you do know you can still get all programs and stuff right in the start screen
 

I could care less about the start button. About the only thing I do through that is restart or shutdown.
It's just not an impressive os in any respect that I am aware of. Glad you like it bud but you are just wasting your time here trying to convince people of it's greatness.

Nereus
...Again, I use the "pin to start menu" as my primary W7 navigation, and then click on "all programs" from there for my lesser-used applications. I do not like to clutter up the task bar or cover my desktop with links. The task bar is primarily for active applications, not links - that's how it was designed by Microsoft! Many many many people use the Start Orb the same way as I do. If you do not, then good for you, I'm sure you'll love W8 and the smartphone-like GUI, but please stop lecturing us that our preferences are invalid - they are no less valid than your own. I don't mind change at all - I think change is good - when it is constructive. As others have said, this just feels like change for the sake of change, and that is rarely a good thing.

Interesting, because this goes directly against the grain of how I and most of the folks I know use Start, the Task Bar and the Desktop itself: No one I know likes to drill down through a series of menus to get to the apps they commonly use. It's like having to click through multiple entries or pages on a Web Page, or dealing with sites that break down a two-page article into 33 paragraph-sized pages stuffed full of ads and overlays, or menus that overwhelm you with choices.
 
Funny. By the time I lay out the half-dozen full-time apps and set up a couple of folders to contain less-than-every-day-but-still-kinda-often apps, I seem to have a couple of "tiles" on the Desktop, while double-clicking a folder is like "swiping" to another page.
 
Funnier still is that no one seems able to make those "connections" between such similar actions.
 
And on how many forums have you read folks complaining they cannot do a specific task with just one click of the mouse, two clicks are too much effort, and can someone generate a script that won't force a double-click? (A second mouse click, for crap's sake - too much effort?)
 
The Task Bar has indeed changed from its debut, but I for one am glad of it and so is the "herd". The left-side Quick Launch has the four things I'm most likely to use in the middle of something else, like IE, WMP and Image Composer. The right side keeps me informed of Services and particular control panels. Both sides can be set up to use either the minimal amount of space or the maximal, according to your preferences - you can even choose NOT to use some at all. And then you have the entire mid-section (and it's fairly obvious that no one here uses anything but a wide screen any longer) with which to actively control primary running tasks in many more ways than was possible with the Task Bar's debut.
 
Now, to me and all of the folks I know, that's a Task Bar.
 
This whole thread is beginning to sound less and less like a comparison of feature sets "for the sake of change" and more and more like simple, knee-jerk reactions that are but manifestations of the Human Nature to totally resist change of any sort...

jaafaman

Nereus
...Again, I use the "pin to start menu" as my primary W7 navigation, and then click on "all programs" from there for my lesser-used applications. I do not like to clutter up the task bar or cover my desktop with links. The task bar is primarily for active applications, not links - that's how it was designed by Microsoft! Many many many people use the Start Orb the same way as I do. If you do not, then good for you, I'm sure you'll love W8 and the smartphone-like GUI, but please stop lecturing us that our preferences are invalid - they are no less valid than your own. I don't mind change at all - I think change is good - when it is constructive. As others have said, this just feels like change for the sake of change, and that is rarely a good thing.

Interesting, because this goes directly against the grain of how I and most of the folks I know use Start, the Task Bar and the Desktop itself: No one I know likes to drill down through a series of menus to get to the apps they commonly use. It's like having to click through multiple entries or pages on a Web Page, or dealing with sites that break down a two-page article into 33 paragraph-sized pages stuffed full of ads and overlays, or menus that overwhelm you with choices.

Funny. By the time I lay out the half-dozen full-time apps and set up a couple of folders to contain less-than-every-day-but-still-kinda-often apps, I seem to have a couple of "tiles" on the Desktop, while double-clicking a folder is like "swiping" to another page.

Funnier still is that no one seems able to make those "connections" between such similar actions.

And on how many forums have you read folks complaining they cannot do a specific task with just one click of the mouse, two clicks are too much effort, and can someone generate a script that won't force a double-click? (A second mouse click, for crap's sake - too much effort?)

