backtop


Print 108 comment(s) - last by just4U.. on Apr 24 at 12:24 PM

Sounds like Microsoft won't be evoking any fond memory of blue screens of death

News continues to trickle out about the upcoming version of Microsoft Corp.'s (MSFT) Windows operating system.  Set to land later this year, builds of the new OS, code-named "Blue" have trickled out to select partners -- which in turn has led to leaks.

The latest news to emerge comes courtesy of Roman L. (handle:AngleWZR), a developer who has been analyzing the leaked builds.  He notes on his Twitter that the latest leaked build -- build 9375 -- has a text string in the lower right-hand corner labeling it "Windows 8.1".
Windows Blue 8.1

Paul Thurrott, a top Windows writer/blogger, affirmed this designation stating that "Windows 8.1" will indeed be the launch name for the new OS.  He posts to Twitter:
One other minor piece of Windows 8.1/Blue related news courtesy of Mr. Thurrott's WinSuperSite : apparently Microsoft has tweaked the Search Charm in its latest builds.  Where Windows 8 made you pick between "Apps, Settings, or Files" , the new search does away with that, allowing you to start typing immediately.  Instead of pre-selecting the category, it simply clumps the results by category.

Windows Blue Search
[Image Source: WinSuperSite]

ZDNet Windows blogger Mary Jo Foley says that Windows 8.1 should hit RTM in August.  A beta is rumored to be slotted for Microsoft's June BUILD conference.

Sources: Twitter [AngelWZR], [Thurrott], WinSuperSite, ZDNet



Comments     Threshold


This article is over a month old, voting and posting comments is disabled

If only...
By kensiko on 4/3/2013 1:50:15 PM , Rating: 5
they would allow us to use the good old start menu, Windows 8 would sell a lot more!! I would buy it.




RE: If only...
By Flunk on 4/3/2013 1:57:26 PM , Rating: 1
What's so great about it? I hear a lot about this, but no one ever says any reason why?


RE: If only...
By datdamonfoo on 4/3/13, Rating: -1
RE: If only...
By kensiko on 4/3/13, Rating: 0
RE: If only...
By althaz on 4/3/2013 4:03:36 PM , Rating: 3
Name one (honestly curious)? The search in Win7 is better than in Win8 (although thankfully they've just told us that Win8 search is being fixed), but it has nothing to do with covering up windows (in fact having a larger area to view search results is not bad at all).


RE: If only...
By GotThumbs on 4/3/2013 4:43:25 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
I like to search for things


Why? I can only see this feature being needed if someone is totally disorganized. Of course if your desktop is filled with folders/files, then this applies to you.

I've known someone in this group and she was extremely unorganized. Because of this, she had to work harder/longer whenever she did work, but it wasn't often anyway.

Best wishes,


RE: If only...
By rs2 on 4/3/2013 9:36:07 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
Why? I can only see this feature being needed if someone is totally disorganized.


I disagree. Being disorganized is only a problem when you *don't* have efficient search. Otherwise the time that you spend manually organizing things is essentially wasted.

Google said it best with Gmail: Don't sort. Search.

I don't even try to organize the thousands of messages in my Gmail account. I just rely on their fast and accurate search function when I want to find something. And it works. There's no reason for the same concept to not be applied in the desktop PC context.


RE: If only...
By Labotomizer on 4/4/2013 10:32:35 AM , Rating: 2
You are dead on. I use search in Outlook religiously. I have a handful of folders with quick steps associated with them to set a reminder, categorize and move the item into a folder for things that need action on. Those are "working" folders. When finished with something I move it to a completed folder. General communication all stays in the inbox. That's the extent of my organization of email. Files are much the same way. I wouldn't want the web categorized like Yahoo once tried. I search for data. I approach my own data the same way.

Our SharePoint site is optimized for search for the same reason. Network shares run Windows Search services so my workstation connects back to the server's index. It works great.

The idea that search is only for the disorganized is crazy. It's for people who know how to work efficiently. What if an email applies to 3 different categories? Do you save it in 3 folders? If not then you have to try to remember where you saved it. Same for files, local, sharepoint or network.

Merging the 3 categories into one search is really the only thing I think search in Win 8 needed. Start Menu or Start Screen, when I'm searching for data that's what I'm focused on. I don't see the big deal.

And when I'm searching the network I typically do it from explorer anyway.


RE: If only...
By karimtemple on 4/4/2013 11:06:17 AM , Rating: 2
Yes. Exactly.


RE: If only...
By retrospooty on 4/3/2013 9:49:04 PM , Rating: 1
"Why? I can only see this feature being needed if someone is totally disorganized."

Try a network drive at work where 500 non-tech users share and drop files on it in a complex folder structure.


RE: If only...
By crispbp04 on 4/3/2013 6:13:44 PM , Rating: 2
Explain how seeing your windows open while you launch an application is useful, please. Give me the use case for it.


RE: If only...
By Da W on 4/3/2013 3:06:09 PM , Rating: 2
Exactly
The whole start menu functionality is still Inside Windows and yoou need only a small program like start8 or startW8 to bring it back.
I did try it and and uninstalled it after 2 weeks, the start screen does enough for me.

With time there will be more W8 apps (and much less new traditional Windows desktop software) so the start screen will have more meaning and Windows RT will become more useful too.


RE: If only...
RE: If only...
By Belard on 4/3/2013 3:39:16 PM , Rating: 4
Because its STUPID to replace a Start Menu which took up little space with a more useless Start SCREEN... besides who the hell need a full screen to run a damn calculator?


RE: If only...
By althaz on 4/3/2013 4:05:08 PM , Rating: 2
The latter complaint is extremely valid...except that you aren't complaining about Win8 then, but about Metro Apps (a separate discussion).

Win8 is good, even though Metro Apps (which I don't use at all on the desktop) royally suck for real PCs (good for tablets though).


