Windows 8 and 8.1 Forums


No Microsoft Start Menu for Windows 8 until 2015: Sources

  1. #81


    Posts : 835
    Win 8.1 Pro


    There is more to Win8 than the dang Start Screen. If one actually takes the time to learn how to use Win8 efficiently, it actually is faster and easier to use.

      My System SpecsSystem Spec

  2. #82


    Posts : 34
    Win7


    Blah, blah, blah...

    If you would only learn Windows 8 blah, blah,blah....

    I know Windows 8.

    I don't lke a Windows 8.
      My System SpecsSystem Spec

  3. #83


    Posts : 1,320
    Server 2012 / 8.0


    Quote Originally Posted by Fredledingue View Post
    Why pure ignorance? If someone uses the start menu all the time? That's his/her right and preference. Not ignorance. With a well arranged start menu you can access hundreds of programs and documents very quickly. Faster than by browsing several pages of Start Screens. Few people use it, and I almost never use it, because most if not all of your useful shortcuts find there place on the desktop but it's potentially a formidable tool should you choose to use it.
    Hello Fredledingue.

    Microsoft is designing a desktop menu, right?

    With a well arranged start menu you can access hundreds of programs and documents very quickly.
    I could say the same. But, with your suggestion, how would you go about designing a desktop menu that can handle hundreds of programs and documents? Do you like the 7 menu?
    It does not cascade. Do you think they will bring back cascading?

    As to your point about scrolling through pages,
    this is an area of controversy because, as designed, no scrolling is required.

    I have close to 300 "apps" installed, everything fits on 1 page as listed by zooming or alphabetical list.
    The default is always to go with a scrolling complaint.
    My start screen is often times blank, so there is no movement there.


    It could be necessary to scroll through a desktop menu, necessary to scroll through a toolbar.
    A taskbar is awesome, but has limited icon space unless you drag / resize.
    If one only does 12 things with their PC, do they need a desktop menu?

    Sure, there's more to 8 than a menu.
    Can you post a screenshot of a desktop menu with hundreds of programs?

    I get it, the metro menu is for tablets, not for a desktop computer.
    Right?
    Last edited by mdmd; 07 Jun 2014 at 20:16.
      My System SpecsSystem Spec

  4. #84


    Posts : 1,320
    Server 2012 / 8.0


    Quote Originally Posted by Tepid View Post
    There is more to Win8 than the dang Start Screen. If one actually takes the time to learn how to use Win8 efficiently, it actually is faster and easier to use.
    I agree, but take a different view. As others have and do,
    time taken to use what is by default, can be lightning quick, fast, and easy.

    In some ways, it could be more efficient than desktop icons.
    A great deal depends on preference /
    ... like this, I hate desktop icons, I don't care for more than a few taskbar icons,
    I don't even like a cluttered start screen.

    So what is Microsoft to do? Windows 9 is likely to increase metro stuff across devices.
    Their clouds / accounts / live tiles / tile notifications / synchronizations are important to them.

    Linux and Apple are looking better eh?
      My System SpecsSystem Spec

  5. #85


    Quote Originally Posted by mdmd View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by Quadrillion View Post
    Well said, pparks
    What's well said?
    Anybody got a Microscope?
    Who operates a PC at 2560 X 1440?
    Everybody at my office, who has the new Dell UltraSharp 27" monitor is running at 2560x1440. It's fantastic.

    Quote Originally Posted by mdmd View Post
    Who almost never goes full screen?
    You like this?

    Attachment 44532
    Righto, that's exactly what my screen looks like. SMH!!!! That's what you get with multiple things open with low resolution. At 2560x1440, you can actually have multiple things sharing your screen.




    Quote Originally Posted by mdmd View Post
    This idea of click complaints ... It's got to be 1, really?
    Sure, why would I want to click around multiple times to launch the stuff I use 98% of the time? Waste of time. I've got a dock on my Mac as well that requires 1 click for the stuff that I use 99.95% of the time.


    Quote Originally Posted by mdmd View Post
    You never scroll, ever? For anything?
    Come on, why are you being so all or nothing? Sure I scroll from time to time, but I don't have to scroll the start screen to find the overwhelming majority of what I use day to day, it's all on my bar at the bottom.

    Quote Originally Posted by mdmd View Post
    You never close anything?
    I don't have to flip to the Start screen, and have my running apps go out of view to launch other apps. That's what I'm saying. If I have a powershell script running, hitting start and having my entire screen taken over by the start screen is like closing/minimizing my powershell window because I cannot see what is going on.

