There is life after the death of Microsoft’s Windows 8 Start button The disappearance of the Start button in Microsoft’s new Windows has proved unsettling for users. “I want Start. Start I say,” said an early tester in a post entitled "Worst 60 minutes in my entire life". One year on, and the Start screen is still a contentious issue. “The advantage of the overlaid menu is that it preserves …
Well if we were to switch to driving on the other side of the road, it would need to be done overnight. You can't have some people driving on the left and some driving on the right. Maybe you could start with some islands that are connected to the mainland only by ferry, but otherwise, it would need to happen at a particular time, and if Northern Ireland were to switch, the Republic would need to switch on the same day as well.
Having said that, I don't really see the point of it. It would cost a lot of money to replace all the road signs, repaint the road markings and redesign junctions, with very little, if any benefit.
So apparently releasing a new operating system with a different UI is exactly akin to changing, in one fell swoop, the side of the road which 30 million vehicles and their drivers drive on. A fascinating insight into your mind for sure.
The real shame is that with so many people like yourself refusing to learn any new skills, at this rate we will never get the chance to use a Minority Report style user interface. This makes me a sad panda.
"I am totally fed up with IT guys refusing to learn new skills."
Umm, 99% of PC users are *not* IT guys. Perhaps the IT guys who you claim are "refusing to learn new skills" are the ones who play a support role, either as part of their job or to their friends and families.
Then again, as the article notes, none of the "reasons why it doesn't matter" are actually discoverable. Microsoft is assuming that we are willing to trawl through endless "Windows Guru Secrets" blogs in order to learn how to make their latest offering even palatable.
How about I shit on your lunch and then point out that a few days googling on the web should throw up some sanitisation options at quite reasonable prices? Do you understand why normal people might find that attitude a little tiresome?
Its not about us IT guys refusing to learn new skills, its about having to support 1000 users that can't understand where their start button went, how they have to waggle the mouse at the bottom corners of the screen to get something to happen, how they now have a new feature where every app is now full screen, and when seeing tiles, half of them won't work correctly as we don't use Exchange, and our proxy servers block access to lots of internet feeds
It was hard enough getting them to understand Win 7 from XP without having to now tell them that is is no longer a start button, I know how popular I'd be if I rolled out Win 8 across the company any time soon
While investing in training of internal staff is usually a good thing, in this scenario it is a case of necessity bred out of ???
So far there has been no GOOD reason give as to why Windows 8 was not released with a "Desktop (and normal Start Menu) as default" option. Even if it was not enabled by default, its existence would alleviate the support burden being place on SME IT departments by this change.
In addition, you are assuming that the company can afford the costs plus lost work time of training all of the staff (of whom likely ~30% will actually retain what was trained, the remainder coming back to IT everytime they need to do something anyways). Some users CAN NOT (or WILL NOT) be trained (either due to a unknown/undisclosed learning disability or just not caring - in this day the latter seems far more prevalent).
You also assume much about the increased productivity afforded by the new UI upon completion of training...
Group Policy Objects are your friend. And user training is always appreciated, be it new LOB application or new OS. Or new business practice, or anything else that significantly affects the business.
Besides, if you've already migrated to Windows 7, you can skip Windows 8 and everybody will be used to the new UI on their home PC's by the time Windows 9 arrives!
The danger is that we'll be wondering why there was so much fuss because "Windows n" will be a minor, niche OS.
OK, that's exaggeration - I'm sure companies will stick with Windows for a long time. But for the home users the enforced change, that apparently only becomes acceptable after intensive use and a crash course in shortcuts and tweaks that MS don't document very well, may prove too much.
Of course it needs a serious competitor to get its act together to provide a decent alternative...
I know you're being sarky, but I have to say that I found 98SE-->XP-->7 pretty much seamless. Each seemed a logical progression of its predecessor and the changed bits were almost always for the better.
8, on the other hand......
What really irks is those continually trottiing out "It's there / it's quicker / it's only available if you use Windows key + whatever / CTRL + whatever". Listen carefully: IF I WANTED TO DO EVERYTHING WITH FUCKING KEYBOARD SHORTCUTS, I'D BE DOING IT IN VI.
As a vi user, I welcome you!
Wait, what? Oh, that was supposed to be some kind of put down huh... interesting.
besides, those shortcuts look a bit more like "Esc Meta Alt Ctrl Shift"... I always said it just needed a boot loader!
Clearly it's your choice whether you use the keyboard or mouse, so this isn't criticism, merely a comment that I have always found it odd how many people don't seem to bother with keyboard shortcuts. For me, the more I can do with a keyboard the better, after all the keyboard gives me 10 'pointers' rather than one and, if I'm typing it avoids me having to move my hand to the mouse!
That is why I use 'Executor' (Gnome Do for Windows), ALT-Space brings up a dialogue for me to type any program or folder I want with far more speed than a start menu.
Each to his own though!
What really irks is those continually trottiing out "It's there / it's quicker / it's only available if you use Windows key + whatever / CTRL + whatever".