RE: If only...
By kaosstar on 4/5/2013 9:46:21 AM , Rating: 2
It's not a separate discussion because OSes are partially gauged by the included apps. Everything the OS is bundled with is fair game as far as I'm concerned. The vast majority of users will stick with the included apps.

As even many reviewers noted, the Windows 8 apps typically have less functionality than iOS 1.0 apps.


RE: If only...
By Motoman on 4/3/2013 4:09:30 PM , Rating: 1
Retards.

The whole damn thing is a Fisher-Price exercise in making a computer as stupid as it can possibly be.


RE: If only...
By kingmotley on 4/3/13, Rating: -1
RE: If only...
By GotThumbs on 4/3/13, Rating: 0
RE: If only...
By kleinma on 4/3/2013 4:10:24 PM , Rating: 1
I use calc extensively, which is why it is pinned to my taskbar like any app should be that you make common use of.

Now calc is 1 click away. What was it before for you in the start menu? At least 2 clicks if you had it pinned in start or it was in recent items list, otherwise it was several clicks, or a click on start and then you typing in calc.

Why are you so stuck in Windows 95 land. Use Windows 8 how it is supposed to be used and you will get things done faster.


RE: If only...
By Motoman on 4/3/2013 4:23:45 PM , Rating: 5
Nothing is faster in Win8. Everything of value that people point out that they can do in Win8, you can also do in Win7.

What you can't do in Win8, without a 3rd party product to fix the fatal flaw, is get the Start menu and therefore have easy access to all of your applications.

Win8 adds nothing of value, and makes it extremely hard to get anything done. Disputing that fact does nothing but label you as an idiot.

Win8 is only usable with Start8 or some other utility that returns the Start menu. Without that, Win8 is just a Fisher-Price toy designed for (and probably by) toddlers.


RE: If only...
By nikon133 on 4/3/2013 4:46:28 PM , Rating: 2
I cannot say if it is faster and how much, because I installed 8 on my new PC (which is naturally faster than previous one running under W7).

However, it does start so much faster I don't even bother putting it to sleep any more. I like that. I also like grouping of all admin tools under one right-click menu.

Re START screen, I personally like it. While I still use Outlook as my major email/calendar/... application, I also have Modern mail/calendar/... apps configured, so I know if I have new emails or incoming calendar entries without opening Outlook. I also like People Modern app functionality integration with Live, FB and Skype, as I use all of them to chat with friends over the world. Living in NZ, I'm usually too different time zone to voicechat with most of them frequently, but we leave messages daily. Instead of logging to each social site/app, I have them all in one place, and it updates automatically.

I don't have a problem to right-click on START screen and get ALL APPS, I don't see it as much different from ALL PROGRAMS in W7. In fact I'm finding this whole screen menu less claustrophobic than scrolling through W7 complete menu.

I also like grouping on START screen. For me, it is much more functional than pinned/last opened apps in W7 Start.

End of the day, all is down to personal preference. I understand your arguments, it is just that they don't impact me the way they seem to be impacting you, and I do see value in some of the new elements that obviously are not of any importance to you.


RE: If only...
By kleinma on 4/3/13, Rating: -1
RE: If only...
By Motoman on 4/3/2013 6:58:41 PM , Rating: 4
quote:
, how can I pause a long file copy to give preference to one I started after the first one?

Nice, but not worth putting up with the Metro UI for.

quote:
In Windows 7, where are my ribbon controls in explorer?

Exactly where they should be: nowhere. Another perfect example of a backwards step in functionality and usability.

quote:
Where is my advanced task manager in Windows 7

Again, nice, but not worth putting up with the Metro UI for.

The task manager is about the only thing I've seen in Win8 that I care about as an "enhancement." And in any case, there is *nothing* that Windows 8 could do that would justify tolerating the Metrosexual UI. The computer is essentially unusable with that UI on it, which for all the world looks like it was designed for a toy "laptop" that you buy for a 6-year old to play with.

The fact of the matter is that there is *nothing* that is easier in Win8 to do...and the more programs you have and/or the more advanced of a user you are, the worse it gets. If all you do is troll Facebook and play Farmville, I'm sure Win8 is great for you. Then again, if you tried hard enough you could probably get a toaster oven to do that these days.

For everyone over the age of 6, Win8 is just simply a trainwreck - and fanboys like you who protest that fact aren't changing anything. You're just outing yourselves as children.


RE: If only...
By nikon133 on 4/3/2013 8:52:06 PM , Rating: 1
You have some good arguments, but childish statements like that really don't do you any credit.

I'm working for small IT company, 20 people total. We have made Win 8 available for our staff back in September on voluntary basis, and pretty much everyone moved to it. In fact we had to pull the plug and keep two helpdesk support computers on Windows 7, just in case for whatever reason we might no be able to remote to customer's machine.

I am personally 45 years of age, moved my work PC back in September, my laptop in November, my home PC in January. I liked W7, but I would not go back to it. I really like W8. To extend my next phone will be WP8 and my next tablet Windows tablet.

Let me reassure you, we don't do child labour, no one below 6 here. In fact everyone in company is over 20.

We still don't have much W8 among customers, but those few among small businesses we have are fine. Took them a few days to get used to it, everyone at least content now.

Windows 8 has many improvements. Maybe none of them is defining quality on it's own, but put all together, they will offer more than decent reason to upgrade for people that don't have problem with Modern GUI; all the mentioned ones, and many unmentioned - like taskbar on both screens, for example.

I can accept that you personally don't like Modern GUI - and many others - but I'm finding it rather amusing that you seem incapable to accept some people do like it.


RE: If only...
By just4U on 4/24/2013 11:42:32 AM , Rating: 2
I would suggest that you talk to the people who are using it. I think you'd find that many "want to" like it but are also considering a switch back.