    Quote Originally Posted by mdmd View Post
    The Windows 7 start menu does not have a classic option.
    My bad for using the word "classic". A better choice would have been the current way and the previous way. You have choices when it comes to 7.


    Quote Originally Posted by mdmd View Post
    My system has at least 40 third party applications. Should I be sad?
    Only if you want to be sad. My system has lots of 3rd party apps too. They are for things other than basic functionality. Think a few inches outside of the box, you knew what I was getting at.
      My System SpecsSystem Spec

  6. #86


    Quote Originally Posted by mdmd View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by nonono View Post
    And 2560 X 1440 is a very normal res, ... so having 17"+ monitor definitely needs 2560 X 1440.
    ok. Is that normal on your screen? Without setting the DPI to larger, it is hurtful to look at.
    Going from (2560 x 1440) to (1920 x 1080) makes a huge improvement.

    Attachment 44589
    I upgraded from a 24" Dell UltraSharp at work that ran 1920x1200 to a 27" that runs 2560x1440. I want all of the screen resolution that i can get. And no, I don't run with larger DPI. My DPI is set at 100%. I have a MacBook Pro that "can" run 2560x1440 on a 13" screen. Yes, that one is too small. On a 27" screen, it's a different ballgame.

    Quote Originally Posted by mdmd View Post
    I agree, but take a different view. As others have and do,
    time taken to use what is by default, can be lightning quick, fast, and easy.

    In some ways, it could be more efficient than desktop icons.
    A great deal depends on preference /
    ... like this, I hate desktop icons, I don't care for more than a few taskbar icons,
    I don't even like a cluttered start screen.

    So what is Microsoft to do? Windows 9 is likely to increase metro stuff across devices.
    Their clouds / accounts / live tiles / tile notifications / synchronizations are important to them.

    Linux and Apple are looking better eh?
    Nobody says you cannot have it the way you want it. Nothing wrong with your approach at all. It's those of us who "lost" the way that we like it without having to resort to third parties that are annoyed.

    The metro interface is great on the phones, it's fine on the Surface's, it's good on tablets, some people like it on their desktops/laptops. Microsoft can do whatever they want with Metro, it's totally fine with me. Just give us an option if we don't want to use it or find it beneficial. MS has been bringing back most of what we have been complaining about since Windows 8 launched, so clearly we cannot all be totally wrong.

    Apple is looking a bit better. I bought my very first Apple MacBook Pro a few months ago. Using it right now. Never before have I owned a single piece of Apple gear. (no iphones, no iPad's, no iPods, I dislike iTunes). Cannot say I am disappointed in any way with my Mac.
      My System SpecsSystem Spec

  7. #87


    Posts : 1,320
    Server 2012 / 8.0


    I was expecting this. You like to pick sentence by sentence. If that is your choice.
    ok. Here is a reference.

    Quote Originally Posted by pparks1 View Post
    ... It's all right there, I don't have to close anything, I don't have to scroll, and I only have to click one time.
    I assume you scroll web pages.
    My monitor is not as good as yours (or others, I think).
    Going with that resolution creates an awful blur, unreadable.
    Have you increased your DPI?
    As far as overlapping goes, I am getting a sense that your single screen space is so huge that nothing ever overlaps. I tried that resolution, the screen space did not increase much more than 1920 x 1080.

    About clicks, I do the same with docks.
    It's the work environment, and using a mouse and keyboard,
    could require hundreds of clicks daily and thousands of keystrokes.

    I do get fluffed, but try to make a point. Microsoft will spend millions on the design of a desktop menu.
    We can have one now for free / or 5 bucks.

    That's what you get with multiple things open with low resolution
    It is an example going back to Windows 95.
    I never get to that point either.
    The taskbar does allow for cascaded windows, that looks much like that screenshot.

    As described in another post here, Windows is all about maximized, minimized, defaulted, moved, resized and closed windows. Paging to another screen, to me, seems easy and quick using Edge UI thumbs, Windows Switcher or Win hotkeys.
      My System SpecsSystem Spec

  8. #88


    Posts : 1,320
    Server 2012 / 8.0


    Oops, you got a second post in before I completed the first.

    I looked at a Surface, and wow, nice but my old age and eyes cannot handle the tiny size of everything.
    Same with desktop monitors, same with file explorer, same with tiles.