The Task Bar has indeed changed from its debut, but I for one am glad of it and so is the "herd". The left-side Quick Launch has the four things I'm most likely to use in the middle of something else, like IE, WMP and Image Composer. The right side keeps me informed of Services and particular control panels. Both sides can be set up to use either the minimal amount of space or the maximal, according to your preferences - you can even choose NOT to use some at all. And then you have the entire mid-section (and it's fairly obvious that no one here uses anything but a wide screen any longer) with which to actively control primary running tasks in many more ways than was possible with the Task Bar's debut.

Now, to me and all of the folks I know, that's a Task Bar.

This whole thread is beginning to sound less and less like a comparison of feature sets "for the sake of change" and more and more like simple, knee-jerk reactions that are but manifestations of the Human Nature to totally resist change of any sort...

Maybe you should read my message again - slowly this time. Click the Start Orb and you are there - that is where I pin my commonly used applications - there is no "drilling down through a series of menus to get to the apps I commonly use" - just ONE CLICK and I'm there - not even a double click as you just proclaimed is so great about W8 lol... perhaps you never learned how to use the Start menu to your advantage? The rest of your commentary falls flat since it's based on a misinformed assumption.
 
You do realize the task bar and start menu are two separate things, right? LOL.. wow.
 
If the way I use the Start menu (click the orb buddy) goes directly against the grain of how you and most of the folks you know use Start, maybe you should get out and meet some more people :-)  Seriously, maybe you should try my method; it's very convenient, and does not clutter up the task bar with applications you are not using, but instead the taskbar is used for open/active applications/windows rather than links to apps you don't need every second of the day. Pinning to the Start Menu instead (just click the orb once and you're there) is where you can put your commonly-used app links so they are not in the way when you don't need them.. just common sense.
 
As far as the desktop goes - that's up to you.. I prefer to keep my desktop clean and use the features W7 provides for easy navigation, rather than minimize all my open windows/apps to get to the desktop first.. which is yet another argument for using the orb/start menu. Note - I did say you can pin a couple of items to the taskbar, like browser & email, and I guess if that's all you use your PC for then that may be all you need.. I tend to use my PC for a lot more than that.. otherwise I'd just get a tablet with W8 on it.. LMAO..!
 
BTW, the "funny how this" and "funny how that" sarcasm really wasn't necessary.. particularly when you were arguing an incorrect point about how to use the Start Menu / orb, lol.
 
 

Nereus
BTW, the "funny how this" and "funny how that" sarcasm really wasn't necessary.. particularly when you were arguing an incorrect point about how to use the Start Menu / orb, lol.

Missed the point again by wearing the blinders to your own situation, then.
 
How you set up any of them beyond default is your concern and your practice. It does not always apply to the common man and helps separate enthusiasts and power users from average desktops.
"If the way I use the Start menu (click the orb buddy) goes directly against the grain of how you and most of the folks you know use Start, maybe you should get out and meet some more people :-) Seriously, maybe you should try my method; it's very convenient, and does not clutter up the task bar with applications you are not using, but instead the taskbar is used for open/active applications/windows rather than links to apps you don't need every second of the day. Pinning to the Start Menu instead (just click the orb once and you're there) is where you can put your commonly-used app links so they are not in the way when you don't need them.. just common sense..."
 
I recall having listed Desktop, Start and Task Bar as separate elements, then moved to show how I bypass the Start altogether to concentrate on the other two.
 
I have tried your method - which doesn't work for me. Nor does it take into consideration how I use my system. Or organize it. Which is why I covered my own situation and not yours.
 
And obviously "common sense" is not all that "common" these days.
 
I can comment on the folks I know, you can comment on the folks you know, but since we have no clue as to each other's world it's nothing but petty to start offering such intimate advice as to "get out and meet more people".
 
Do you have any other plan of attack, or is that it?...

 
LOL well no - no attack. You started by telling me I had to "drill down through a series of menus to get to the apps I commonly use", which is simply not true. I corrected you. Call it an attack if it makes you feel better, lol.
 
FYI - default behavior in W7 is to list the MRU apps in that same place - if the apps are commonly used, then they will be there even if you don't pin them there, so again, your comment about defaults still doesn't help your argument. Sorry.
 