This is the best statement I've seen on windows 8 so far..

"the more advanced of a user you are, the worse it gets"

I am a early adopter of all Microsoft operating systems and to be honest I've never had a problem with any (including Windows ME) Until now. I wish I could like win8.. but at the end of the day it simply frustrates the hell out of me. Microsoft wants to integrate it's OS experience across all lines (I get it..) but giving their users a " 3 steps back" experience is not the way to go.


RE: If only...
By Makaveli on 4/4/2013 10:46:04 AM , Rating: 2
I use teracopy in windows 7 which allows me to pause file transfers.


RE: If only...
By ForceCredit on 4/3/2013 4:25:22 PM , Rating: 3
I feel it is important to point out that you could pin programs to the task bar in Windows 7 as well, also one click away. Looking backward, you could do that in Windows 95 using the quick launch toolbar, again one click away.


RE: If only...
By kleinma on 4/3/2013 4:53:57 PM , Rating: 2
Yup, and on my Windows 7 machine at work, that is exactly what I do. I have my taskbar 2 icons high, and my important programs (there area about 15 of them) are all pinned for 1 click access. The amount of time I spend in the start menu in Windows 7 is about the same amount of time i am ever in the start screen in Windows 8.


RE: If only...
By superflex on 4/3/2013 4:30:33 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
Now calc is 1 click away. What was it before for you in the start menu? At least 2 clicks if you had it pinned in start or it was in recent items list, otherwise it was several clicks, or a click on start and then you typing in calc.


Or you could make a shortcut and, voila, it's on your desktop, 1 click away.
Why are you stuck on stupid?


RE: If only...
By kmmatney on 4/4/2013 12:11:31 PM , Rating: 2
I don't like to pin Apps to my taskbar, I run with a lot of programs open, so my taskbar quickly fills up with my working windows, and I don't want to waste that space with shortcuts. I have a few things pinned there, but things like calculator, which I might not use everyday, it easier for me to use the start menu and type in calc.


RE: If only...
By ppardee on 4/3/2013 2:14:12 PM , Rating: 2
It's a good way of organizing what you need. The average computer user might just use a handful of applications, but a lot of us more technical people really like having access to our frequently used programs, all utilities and everything else on the computer, organized in a hierarchy.

For me, being able to do a Windows key + "calc" to pull up the calculator is huge. I don't want to have to drag through a list of gigantic icons to find the program I want. For the most part, I can pull up anything I want with 5 quick key strokes and it takes only a second. Killing the start menu removes this ability.


RE: If only...
By Flunk on 4/3/2013 2:35:21 PM , Rating: 1
That example also works in windows 8.

Win Key, type calc, push enter = calculator.

Are you sure you've even used Windows 8?


RE: If only...
By txDrum on 4/3/2013 2:45:18 PM , Rating: 2
You realize programs still launch in exactly the same way as they did in Windows 7? Your huge scenario still functions perfectly in W8.

W8 isn't some revolutionary change like 7 was over Vista. It's revolutionary in design, but not in functionality (for better or worse). If you have Windows 7, there isn't a huge need to upgrade. But there really isn't much of a need to go Windows 7 over Windows 8, if you spend enough time on it. The functionality is same if not -slightly- better, the scheduler is better, and the task manager is way better.


RE: If only...
By Luticus on 4/3/2013 2:56:38 PM , Rating: 2
One of the things I particularly love regarding the new start screen is in a multi monitor scenario the start screen can be moved from monitor to monitor so any screen can be used to launch any program. This is huge because sometimes I don't have my primary screen on and don't want to have to turn it on just to launch one program. Unlike the windows 7 start menu which is essentially glued to the primary monitor. I'm also a huge fan of the multi monitor taskbar in windows 8. So I would say that while there are pro's and con's for the new start screen, there are defiantly some use cases where the new system has a clear advantage.


RE: If only...
By kleinma on 4/3/2013 4:55:32 PM , Rating: 2
I hear this is going to be expanded further in 8.1 to allow metro apps and desktop apps to all be running side by side. As it is now, if you are in a metro app and click on the desktop on your other monitor, it brings up the desktop on both and minimizes metro. It is my understanding that won't be the case in 8.1


RE: If only...
By inighthawki on 4/3/2013 9:02:10 PM , Rating: 2
That is only true for the start screen, which will not stay open. Metro apps can co-exist just fine alongside the desktop in 8. (Not that it works that well anyway, tbh)


RE: If only...
By Makaveli on 4/4/2013 10:42:39 AM , Rating: 2
Ultramon fixed this on windows 7 you can have a start screen on both. This program + win7 > anything in windows 8 with multiple screens.


RE: If only...
By Luticus on 4/4/2013 4:09:04 PM , Rating: 2
Well as neat as that is, and I'm sure it is, I'm not using windows 7 anymore. On win 8 it's not that the "start menu" is on both, but that the start screen can be moved from monitor to monitor freely. IE: What happens when a user presses the "win" key with this program + win 7? In windows 8 the start screen appears on the monitor it's currently attached to and not on both.


RE: If only...
By theapparition on 4/3/2013 3:57:25 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
W8 isn't some revolutionary change like 7 was over Vista.

Hate to burst your bubble, but Win Vista to 7 was a very minor change. In fact, the most minor change MS ever did to an OS since Win89->Win98SE.

WinXP to Vista was a complete rewrite, which is also why Vista gets maligned for bad 3rd party drivers that either weren't available or didn't work. But all Win7 did was tweak the things consumers didn't particularly like with Vista.

I suspect Win8.1 will be similar.