    I cannot function without huge, vision impaired stuff. I need to up the DPI on everything.
    I've seen the Apple screens at Best Buy.
    They are fantastic!
      My System SpecsSystem Spec

  9. #89


    Quote Originally Posted by mdmd View Post
    I assume you scroll web pages.
    Well of course I scroll web pages. I was talking about scrolling as it pertained to launching applications. I prefer ~10 icons on the taskbar, and I prefer a hierarchical menu over a full screen start screen where I have to scroll off to the right in order to find applications to launch. That's what I mean by scrolling. I didn't mean I didn't scroll at all when utilizing computers.

    Quote Originally Posted by mdmd View Post
    My monitor is not as good as yours (or others, I think).
    Going with that resolution creates an awful blur, unreadable.
    Have you increased your DPI?
    As far as overlapping goes, I am getting a sense that your single screen space is so huge that nothing ever overlaps. I tried that resolution, the screen space did not increase much more than 1920 x 1080.
    The monitor that I have is pretty nice. It's a Dell U2713HM, 27" IPS flat panel. Dell UltraSharp 27 Monitor - U2713HM

    I have not increased the DPI. It's running at 100%. I had not increased the DPI on my 24" monitor that ran 1920x1200. Increasing the DPI would have somewhat negated the advantages afforded by the 2560x1440 resolution.

    I found the screen space increase going from 1920x1200 to this new monitor to be outstanding. I've got quite a few people at work who come by and say, "hey, when are you going to upgrade my monitor to one that looks like that"? Everybody else at work is on a 23" Dell Ultrasharp running 1920x1080


    Quote Originally Posted by mdmd View Post
    I cannot function without huge, vision impaired stuff. I need to up the DPI on everything.
    I've seen the Apple screens at Best Buy.
    They are fantastic!

    It's funny, because when I bought the Apple MacBook Pro, the 13" Retina display looked great, but the resolution was practically useless to me. Technically, it's 2560x1600, but it's pixel doubled. So, in essense, it's the screen real-estate space of 1280x800. I couldn't stand it whatsover. So, I'm running the 13" screen at a scaled resolution of 1680x1050. It's not quite as sharp as the "best for the display, Retina setting", but I can see so much more that it's a trade-off I'll make 100 times out of 100.


      My System SpecsSystem Spec

  10. #90


    Posts : 1,320
    Server 2012 / 8.0


    Quote Originally Posted by pparks1 View Post
    I was talking about scrolling as it pertained to launching applications. I prefer ~10 icons on the taskbar, and I prefer a hierarchical menu over a full screen start screen where I have to scroll off to the right in order to find applications to launch. That's what I mean by scrolling. I didn't mean I didn't scroll at all when utilizing computers.
    This is one of my one note rants I always get into.
    (Like your taskbar reference number)
    Funny thing is, I am on the opposite side of the fence with other start screeners.
    I, as well, prefer minimal start tiles, like 10 or less or NONE at all. I prefer none.

    The hierarchical issue is a matter installer results.
    The apps screen is automatically sorted and grouped as my endless screenshots have shown.
    I would have to see evidence that a hierarchical structure a.k.a. nests, work better than what exists in apps.

    Over time here, I have seen dozens of screenshots of nests, but I haven't seen anything that could not be managed by apps.

    It's one of my quirks / rant points. Using semantic zooming, all scrolling is eliminated in apps.
      My System SpecsSystem Spec

Page 9 of 13 FirstFirst ... 7891011 ... LastLast
No Microsoft Start Menu for Windows 8 until 2015: Sources
Related Threads
Feb 10, 2015 Microsoft Updates in Windows Updates & Activation
Hi, I would just like to know if you encountered any issues after installing these updates. Thanks :) 57873
Read more...
Read more at: Microsoft is bringing the Start Menu back | The Verge
I'll believe it when I see it. Microsoft may finally bring back full Start menu with Windows 8.2 "The most important change, as Thurrott hears it, is that Microsoft will finally be bringing back the full Start menu to the Windows 8.2 desktop mode. Unlike the current Start button that...
Read more at: Microsoft still open sources more technologies than many think | ZDNet
An elderly relative of mine recently got a new laptop with Windows 8. I had suggested she get one with Windows 7 as she has been using XP for about 8 years. But with various hardware requirements she ended up getting a laptop with Windows 8. Well, getting her accustomed to Windows 8 was a real...
There is now speculation that the Start Menu will return: Will Microsoft restore Start Menu to Windows 8? With Sinofsky out, everything is now possible, Microsoft already step back on the fact that Directx 11.1 will not only run on Windows8 , but on 7 too , this is a major step back. ...
Eight Forums Android App Eight Forums IOS App Follow us on Facebook