Riiigghht...
 
Well, I don't see this conversation going anywhere...

 
Nereus is right that is default for windows7 and I know many who use start button menu the same way it is only 1 click to get to commonly used programs. Windows 8 looks good for tablet use but it is backwards step for 'power users' which must mean anyone who uses computer for any thing more than basic tasks! You are wrong about start menu button jaafaman. 
 

notuptome2004


ok well so tell me just as other forums have disused    tell me one thing the start screen cant do the old  start menu did.  


Oh wait  you cant because the Start screen does everything the start menu did  but more and  better .

Oh here is a screenshot of the windows  8  RP  from another forum on flauting windows 8 desktop someone using  a start menu program and working well for those who must have  the old start menu 

 
That is most likely Stardock's Start8. It may work for now but M$ has already stated that it will actively patch any exploit that allows users to regain this feature.  M$ has made their stance clear on this. They do not want the start menu in W8 and are willing to do what ever it takes to keep it from happening.  So while you may gain this functionality with a third party application for now. It is on borrowed time and will like many other well loved features of former OS's will be trampled on my Metro.
 
The thing is I really would like to know exactly how small their survey panel was in determining that users are not using the start menu enough to the point of removing its code from the OS entirely was considered a good idea.  My personal thought on it is they just decided to pull an Apple move with the "It's our software and you must use it how we say you must use it" attitude and are trying to force users over to metro UI by removing this feature for the sake of change, and as others have stated change for the sake of change is never a good thing. 
 
It is clear you as with a few others do like W8 and plan on upgrading. That is all well and good but most of us from what I have seen myself included don't and that is unlikely to change.

Porpoise Hork

notuptome2004


ok well so tell me just as other forums have disused    tell me one thing the start screen cant do the old  start menu did.  


Oh wait  you cant because the Start screen does everything the start menu did  but more and  better .

Oh here is a screenshot of the windows  8  RP  from another forum on flauting windows 8 desktop someone using  a start menu program and working well for those who must have  the old start menu 

That is most likely Stardock's Start8. It may work for now but M$ has already stated that it will actively patch any exploit that allows users to regain this feature.  M$ has made their stance clear on this. They do not want the start menu in W8 and are willing to do what ever it takes to keep it from happening.  So while you may gain this functionality with a third party application for now. It is on borrowed time and will like many other well loved features of former OS's will be trampled on my Metro.

The thing is I really would like to know exactly how small their survey panel was in determining that users are not using the start menu enough to the point of removing its code from the OS entirely was considered a good idea.  My personal thought on it is they just decided to pull an Apple move with the "It's our software and you must use it how we say you must use it" attitude and are trying to force users over to metro UI by removing this feature for the sake of change, and as others have stated change for the sake of change is never a good thing. 

It is clear you as with a few others do like W8 and plan on upgrading. That is all well and good but most of us from what I have seen myself included don't and that is unlikely to change.

 
 
 
No they wont patch something like this since ther is many other like this program out and this is not str8   but  dont matter  because  this is  a 3rd party app    microsoft cant block anything  for this as it runs on-top of windows  not integrated in to  besides  possibly using some search things  
 
 
    Edit   Microsoft confirms Windows 8 RTM for august        http://windowsteamblog.com/windows/b/bloggingwindows/archive/2012/07/09/upcoming-windows-milestones-shared-with-partners-at-wpc.aspx
 
 
 
Here is Start  8 
 
 

 
 
 
 

weasel333
Nereus is right that is default for windows7 and I know many who use start button menu the same way it is only 1 click to get to commonly used programs. Windows 8 looks good for tablet use but it is backwards step for 'power users' which must mean anyone who uses computer for any thing more than basic tasks! You are wrong about start menu button jaafaman.

Not every app places a link there by far. For example, here's my Start both as first shown (recently opened) and expanded to All Programs:
 
https://skydrive.live.com/redir?resid=6EAE41C021B73932!1070
 
I would be very happy if someone could point out, say, Blender's location? GIMP is there, but I just can't find Blender.
 
Or how about my RAMDisk Configuration Utility?
 