That's because you aren't the power user you think you are.
Sure, me too, really, but I think the point is that even then it is a big change for many, many people. I've multi-booted since forever, but took a full year to get to where I used XP most of the time. Same when I switched from IE to FF. Same to W7. Seamless from the geek pov but stressful from the Human, and more so the older you get. Maybe this is one of those examples where the reality is counter-intuitive, but it seems to me that if someone like me who is always trying new operating systems and software can't adjust in less than a year, the average user certainly won't.
Sometimes it seems like Microsoft stress users out 'because they can'. But I think it just comes down to they have to keep continually selling new versions for the shareholder's sakes and maybe it's like the way the supermarkets keep rearranging their layouts. I'm sure we all agree in the supermarket's case its about stopping us going straight to where we knew what we wanted was and instead having to look at all the shelves of everything else as we try to find where they've put it, thus increasing impulse buys. Hello Windows Store. Windows Store 8. Self-checkout.
Ok the lack of start menu is a bit anoying at first, but i did get used to it and i do love how fast Win 8 is, but.... the modern Ui/metro start menu is horrid. i loved the win7 start menu, not because it was what i am used to but because it didn't in-peed my view of my HD backgrounds... the aero affects also made your own personal backgrounds more erm.. personal as your bars are more see through.. i HATE having to look at the metro when i press the windows key why microsoft only lets u have a few designs and colors i don't know... i think i would like it better if i could customize metro more. Also remove that swipe screen upwards to unlock, it fails for desktops.
I thought that they would think up something - always liked my WindowShades...
One minor thing though - Win95 you had the QuickLaunch bar to work as a launcher, so it predates Vista/7, after you installed the desktop update, so I've been a taskbar launcher for probably a decade and a half... I think I'll get used to 8 very, very quickly - and the more I see (i.e. plagiarise from the folk actually doing the mousing/clicking/touching), the more I like.
of an issue if I am the only one who has to change the way I am working, however having to help hundreds of other users change the way they work is a bit more of a time waster.
Since this most likely will be deployed in a corporate environment, and I know it will be in mine, the people who have just got used to using the start button in windows, and maybe even the search, and occasionally the task bar, this will probably put a large strain on our department as the unwashed masses try to get to grips with another way of working, in the end they may like it, but until they do we will have to go to them and help them through tasks that they have been familiar with.
It will be even worse if the angry salesforce start using it, they really do not like change and some complain about an extra click or two already....
What was wrong with the 3.11 gui, I am used to it and know where everything is. This windows 95 gui is useless and it slows me down
oh sorry, bit of a blast from the past as all the comments about windows 8 are the exact same ones I have heard many time before.
While I agree change for change sake is not a good thing, this is a good move forward to combining touch interfaces with a traditional desktop environment and having used it, it is quite nice. It isn't the major learning curve that all the moaners seem to think it is. It really doesn't work that differently from the windows gui you are used to, it just looks a bit different.
Problem is that the Win 3.1/3.11 UI was pants. In fact, TIKFAM reminds me a bit of it. Win 95 was certainly a change, but mostly for the better. Whereas Win 8 is only an improvement if you are using a tablet. Now you can argue that tablets will eventually replace the desktop and I will agree with you, but I will also ask why desktop users need to be relegated to second class citizens.
Whenever anyone questions change some cretin comes up with the mantra:
"Change happens, get used to it"
Why? It is just as reasonable to complain about change for the worse as it is to complain about maintenance of a bad design.
I'm perfectly happy with windows the way I have it set up now - win7 with classic shell to make it look as close to the XP/classic interface as possible. So I suppose this is more or less a Win 2K look and feel. Basically it does what I want without too many unpleasant suprises - most unexpected behaviour is where the emulation fails (such as the brain-dead version of Windows Explorer in Win 7). I could have slavishly learned each new interface along the way but why should I? The best OS is the one you don't notice - things just happen the way they always did.
I don't object to new interfaces provided they are not mandatory. If Win8 had a nice prominent initial setup option - Use Classic Interface - I could quite happily leave TIFKAM to those who want their desktop to behave in the same way as their tablet or phone (a not unreasonable desire). Unfortunately it does not, and the monolithic Windows design precludes complete desktop replacements in the way allowed in linux. And yes, I did move from Ubuntu to Xubuntu because the Unity interface screwed up my normal workflow (ingrained over the last 6 years) but Xubuntu required very little change in behaviour.
"Backwards compatibility".
What most people seem to ignore is that Microsoft used to be very straight forward with this. You'd be surprised how long "progman.exe" was kept included with Windows even though they had long implemented the start menu. Eventually it obviously got removed.
And this has always been the case; Microsoft implemented some drastic changes before, but /ALWAYS/ made sure that customers could move back while eventually removing those options, but only on newer versions.
Windows XP could be made to look and feel like Windows 9x with a single column start menu. On Windows Vista and Windows 7 this specific option got removed, but you can still change the appearance of the start menu and Windows as a whole.