RE: If only...
By Manch on 4/4/2013 1:46:44 AM , Rating: 2
also look at the build number between Vista & 7. I think if the Vista name hadn't gotten such a bad rap, 7 may have just been vista SP2


RE: If only...
By just4U on 4/24/2013 11:57:00 AM , Rating: 2
agreed


RE: If only...
By inighthawki on 4/3/2013 3:43:40 PM , Rating: 2
It's amazing how many people still think that this is the case. I don't even know how many times I've seen people prove others like you wrong, and yet there's always another person who proves to the world that they've never even used Windows 8 but complaining about how it's missing features that it actually has. Good job, you must feel proud.

Try installing Windows 8, then hit start and type "calc". I bet you will be shocked at the result. (Hint, it works)


RE: If only...
By Motoman on 4/3/2013 4:03:36 PM , Rating: 2
This again? You post that same "lolwut news to me" comment on every available thread - ignoring the many, MANY times that rational people have clearly described why the traditional desktop/Start menu is obviously superior to the Metrosexual UI.

Not doing it anymore. You're clearly not worth the pixels on the screen, since you'll just pretend you never saw such information the next time another thread rolls around.


RE: If only...
By inighthawki on 4/3/2013 9:05:29 PM , Rating: 2
Personally I've never seen much of a valid argument. "Being able to see the windows at the same time" actually isn't as much of an argument as you think. In eye tracking tests Microsoft showed that virtually nobody ever looks anywhere outside of the start menu when it's open. Why not use the entire screen realestate and provide a much better program layout?


RE: If only...
By Motoman on 4/4/2013 4:46:55 PM , Rating: 1
I have no idea what you're referring to with "Being able to see the windows at the same time."

But this strikes me as the best possible demonstration of how clueless Microsoft, and their fanboys are, in defending the Metrosexual UI:

quote:
In eye tracking tests Microsoft showed that virtually nobody ever looks anywhere outside of the start menu when it's open.


...really? Let's think about that for a moment, shall we? First of all, unless you, the user, have made a deliberate action to open the Start menu, it's not open. Ergo, you wouldn't be looking at it. Secondly, if you, the user, did purposefully open the Start menu, it would be because you're looking for something - like the program you want to launch. Ergo...you're going to be looking at it. Once you launch said program, the Start menu closes and then - gasp - you're not looking at it anymore.

You'd make just as much sense by saying something like "Microsoft's studies have determined that people only drink when their mouths are open - and when their mouths are closed, they aren't drinking."

Get. A. F%cking. Clue.


RE: If only...
By inighthawki on 4/5/2013 1:29:13 AM , Rating: 2
Are you seriously so ignorant as to say "I don't understand what you mean but I'd like to counter your argument"?

The retardism in your post is absolutely astounding. One of the most common complaints about the start screen is that it's fullscreen and thus people can no longer have it open and see active desktop windows at the same time. The eye tracking test disproves that people actually do this.

It's like you just walked into a situation where you have zero context of an argument and randomly took someone's side with an argument that makes no sense. Wow.


RE: If only...
By Motoman on 4/5/2013 3:11:53 PM , Rating: 2
You don't read much, do you?

I started off with your first point - noted that I don't know what you meant by it, and moved on to *another* point. I didn't refute it or even make any further comments about it...because I don't know what it is.

I then moved on to a quote directly taken from your post and then debunked it. Utterly. Your "analysis" of the "eye tracking test" is complete gibberish - in fact, what that test shows is that the LAST thing you want to do is to cover the whole monitor with a "start screen" - because people ONLY want to look at that very infrequently.

It's like you just walked into some conversation, ignored what you just heard someone say, and then went off completely in the wrong direction. Oh wait...that is what you just did.
You don


RE: If only...
By inighthawki on 4/5/2013 9:43:03 PM , Rating: 2
Apparently you don't get it, because they weren't two separate points, the second part of my post was in direct relation to the first thing I said. Therefore if you didn't get the first thing, you cannot possibly provide a valid comment against the second part. Understanding the first point is prerequisite knowledge for an informed response against the second.

The fact that people are always looking at the start menu while it's open is reason for expanding it to use the full screen real estate instead of a small area. If people don't look anywhere else while using it, it's wasted space.


RE: If only...
By just4U on 4/24/2013 12:04:49 PM , Rating: 2
I find the not knowing which windows are open a huge nuisance. Especially since I tend to have tons open all at once and than close them down upon leaving my computer. A quick look below on win7 shows me roughly what I all got open. Can't see that in win8.

M.. would likely hate that as well. Very frustrating.


RE: If only...
By just4U on 4/24/2013 12:24:09 PM , Rating: 2
I only spent a few days with win8. I'd have to re-install it to refresh all the things I disliked about it. Off the top of my head, The security feature account was puzzling and hard to set up (especially if it's not going to be your computer) Setting up ISP email accounts was harsh and should have been easy. The fade out on the right to access your menus and power user features is irritating, as is not seeing what you all have open..

Jumping to the desktop is disappointing in almost every regard since it's mostly useless (except maybe for browsing the internet if you don't like the built metro look)Installing 3rd party cheesy "bring back the start menu" programs is at best so so.. I'd prefer that to be a Microsoft implementation. Finally, many of the commands that have moved forward with windows simply don't work as they once did which was MS's saving grace. The ability to do everything a 100 different ways since users all have different approaches for getting at what they want to do.

The OS is tailored around tablets and phones but sort of expects the desktop user to re-learn everything. That's not a great approach by Microsoft when you consider the millions upon millions of desktop users out there. The learning curve should have been reversed. Or at the very least they should have made sure that desktop users had some bones thrown their way for points of reference.


RE: If only...
By LRonaldHubbs on 4/4/13, Rating: -1
RE: If only...
By Hakuryu on 4/3/2013 4:11:21 PM , Rating: 2
Well for one thing, it doesn't look like a menu from a Leapfrog toy for children.