Chrome, anyone? Anyone?
 
Hell, I can't even open Crysis from here.
 
Sure enough, though, if my IDE's installed it will show - because it's an MS product. But I'm moving more toward Open Source in order to relieve some of the ridiculous prices AutoDesk lists.
 
But that's OK. Last post on just whose use of the Start Button is the most "correct" when it's not even necessary to use it in the first place...

I'm of the type of person who doesn't mind change, but this was just change for the sake of change.  Anyone remember the transition from XP to Vista where they changed the names of everything in the control panel?  Removing the start orb is like that to me.
 
I've used a Windows computer since Windows 95.  Clicking the start button and getting a list of all my applications in a folder layout is what I'm used to.  It's great that they're thinking of tablets and touch, but forcing it upon desktop users who don't have touch displays and don't need their icons to be any bigger, not a wise choice.
 
Another thing I've noticed, and this may be entirely subjective to some of you, is how Windows seems to have it's own tick-tock scale since they implemented the start button.
 
95 was a great success
98 FE fell on its face and was replaced by
98 SE which helped clear up all the bugs.
Windows ME fell all over its face and is still regarded as the worst OS to date.
Windows XP, buggy as it was through its early years, sold well because it wasn't full of crash-soup.
Windows Vista, like XP, was buggy as all hell early on.  Going from stability to a crash fest gave it a bad name.
Windows 7, just like Windows 98 SE before it, fixed the bugs.
 
Now History repeats itself.  If we compare XP to 95 (buggy, but useful), 98FE to Vista (buggier than the version before it) and 98SE to 7 (fixed the bugs), Windows 8 is in line for Windows ME.  That makes Windows 9 likely to be the next XP: the saving grace to whomever got trapped in this change-for-the-sake-of-change mess.

Madrias

Another thing I've noticed, and this may be entirely subjective to some of you, is how Windows seems to have it's own tick-tock scale since they implemented the start button.

95 was a great success
98 FE fell on its face and was replaced by
98 SE which helped clear up all the bugs.
Windows ME fell all over its face and is still regarded as the worst OS to date.
Windows XP, buggy as it was through its early years, sold well because it wasn't full of crash-soup.
Windows Vista, like XP, was buggy as all hell early on.  Going from stability to a crash fest gave it a bad name.
Windows 7, just like Windows 98 SE before it, fixed the bugs.

Now History repeats itself.  If we compare XP to 95 (buggy, but useful), 98FE to Vista (buggier than the version before it) and 98SE to 7 (fixed the bugs), Windows 8 is in line for Windows ME.  That makes Windows 9 likely to be the next XP: the saving grace to whomever got trapped in this change-for-the-sake-of-change mess.

 
Nope, your not the first one to notice and in fact the topic comes up from time to time. It's still unclear why it has been this way for so long. Honestly if MS wanted their start menu so graphically oriented it would have been a better for them to place it in the same spot as it's always been. Keep it the same size as it was in Win 7 and make the icons much smaller of course. Lastly, and I cant stress this enough, make it optional. Let the users decide how the start menu is displayed.  

Clergy

Madrias

Another thing I've noticed, and this may be entirely subjective to some of you, is how Windows seems to have it's own tick-tock scale since they implemented the start button.

95 was a great success
98 FE fell on its face and was replaced by
98 SE which helped clear up all the bugs.
Windows ME fell all over its face and is still regarded as the worst OS to date.
Windows XP, buggy as it was through its early years, sold well because it wasn't full of crash-soup.
Windows Vista, like XP, was buggy as all hell early on.  Going from stability to a crash fest gave it a bad name.
Windows 7, just like Windows 98 SE before it, fixed the bugs.

Now History repeats itself.  If we compare XP to 95 (buggy, but useful), 98FE to Vista (buggier than the version before it) and 98SE to 7 (fixed the bugs), Windows 8 is in line for Windows ME.  That makes Windows 9 likely to be the next XP: the saving grace to whomever got trapped in this change-for-the-sake-of-change mess.