THAT is IMO the reason why many people complain and why I think Win8 is going to turn into a failure. Microsoft should not have broken their own cycle; the start menu should have been included in Windows 8 and maybe get removed in Windows 9.
And almost nobody used Progman,exe even in Windows '95, despite the fact that in all the build up all the tech crowd were insisting that there was absolutely no way anyone would ever be able to cope with the crazy new interface. The "stupid" new Start button interface was awkard and illogical and everybody was obviously going to hate it. Sound familiar?
The shocking truth is that people cope with new interfaces. In fact, they typically cope better when the change is significant enough to break their old mental associations with how things work rather than a handful of minor, incremental changes.
So the new start menu is not so bad because......
a) Users don't use the old start menu anyway....
Well my 500 odd users do.....not sure what your users do but mine have been trained on the advantages of using the start menu to find files, change settings and open programs.
b) the new start menu allows us to group items together.....
what like folders do??
c) you can easily install a 3rd party app to put the start menu back......
Hang about, I thought you said the new one was fine? If the new menu works why would anyone need the old one back?
d) you finally note that having things open in full screen metro Apps is annoying and a Tech can fart around with the file associations to correct this....
What you have said is Windows 8 start menu is not suitable for business desktop users. FAIL!!!
I'd say it will do better than Vista, if only because it'll probably have some success in the consumer tablet market, whereas most people looked at Vista if it was something a dog left on their doorstep (even if later on, this image was unwarranted).
However, it'll do far worse than 7, because what business (I'd imagine the bulk of Microsoft's market) will change to some "my first PC" version of Windows. There's not enough booze in all the land to calm the nerves of every tech if all staff had to learn 8..
" in a couple of years we will look back and wonder why there was so much fuss about the Windows 8 Start menu"
That's mainly because the majority of PC users will still be using Win7, having only just upgraded from XP.
And Microsoft themselves will be busy touting Win9 as the next best thing; trumpeting their latest UI 'innovation' - a handy way to group all your programs and documents into one place, easily activated by a small icon at the bottom left of the screen....
So we've heard 'dated' and 'cheesy', from Microsoft themselves, describing Win7. When Win9 comes around will we hear Win8 dismissed as being 'idiosyncratic' and 'restrictive'?
Microsoft is sounding more and more like a political system at war with itself, and the civilians are suffering mightily.
You're assuming that you can remember the name of the application you want. I have a bunch of stuff that I don't use very often and I can't remember what half of them are called.
Your system would be fine on a relatively specialised computer with not too many apps installed; but is completely impractical for a jobbing "general techy dude"'s computer; particularly if that dude is also a packrat.
The author has a point here and there but every time ignores the major issue: decrease of usability and functionality.
"Pin the applications you use most often to the taskbar, and you rarely need the Start menu."
The problem with this is that a set of pinned applications is purely static. I actually use the 'most started' section because it reflects the stuff I most often use. When I'm doing software design you'll find stuff such as NetBeans, VP-UML, Word and so in there. When I'm doing administration or presentations you'll see stuff such as PowerPoint, Word, Excel and such appear.
And without Aero on the desktop I wonder if those pinned icons will actually give me jumplists like I have now.
"Windows 8 also adds the Administration menu, mouse bottom left and right-click, or press Windows key and X. It is the quickest route to things like Disk Management, Event Viewer and Device Manager, and you miss it when returning to Windows 7."
Miss it on Win7? Nonsense: just add "Administration tools" to your start menu. Then click start, hover over 'Administration tools' and you're done.
Another nasty side effect to this Win8 crapola: because you're in TIFKAM you can't simply right click and use the option "run as administrator", which you can in Win7. Why would you want that? Well, believe it or not; but there are people who actually don't use an admin account while on Windows 7.
"Finally, search in the new Start screen is better than before. Just start typing."
And even more nonsense. On Win7 I hit the windows button, start typing and get my results nicely sorted in sections, where programs are obviously on top because those get started most often. But I also see control panel options, documents, etc. All nicely sorted. On Win8 you can only search in certain sections, one at a time. In other words you always need to remember to press the right shortcut to search OR after typing the search string "simply" use the mouse to click on the section you want.
Its not easier; it adds more burden to get to the same results.
And without Aero on the desktop I wonder if those pinned icons will actually give me jumplists like I have now.
Yes, they do.
because you're in TIFKAM you can't simply right click and use the option "run as administrator", which you can in Win7
Yes, you can. (Aside from actual Metro apps, which never run elevated, by design)
On Win7 I hit the windows button, start typing and get my results nicely sorted in sections, where programs are obviously on top because those get started most often. But I also see control panel options, documents, etc. All nicely sorted.
Well you see maybe one or two of them, before the Start menu "helpfully" crops the list to fit everything in a small amount of space. Wheras Windows 8 shows you everything. And let's you search across services and applications in the same interface.
The Register 
Biting the hand that feeds IT
Copyright. All rights reserved © 1998–2024