RE: If only...
By AstroCreep on 4/3/2013 5:44:49 PM , Rating: 2
My experience is just that people are hesitant to change. No, it's not like the "Good ol' Start Menu", but it still does the same job as the old one (albeit in a "Prettier" fashion). Most people who I know who are still clinging to the classic Start Menu, but who have been using Windows 8/Server 2012 say it's because it's not as "Intuitive" for them as the old Start Menu. My argument is "It's different, but you'll get used to it". Not a strong argument, but it is true.

Case-in-point: I bought a Surface Pro a few weeks ago and I'm getting used to the Windows 8 UI, but I'll state that I think it is the most functional with a touchscreen. Mouse still works fine, but it's not as good of an experience.

I like the new UI okay; I can use it, but there are plenty of times that simply having the classic Start Menu there would be handy when opening apps (again, because it is what I am used to), as I understand the whole "Creatures of Habit" phenomena.

If Microsoft REALLY wanted people to start adopting Windows 8 they would give back the classic Start Menu and give a choice as to which start menu you want; "Classic" for the old Start Menu, and "Touch" for the new Windows 8 UI ("Having your cake and eating it). That would potentially neuter the "Metro-App" experience, but I'm sure they could find a way to "Launch" the new (or old, for that matter) Start Menu on demand.


RE: If only...
By LRonaldHubbs on 4/4/2013 11:48:30 AM , Rating: 1
quote:
If Microsoft REALLY wanted people to start adopting Windows 8 they would give back the classic Start Menu and give a choice as to which start menu you want; "Classic" for the old Start Menu, and "Touch" for the new Windows 8 UI ("Having your cake and eating it). That would potentially neuter the "Metro-App" experience, but I'm sure they could find a way to "Launch" the new (or old, for that matter) Start Menu on demand.

Why would they put effort into that when:
1) the new UI works fine and people who are not PC savvy (most of the market) love it
2) anyone who cares can easily do this themselves in about 2 minutes

I personally know several people who have bought new Windows 8 computers. My advice to all of them was to give it a try, and if they didn't like it I'd help them install a 3rd party start menu tool. All of them love Metro.


RE: If only...
By kmmatney on 4/4/2013 11:58:25 AM , Rating: 2
I like the start menu as it automatically creates short-cuts to my most heavily used programs, and these short-cuts have sub-menus with all my recently loaded projects. This is very convenient, and allows me to keep my desktop clean.

I'm using Windows 8 with Classic-shell. I could live without a start menu, but then I'd have to have a messier desktop with a lot of shortcuts.

I do agree that the absence of a start menu is not a valid excuse to avoid Windows 8, since you can add one so easily.


RE: If only...
By zaaf on 4/3/2013 2:39:15 PM , Rating: 3
http://www.softpedia.com/get/Tweak/System-Tweak/St...

It's free. Try it, you'll like it and never look back.


RE: If only...
By Motoman on 4/3/2013 4:26:29 PM , Rating: 3
I haven't used that exact product, but yes - you've hit the nail on the head.

Put the Start menu and desktop back on Windows 8, and it suddenly becomes useful. Without it...it's not.


RE: If only...
By LRonaldHubbs on 4/4/2013 11:52:06 AM , Rating: 1
quote:
Put the Start menu and desktop back on Windows 8, and it suddenly becomes useful. Without it...it's not.

Lies.


RE: If only...
By LRonaldHubbs on 4/4/2013 11:52:51 AM , Rating: 2
An additional lie tucked in here is the notion that the desktop is somehow missing from Win8 without this tool. Complete and utter BS.


RE: If only...
By Jeffk464 on 4/3/2013 4:35:04 PM , Rating: 2
they would allow us to use the good old start menu, Windows 8 would sell a lot more!! I would buy it.

use classic shell, it functions just like win7.


RE: If only...
By Da W on 4/3/2013 5:00:58 PM , Rating: 2
How much time have you people wasted complaining about a damn start menu that you can get back with a 5$ program is incredible.
Just don't buy it if you don't like it. Then the free market should do it's job, everybody will move to linux or Chrome or macs and Microsoft will go out of buisness.
Or may be... Windows 8 format will eventually catch on and you will be left alone in the dark.

Written from my Surface Pro with Windows 8 which i like.


RE: If only...
By Reclaimer77 on 4/3/2013 6:15:47 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
How much time have you people wasted complaining about a damn start menu that you can get back with a 5$ program is incredible.


And you don't see how having to do that validates everything the "complainers" are saying?

The fact that those programs even exist speaks volumes. Or would if your head wasn't up your ass.


RE: If only...
By LRonaldHubbs on 4/4/2013 12:03:46 PM , Rating: 1
As a user of both Win8 and Start8, I will point out that it does not validate everything the "complainers" are saying. Your logic in drawing this conclusion is broken. All it validates is the fact that some people want to keep the older interface. It doesn't mean that the old interface is preferred by everyone or even by most people. In reality, people who are not tech savvy (which is most of the PC market) love the Metro interface.

You can find 3rd party tools out there to change virutally every aspect of Windows, and that's been the case for every release of Windows. The existence of one such tool does not in any way prove that said tool offers the single best experience. In some cases the tool may well offer just that, but its mere existence does not prove such.


RE: If only...
By Motoman on 4/3/2013 7:01:03 PM , Rating: 1
We're not Apple users. It's not our job to fix the mind-blowing flaws in Microsoft's products.

Although...clearly we either have to, in order to make them usable...or actually move to a different platform. Which becomes a more viable option every day, apparently...


RE: If only...
By Pirks on 4/4/2013 5:56:05 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
Which becomes a more viable option every day
mototroll switches to mac? wow! LOL hahaha ahahaaaa


RE: If only...
By Motoman on 4/4/2013 10:18:04 PM , Rating: 2
In reality, brainful people will stick with Win7. Start8 et al make Win8 usable.