Nope, your not the first one to notice and in fact the topic comes up from time to time. It's still unclear why it has been this way for so long. Honestly if MS wanted their start menu so graphically oriented it would have been a better for them to place it in the same spot as it's always been. Keep it the same size as it was in Win 7 and make the icons much smaller of course. Lastly, and I cant stress this enough, make it optional. Let the users decide how the start menu is displayed.  

 
 
 
couple of issues with your idea   
 
1: if it was the same as the current start menu  or in the same place  and size then they be no Live tiles no added information right in your face for when ya need info Now not later.
 
2: if it was optional do you realize how freaking bad that be  for everyone specialy more importantly  the average person who buys a new Pc because oh   they love the  start screen they love that idea they was shown it  so they call you up to build them a new  PC and guess what happens  you decide to enable the  old style start menu  and when they get it they are baffled and displeased  and thinking that you have ripped them off and they did not get what they pay for .
 
3: and this sorta goes with  2 but what if they sue the new system and somehow  muck things up and  disable the start screen and  the old start menu appears  Maby they are new to windows or something or  a PC in genral   you realize the headache it be for that person thinking maby they been hacked or somehow got a virus  or ther system is broken 
 
 
 
Another thing to note is  that Windows 8  install size despite the fact haveing more features   and the whole metro thing and much much more is Far less then windows 7  .  Read the blog here that can explian the choices they made and why and  other stuff they tried and and many other areas  
 
 
 
http://blogs.msdn.com/b/b8/archive/2012/05/18/creating-the-windows-8-user-experience.aspx
 
 
 

notuptome2004





No they wont patch something like this since ther is many other like this program out and this is not str8   but  dont matter  because  this is  a 3rd party app    microsoft cant block anything  for this as it runs on-top of windows  not integrated in to  besides  possibly using some search things  


  Edit   Microsoft confirms Windows 8 RTM for august        http://windowsteamblog.com/windows/b/bloggingwindows/archive/2012/07/09/upcoming-windows-milestones-shared-with-partners-at-wpc.aspx

 
Its simple as this. Microsoft has said they do not want the start orb. They have removed all legacy support from the OS coding. They are now actively blocking third party apps from allowing this functionality. The apps that work now most likely will not work in October when they launch Titanic II (Windows8) into the frigid waters of the consumer PC market. Even if  a few still work at launch and M$ is as serious about this as they have been so far on this point then these apps will be patched out to oblivion very soon after launch.
 
Someone at M$ really really likes AOL kids homepage and M$ has spent a crap ton of capitol and time developing a UI that looks just like it. So They clearly want us the users to shift to Metro to make it all worth it. If they allowed users to just simply shut Metro UI down then they would be left with a desktop that looks like Vista and W7. That won't sell in their opinion so they are all but killing every aspect of the former OS's in order to push Metro on us.
 
If we all used tablets then I could see Metro being OK, but we don't. We use a keyboard and mouse, something Metro wasn't designed to work with very well. 
 
In the end W8 will flop because people will hate it. It's too far removed from what they have and like now. It makes doing even some of the most simple of tasks like say shutting the PC down a chore because of the extra steps they introduced.  It's like this through out the entire OS. Things that used to be simple are now a chore. 
 
So love it all you like. Post as many pictures of screen captures of people using W8 with a third party start orb. You're barking up the wrong tree bubba. For the majority of us the everyday users W8 is utter crap to us and there is nothing you can say that will change that.

they are not  blocking 3rd party app support   or anything  so unless ya  have a source they are not because   3rd party  start menu apps work just fine  

Still pounding your head into that MS wall I see, lol.
About the only way W8 moves is thru new oem pc sales, not many people will be willing signup for a headache that I am aware of. And I suspect a good many of those will revert to w7 when they see what they are confronted with in a tablet os.

notuptome2004


they are not  blocking 3rd party app support   or anything  so unless ya  have a source they are not because   3rd party  start menu apps work just fine  

 
uh.. yes they are...
 
http://www.winsupersite.c...ws-8-businesses-143238
 
 

Related to this second point is information I’ve received that Microsoft has been furiously ripping out legacy code in Windows 8 that would have enabled third parties to bring back the Start button, Start Menu, and other software bits that could have made this new OS look and work like its predecessor. In fact, I’ve seen that several well-known UI hacks that worked fine with the Windows 8 Consumer Preview are no longer functional in the coming Release Preview. And those with hopes that Microsoft would allow businesses, at least, to boot directly to the desktop should prepare for disappointment. That feature not only isn’t happening, it’s being removed from Windows Server 12 (Windows 8’s stable mate) as well.

