1) Why is it faster than arrange icons configure all the programs you use the most and get to them actually faster than from a start menu
2) No it does not. If I could made folders to put apps in, to make a clear overview, then it would be different, and then you would be right
3) No, again it is because of the lack of folders. On desktop AND in startmenu you can arrange things in folders (Office, Games, Photos aso), that can not be done in tifkam
4) Yes, here you are right, as long as you know the name of the program you search for, and that we do allmost all the time
...besides the fact that nobody with a non-touchscreen device will be interested in 8.1's tile-based user interface (about ~1.4 billion people at Microsoft's last estimate of the total number of traditional desktops & laptops sans touchscreens running all versions of Windows and DOS worldwide.) So...
*Touchscreen user interfaces don't belong on non-touchscreen devices and monitors, period (painfully obvious to everyone except Microsoft, unless the company is actually doing an "8.2" as this writer-person suggests. Better late than never, Microsoft.) This would have been a much bigger disaster in 1995 as mass-market touchscreen devices weren't just grossly outnumbered as they are at present, they didn't yet exist.
*Not only are the tiles grossly incompatible with traditional desktops, laptops, and monitors, but they are ugly, their color schemes jarring and highly incongruent. Would have been even a bigger disaster in 1995 because then they'd have made even less sense than they do now...
*But it's not just the aesthetic qualities that have been changed in the Win8 tile-based ui, because that wouldn't make that much difference. Once you get used to it, even "ugly" can grow on you...;) No, the main problem is that besides being ugly, the information conveyed by the garish tiles is simplified to the point of being incomplete. Far too often in Win 8 the user must leave the RT user interface (tiles) and open up the traditional, Win7-style non-touch user interface in order exercise the degree of control he'd like over his operating system because of the many things you simply cannot do at all through the Win8 tile-based user interface.
*With the exception of the Start Menu, all of the Win7 (explorer.exe-based) user interface remains fully intact within Win8.1. It's all there, and it has to be, of course, since the tile-based RT user-interface portion of Win8 is so incomplete. If the Win8 tile-based ui was as functional and informative as the traditional explorer.exe user interface then you'd certainly have a good point. Unfortunately, the two user interfaces are nowhere near "equal" in terms of the amount of control they offer the end user--Win8's tile-based user interface is grossly inferior to its explorer.exe-based user interface. Win8/8.1 has two user interfaces because it has to, to function correctly. It's as simple as that.
Someone else mentioned Classic Shell 4.0.2, and I must concur that it is a must-have for Win8/8.1. It's of very high quality and it is free. It even allows you to turn off *all* the desktop hot corners and charms, if you want (8.1 only grants you very partial control on these things through Taskbar properties--can't turn off charms at all.) Or leave them on, if you want. I really like 8.1--it has completely replaced Win7 for me at home and at work. But, thankfully, I don't have to look at a single tile while reaping the benefits of 8.1! And why should I? I have no touchscreen, and have a zero desire to buy one. Good grief...;) It's sometimes difficult to keep my monitor screens as clean as I'd like--but if I had to contend with greasy fingerprints all over them every day--uh-uh, no way! But also--my 2500 dpi-density mice are incredibly more accurate and precise than my pudgy fingertips will ever be! Johnny Paycheck should sing, "You can take this touchscreen and shove it..!" I think he'd have a hit on his hands, no doubt about it.
Microsoft's devices head: We won't have three Windows versions in the future
Microsoft's devices head: We won't have three Windows versions in the future - Neowin
After reading this story it brings to mind an old saying.
Jack of all trades master of none.
We are domed to mediocre Windows.
You don't have to use tifkam. You never did, since day one.
The arguments on this thread will not end, even on touch screen tablets Windows 8.1 Metro UI apps pale is comparison to Android apps and is basically a laughing stock when compared to iOS's apps.
The only saving grace for recent Windows 8.1 tablets in the fact Bay Trail is a very competent processor and the fact most of the bigger and smarter tablet manufactures have dropped Windows RT altogether and switched to a full version of Windows 8.1.
Which brings me back to my fist statement, even on touch enabled devices people are only going to get Windows 8.1 for the desktop portion of the operating system and not Microsuck's crappy Metro UI and it's pathetic apps selection.
Thanks for the views not arguing...
I doubt that someone would buy a tablet only to install a desktop start menu and use it as a PC.
Or maybe someone would but, count me out, a tablet is not a device that I would want.
I see you are using Windows 7.
Changes are coming. Updates are coming such as they are.
A Microsoft desktop start menu, as an addon for 8.2,
I've been using one for 18 years. Enough already. I prefer tifkam.
I expect all the changes coming will be in the form of updates.
To start another wave of ISO and key controversies would certainly add more threads.
Last edited by mdmd; 24 Nov 2013 at 00:04. Reason: its office 365
new Dell Venus 8 Pro which looks like a nice 8" tablet. But then I was looking at all the apps I have on my Nexus 7 and found none of them in the Windows 8.1 world - except for Office. But maybe it will get better over time. The " crappy Metro UI " would not really bother me on a tablet but on my desktop PC it does bother me.