If somehow, in some way, there was no way to stick with Win7, and no way to fix Win8, I (and the vast majority of everybody) would switch to something else...Mac or Linux. Hopefully Linux...but if it was either out-of-the-box Win8 or a Mac, I'd buy a Mac.

...or more likely build a Hackintosh.

Thankfully, Win7 will be plenty available for many years yet...and of course we do actually have Start8 and all the other utilities to fix Win8. Microsoft is going to survive this only by virtue of the fact that someone else is stepping up and fixing their mistakes.


RE: If only...
By Justin Time on 4/3/2013 4:54:04 PM , Rating: 2
Just add Stardock's Start8 and ModernMix utilities, and you're good to go.


RE: If only...
By Ammohunt on 4/3/2013 5:45:48 PM , Rating: 2
Translation: Just spend more money to add legacy UI features Windows 8 should have had out of the box like all previous Windows releases.


RE: If only...
By Motoman on 4/3/2013 7:04:34 PM , Rating: 1
Forget "legacy UI features." The Start menu is the optimal form. That branch of evolution is over. Any deviation from that to something else is necessarily a defect.


RE: If only...
By Ammohunt on 4/4/2013 11:34:06 AM , Rating: 2
Well to play devils advocate Microsoft is often criticized for not innovating. Windows 8's UI could be considered innovation just in a very obtuse and stupid way. I know that a lot of people (including myself) didn't at first like the newer start menu XP presented but they had the option of using the legacy start menu. If the metro UI is better then people would have naturally gravitated to it. My guess is that Microsoft went so far down the path with metro then realized that is was total crap and decided to force it on everyone rather than provide people a way out with the traditional UI.


RE: If only...
By Motoman on 4/4/2013 4:51:41 PM , Rating: 2
Is inventing a square wheel "innovation?"

Because, you know, everybody is *so* over the whole round-wheel thing.

Wheels are round because that's the optimal form.

The Metrosexual UI is a square wheel. Did someone "innovate" that? Sure...if you want to be ridiculous in the application of that word.

It's different. It's new. But neither of those things in any way guarantee that it's better than what came before. That's the problem with the children who think the Metrosexual UI is "good." All they can see is that it's new - and their peabrains automatically make the jump from "new" to "good" because they're not actually capable of their own critical thought processes.


RE: If only...
By karimtemple on 4/4/2013 1:53:56 PM , Rating: 2
LOL, I dislike the Start Screen as well, but this is a pretty silly thing to say. Let's not get crazy.


RE: If only...
By xti on 4/3/2013 5:19:34 PM , Rating: 2
Win8 doesnt need a start menu to sell.

Win8 needs a $500 Windows Pro tablet solution in the market. Otherwise, consumers are getting everything they need from iPads, android tablets, and leftover $400 laptops from 2-3 years ago. No, the RT isn't going to cut it because win Phones users, and windows 7/8 x86s users, get nothign from adding a 3rd OS to the mix.

tldr - start menu =/= sales.


RE: If only...
By BZDTemp on 4/4/2013 7:54:18 AM , Rating: 2
I was skeptical at first but the silly thing is that you'll hardly miss the start menu once you get used to Windows 8. Plus the new features in 8 more than makes up for the loss :-)


RE: If only...
By Arsynic on 4/4/2013 9:23:00 AM , Rating: 2
Please shut the hell up about the start menu. It's done. It's gone. It's never going to come back. Get over it or kill yourself.


Fixed Search Groupings?
By Flunk on 4/3/2013 1:56:41 PM , Rating: 2
Fixing the search groupings to make it less annoying to find control panel settings is my #1 want for Windows 8. I'm so happy Microsoft is adding in this feature.

Not only that 8.1 is such an incremental update that they're going to have to give it to us for free.




RE: Fixed Search Groupings?
By lagomorpha on 4/3/2013 2:06:57 PM , Rating: 2
So is 8.1 going to basically be "Windows 8 Service Pack 1" and a free update or are they actually selling this as a brand new OS? Please tell me they aren't immitating Apple and charging for updates.


RE: Fixed Search Groupings?
By Argon18 on 4/3/13, Rating: -1
RE: Fixed Search Groupings?
By Luticus on 4/3/2013 2:51:53 PM , Rating: 5
Wow, did you seriously just say Apple's minor updates are free and then yell about Microsoft for charging for new versions? You do realize every major version of osx has been paid right? Also LESS changed from osx 10.7 to osx 10.8 than ANY windows increment. The windows XP service packes, especially 2 and 3 were HUGE and completely free. Those services packs alone added more features and security fixes than ANY of the osx paid updates in the last 10 years. Not to mention that once Apple is on their new OS everything before then is old news and basically doesn't exist to them anymore. Microsoft on the other hand STILL releases critical security updates for XP (ending in 2014), Vista, and 7.

So yea... I don't think you much know what you're talking about.

As for 8.1 I'm betting that it's something like a service pack and will be free to upgrade to through windows update.


RE: Fixed Search Groupings?
By Argon18 on 4/3/13, Rating: -1
RE: Fixed Search Groupings?
By Digimonkey on 4/3/2013 4:57:50 PM , Rating: 4
Are you under the impression that point releases are major updates, or are you trying to argue the fact that Apple won't charge you for them? I'm confused.


RE: Fixed Search Groupings?
By Luticus on 4/4/2013 4:14:03 PM , Rating: 2
I think he's confused. Why is it that anytime someone argues against a point they are automatically a "fanboy" or a "microsoftie" whatever the hell that is? For the record, I'm a universalist. A computer is a computer to me, the operating system is irrelevant. I can and do use pretty much all of them in both my day to day life and professionally. My preferred desktop is actually KDE (after my heavy modifications are made).


RE: Fixed Search Groupings?
By Newspapercrane on 4/3/2013 2:53:57 PM , Rating: 4
Snow Leopard...
Lion...
Mountain Lion...
All OSX...
All cost money to upgrade to.


