of replacing the Start Menu with Start Screen/All Apps, if one did not participate in the CEIP, then how would MS know your computing habits, therefore I feel they no right to complain.

 

[Mystere]

How on earth can anyone suggest that the vast majority of users don't like cascading menus? Where's the evidence?

I didn't say that. Perhaps you should try reading what is written, rather than reading what you want me to have written.

I said, the vast majority of users do not "love" popup menus as Wrend does. The vast majority of users do not care, one way or another.. that is, until popup menus become a PITA such as when they grow larger than a full vertical screen.

 

[Ray8]

How on earth can anyone suggest that the vast majority of users don't like cascading menus? Where's the evidence?

I didn't say that. Perhaps you should try reading what is written, rather than reading what you want me to have written.

I said, the vast majority of users do not "love" popup menus as Wrend does. The vast majority of users do not care, one way or another.. that is, until popup menus become a PITA such as when they grow larger than a full vertical screen.

You said this:

Unfortunately (or perhaps fortunately), the vast majority of people do not agree with you.

Agreeing, being the use of pop-up or cascading menus. There was no love in your statement.

 

[Ray8]

MS keeps data on users habits through their Customer Experience Improvement Program (CEIP): Microsoft Customer Experience Improvement Program

That depends on how many people overall subscribe to the CEIP, I certainly don't and I'd suggest that dedicated users don't either. The ones that do, are the ones that allow any program they install to add a desktop icon and never read the fine print of anything they install. If that's where Microsoft got their idea that no one uses the start menu, then I think they have a slightly distorted view of the world.

Remember also that in the corporate world, every user has a desktop image that is consistent and all programs are predominantly accessed via the cascading menus. I would also hazard a guess that corporate system also don't subscribe to the CEIP. That's where are the vast majority of Windows licences deployed.

So Microsoft has decided to ditch a perfectly functional menu system, based on the laziness and lack of knowledge of a proportion of Windows users, in favour of a menu system used by Android and iOS devices.

 

[Tepid]

Ok Ray, I have to say, you obviously don't work in the corporate world of consistent Desktops. They are very few and far between, Rare to say the least. They need to be locked down to really keep that consistency and that is rare as well.

Seriously, I can attest to this fact as I have been around the corporate world for a long time as an IT Professional.

You would be surprised as to how many users have no clue what the start menu is, where the start button is or how to use it.

Or try anywhere between 20 and 100+ icons on the desktop cause they have no idea how to use Documents/My Documents
Or finding files saved on root C drive or in the root of their profiles or windows, it is far more common than you think.

Trust me when i say, the vast majority of plain jane and joe user don't use the start menu and have very little knowledge of it.
this is a fact, not opinion.

 

[Hopachi]

MS keeps data on users habits through their Customer Experience Improvement Program (CEIP): Microsoft Customer Experience Improvement Program

That depends on how many people overall subscribe to the CEIP, I certainly don't and I'd suggest that dedicated users don't either. The ones that do, are the ones that allow any program they install to add a desktop icon and never read the fine print of anything they install. If that's where Microsoft got their idea that no one uses the start menu, then I think they have a slightly distorted view of the world.

Remember also that in the corporate world, every user has a desktop image that is consistent and all programs are predominantly accessed via the cascading menus. I would also hazard a guess that corporate system also don't subscribe to the CEIP. That's where are the vast majority of Windows licences deployed.

So Microsoft has decided to ditch a perfectly functional menu system, based on the laziness and lack of knowledge of a proportion of Windows users, in favour of a menu system used by Android and iOS devices.

I've used the menu as well.

You'll need to rely on 3rd party menus starting from Win8.
Speaking of Win8, I adapted to the start screen because search works pretty good.

Maybe I have up to 4 shortcuts on the Desktop but not more than that.

And since I'm a menu fan I always add a start menu/screen shortcut as the first taskbar icon for the sake of my clicks in the area.
http://www.eightforums.com/tutorials/17354-start-screen-shortcut-create-windows-8-a.html?filter[1]=Shortcuts