Re: See - that's fine. That's a constructive, supportable criticism
You just don't get it do you? I and several others have presented multiple concrete legitimate reasons as to why the GUI causes problems. It may work on a client. If I had a touch device I might like it. However, I am a server guy with a speciality in terminal server/remote desktop solutions. Microsoft decided to saddle the server OS with the same GUI as the client and it just doesn't work.
I need to be able to install multiple applications on a server and present subsets of these applications to diferent users. Since Windows 2003SP1 this has been a breeze. Redirect the desktop and start menu and use ABE to limit what shortcuts users see. Job done. Doesn't work anymore. There is no way I have yet found to achieve the same objective on the 2012/R2 start screen.
I need to limit screen updates so that users on slow links get acceptable performance. On previous versions of Windows when finding a new application, the user could go to the start menu. Only a small portion of the screen changed. Now, they hit the Windows key and Bang! They have to wait for the whole screen to update and then sometimes get animated tiles to make matters even worse.
These are just 2 real world examples of how this causes problems.
I can accept your point of view that the GUI works for you. You should accept mine that putting this GUI on the server was a stupid decision.
Just think, if Microsoft had simply offered the choice of interface we would both be happy, nobody would be having this endless conversation and Microsoft would probably have shifted a lot more Windows licenses.