RE: Fixed Search Groupings?
By BRB29 on 4/3/2013 2:56:41 PM , Rating: 5
but they put a cool name on it so it's premium!


RE: Fixed Search Groupings?
By Belard on 4/3/13, Rating: -1
RE: Fixed Search Groupings?
By andrewaggb on 4/3/2013 4:34:52 PM , Rating: 2
not entirely true, windows live was upgraded continually and ms security essentials, and that was all free as well. Too bad most of windows live sucks


RE: Fixed Search Groupings?
By lagomorpha on 4/4/2013 7:27:10 AM , Rating: 5
Only in Apple world are visual updates considered more important and significant than security patches.


RE: Fixed Search Groupings?
By johnsmith9875 on 4/8/2013 2:25:36 PM , Rating: 2
Apple security patches are free.


RE: Fixed Search Groupings?
By datdamonfoo on 4/3/2013 2:09:38 PM , Rating: 2
Uh, how hard is it for you to find control panel settings?

It's the exact same on Windows 7.

Win key + "con" + enter


RE: Fixed Search Groupings?
By Flunk on 4/3/2013 2:37:21 PM , Rating: 2
No, it's not. If I type in win key then "system" I don't get anything. I need to click a "settings" button. Con doesn't bring me to the applet I want, only to another screen I need to then search a second time. The change they're making in 8.1 fixes this.

READ the comment being typing.


RE: Fixed Search Groupings?
By ipay on 4/3/2013 3:32:42 PM , Rating: 2
Nope! If you have something else installed with
"control" in it like... I dunno... Catalyst Control Center since you have an AMD based GPU, then that app is defaulted. "Ca" is alphabetically before "co".


RE: Fixed Search Groupings?
By Luticus on 4/3/2013 3:49:30 PM , Rating: 2
The easiest way I know to get to the control panel is to go to the desktop and do win + i (settings charm) then click control panel on the right.


RE: Fixed Search Groupings?
By Digimonkey on 4/4/2013 1:01:11 PM , Rating: 2
You can also right click on the bottom left of either the desktop, or modern UI and click Control Panel. I use that method to open a lot of system tools.


RE: Fixed Search Groupings?
By andrewaggb on 4/3/2013 4:31:50 PM , Rating: 2
I agree the unified search will be nice, the old way annoyed me. windows+w works but it wasn't as straight forward.


I'm excited for it.
By stm1185 on 4/3/2013 1:40:52 PM , Rating: 2
I bought Windows 8 Pro during their $40 sale. Been using it, but I installed Star Dock Start8, and I almost never use the Start Screen. So I am curious to see if Windows 8.1 can make that experience work well enough I give up the start button.




RE: I'm excited for it.
By crimson117 on 4/3/2013 1:59:39 PM , Rating: 3
quote:
I bought Windows 8 Pro during their $40 sale. Been using it, but I installed Star Dock Start8, and I almost never use the Start Screen. So I am curious to see if Windows 8.1 can make that experience work well enough I give up the start button.
I really wanted that start screen to work, but I felt like I had too little control over its contents, and at the same time too little knowledge of how to use it (or even access it).


RE: I'm excited for it.
By Ramstark on 4/3/2013 3:09:14 PM , Rating: 2
That's the single, most honest comment about the new "Start Screen" in Windows 8 I have ever read in DT.

Thank you for not being a tool and just yell that you don't know how MS got rid of "ye 'ol start menu"

I'm looking forward to even more customization options in Windows 8.1 for the whole OS. It's going to be a much better experience.


RE: I'm excited for it.
By Belard on 4/3/2013 4:23:21 PM , Rating: 2
Hey, check this out... I spent $0 and kept Windows7 and didn't need to add some hack-add on to fix a broken OS.

Win7 = same performance and almost same memory footprint... but hey, 16GB of RAM costs half the price of Win8Pro upgrade.


RE: I'm excited for it.
By stm1185 on 4/3/2013 11:49:06 PM , Rating: 2
I like the new desktop design a lot too. It's clean, efficient and well laid out. Task Manage, File Transfer, new device pop up, all the little things have been improved on the desktop side. It also boots faster, shut downs faster, and so on and so forth.

Win8 to me is well worth the $45 I spent on it for how it improves on almost every windows desktop function I do.

But if you want to keep mindlessly hating it go ahead, you are the one missing out.


RE: I'm excited for it.
By johnsmith9875 on 4/8/2013 2:26:27 PM , Rating: 2
Thats what Server 2012 is, Windows 8 with the tiles/metro interface disabled.


Where is Windows?
By Belard on 4/3/2013 4:27:09 PM , Rating: 1
So... why call it Windows at all? There are no Windows in Metro / TIFKAM...

Its cheaper and easier to get LinuxMint... it costs $0.




RE: Where is Windows?
By Digimonkey on 4/4/2013 8:28:01 AM , Rating: 2
Why do you insist on commenting about an OS you apparently know nothing about?

It's quicker and easier not to post.


Huzzah!
By althaz on 4/3/2013 4:00:48 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
Where Windows 8 made you pick between "Apps, Settings, or Files" , the new search does away with that, allowing you to start typing immediately. Instead of pre-selecting the category, it simply clumps the results by category.

Yes! This was probably the only legitimate complaint I had with Win8 vs Win7 (there's other things that can improve, but this was the only thing that was actually worse than Win7).

So glad it's going to be fixed.




no thanks
By carigis on 4/3/2013 4:32:26 PM , Rating: 2
funny.. this is the first windows beta that I have no interest in even trying. anything branching off windows 8 is going to be crap... oh well, I hope windows 7 lasts even longer then XP.




Windows Fixed
By Lord 666 on 4/3/2013 4:40:07 PM , Rating: 2
With the blue cover, reminds me of the NIN Fixed disc.




The Folly of the Start Screen
By karimtemple on 4/4/2013 9:46:19 AM , Rating: 2
Let's see if I can explain this properly.

The problem people have with the Start Screen often seems difficult for them to explain because the situation is unconscious and actually a little complicated. The Start Screen has a lot going for it, but its hangups are just too much for most people to swallow.

Input

It starts before the Start Screen itself, with input and input methodology. Something I think about a lot is the future of input and how we can finally evolve beyond the keyboard and mouse. The short answer is: we can't. KB/M is stupidly efficient, and the only reason we use touch on handhelds is because keyboards and mice are so huge (aside: this is why I think the Surface Pro/touch cover is so amazing). Touch still sucks butts compared to KB/M. Voice control is even stupider, and really kind of corny. Probably better than gesticulation, though. The keyboard and mouse are so insanely efficient that there are really only two options for moving on:

1) Evolving the keyboard and mouse. I personally think this to be training everyone (especially children) on how to use some kind of new handheld bar designed to be a single-handed shorthand device (similar to a stenography machine). It'd have "air mouse" tech for pointing and gestures. This would be perfect for glasses-based computing (Google Glass etc). It would require a LOT of training lol, and some pretty ingenious design.

2) The final frontier of interface: Non-invasive BCI (brain-computer interface). There's nothing past this. Cameras imitate the eye and you put your eye to them to use them; microphones imitate the mouth and you put your mouth to them to use them; computers imitate the brain, but there are technological barriers still to putting your brain to them to use them. We put our brains to them right now by proxy with our hands and mouths (and eyes, shortly), but these are all just stopgap measures on the way to non-invasive BCI.

All of this is to illustrate the problem with the input methodology of the Start Screen -- it's designed for touch. This is awesome if your target is a touch device, except Microsoft targeted everything with this including desktops and laptops. So now we're seeing laptops come out with touch screens, which is about as useful and smart as a cellphone with a keyboard and mouse hanging off of it.

The goal should've been to make Aero Glass portable and touch-effective. Even the 'fragmentation' of separate desktop/laptop and touch interfaces would've been better than this. The point of Windows 8 was achieved as soon as MS unified the code bases of 8/RT/Phone. They didn't need a unified interface at all.

The interface works on the Xbox; anyone who has one can tell you that. It makes the PS3 look like a cellphone from 2002. But the Xbox doesn't have [read: normally use] a mouse, it just has a keypad. And the interface is well-organized by default into categories based on a strong agenda, made possible by the fact that it has focused purposes because it's a console.

Design

Then you have the design. It's stupid. It comes from a good place -- the Metro UI design philosophy (also called Modern UI), the result of probably about 20 years of what I personally consider to be some of the best work Microsoft has done -- but it goes off into a bad direction with the Start Screen. The Start Screen also actually breaks one of the core philosophies of Metro UI, which is text-based navigation. It just uses blocks. My favorite Metro-based product is Windows Media Center (Vista/7/8). To this day it's the cleanest, smoothest, most effective 10-foot UI. It even works extremely well with either mouse or keypad (remote) controls. It follows the Metro UI philosophy. It's attractive.

It's apparent that someone realized that digital skeuomorphs are bad form for advanced user interfaces, but the problem is they took that epiphany and went completely nuts with it, cannibalizing Aero Glass (which really just needed an update) and crushing everything into squares and solid colors. At least on the Xbox, there's stuff everywhere and the blocks all have stuff going on in them. The Xbox even utilizes the text-based navigation philosophy (you press up to access the text navigation which takes you between categories).

Aesthetics are widely regarded as unique to each person, but what any professional in that area can tell you is that they're based on some pretty solid and universal themes. Every human has a human brain, after all. But this? It's just flat in shape and in color and has no real organizational structure by default (on the initial screen). Stacks of solid-colored blocks, arranged in the picture version of a "wall of text" with no paragraphing (by default), hardly follow any of those themes. At the very least, the Start Button provided a clear and functional structure.

It might help to force the user to design an organizational agenda at the OOBE, I dunno, but you'd still have the problem of everything just looking really flat and silly. What should've happened is they should've taken whatever they thought they were accomplishing with the Start Screen and found a way to apply those philosophies to Aero Glass. The "glass" in Aero Glass is the only skeuomorphism in it, having none of the drawbacks of heavy skeuomorphism, and is a lot more attractive than anything Microsoft has done with Windows before or since. Considering the power aesthetics have on the unconscious mind, a re-engineered Aero Glass is really one of the best bets Microsoft has for re-establishing Windows as a must-buy product going forward.




Touch only problem maybe?
By uallas5 on 4/4/2013 10:43:08 AM , Rating: 1
quote:
Where Windows 8 made you pick between "Apps, Settings, or Files" , the new search does away with that, allowing you to start typing immediately. Instead of pre-selecting the category, it simply clumps the results by category.


Never had to do this, I just press the Win key and start typing and Win8 starts searching.

I personally prefer the Start Screen over a menu. I have it organized in groups, i.e. MS Office, Games, etc. It makes it much easier to start the program I want than a menu did. This, in combination with my most used programs being pinned to the task bar is very productive for me.

If it doesn't work for someone, fine. I understand that as I would hope they understand that it works for me. But unfortunately any article about Win8 gets bogged down with needless bitching and moaning with very little constructive commentary. To the people in that category, I don't care anymore than I care that you love/hate Apple/Microsoft/Linux/Android, etc., etc., etc.




"Paying an extra $500 for a computer in this environment -- same piece of hardware -- paying $500 more to get a logo on it? I think that's a more challenging proposition for the average person than it used to be." -- Steve Ballmer

Related Articles













botimage
Copyright 2014 DailyTech LLC. - RSS Feed | Advertise | About Us | Ethics | FAQ | Terms, Conditions & Privacy Information | Kristopher Kubicki