 
 
In case you don't believe that guy..
 
No Start Orb
 
So for your precious third party applications Microsoft need only see how they work and then can block shell access via a patch to render them useless.  They are doing that now... M$ is serious about it killing this long time staple feature of their OS.  I for one do not want to have to go to a 3rd party vendor whom I can't completely trust and implement this software on say 5k workstations to restore a feature that M$ should never have removed in the first place only to find out it contains malicious code and expose my network to who knows what.  So if you want to do this then fine go right ahead. Do it, but don't come crying to us when your rig gets trashed cause you put some untrusted software on your broken out of the box OS.
 
 
 

umm ok what they are talking about it  not 3rd party applications but 3rd party Hacks  that are Registry hacks to enable the old start menu  of which was   somthing you could do  in the Developer  preview   but all the  legacy start menu code was ripped from the OS  so those  UI hacks those code hacks dont work    
 
 
This article does not apply to 3rd part programs  that emulate  the old start menu  start  8 which really just  makes a start menu smaller metro but still 
 
 
to your 2nd statement   Microsoft never removed anything the start menu did it is all still there in the start screen every dang feature and function is there  if not better  you just have to use it but seems you did  not nore have tried  .  period the  start screen does what the start menu did + extra  

notuptome2004


umm ok what they are talking about it  not 3rd party applications but 3rd party Hacks  that are Registry hacks to enable the old start menu  of which was   somthing you could do  in the Developer  preview   but all the  legacy start menu code was ripped from the OS  so those  UI hacks those code hacks dont work    


This article does not apply to 3rd part programs  that emulate  the old start menu  start  8 which really just  makes a start menu smaller metro but still 


to your 2nd statement   Microsoft never removed anything the start menu did it is all still there in the start screen every dang feature and function is there  if not better  you just have to use it but seems you did  not nore have tried  .  period the  start screen does what the start menu did + extra  

 
It is clear that you either you didn't read the article, don't actually understand what it or I have said, or are in denial and are refusing to accept what M$ is trying to to.   That also goes for my 2nd comment since it's obvious that you completely missed my point.

notuptome2004


couple of issues with your idea   

1: if it was the same as the current start menu  or in the same place  and size then they be no Live tiles no added information right in your face for when ya need info Now not later.

2: if it was optional do you realize how freaking bad that be  for everyone specialy more importantly  the average person who buys a new Pc because oh   they love the  start screen they love that idea they was shown it  so they call you up to build them a new  PC and guess what happens  you decide to enable the  old style start menu  and when they get it they are baffled and displeased  and thinking that you have ripped them off and they did not get what they pay for .

3: and this sorta goes with  2 but what if they sue the new system and somehow  muck things up and  disable the start screen and  the old start menu appears  Maby they are new to windows or something or  a PC in genral   you realize the headache it be for that person thinking maby they been hacked or somehow got a virus  or ther system is broken 



Another thing to note is  that Windows 8  install size despite the fact haveing more features   and the whole metro thing and much much more is Far less then windows 7  .  Read the blog here that can explian the choices they made and why and  other stuff they tried and and many other areas  



http://blogs.msdn.com/b/b8/archive/2012/05/18/creating-the-windows-8-user-experience.aspx

 
I'm sorry but this has to be the worst attempt at an argument in favor of Win 8 I have seen so far. If you want live tiles put them in Windows SideShow where those gadgets are that are hardly used, problem solved. If I built a PC for someone who actually wanted to use this awful start menu, I'd simply enable it, there is no logical argument there. OK, so they accidently disable the new start menu and windows 8 looks like windows 7. Who would assume they have a virus? Your reaching for an argument that just isn't there. Make this feature optional and problem solved. 

muskie32

 
Not to mention charging the enduser for switching to Win7's TRUE successor.

Windows sideshow was not a success  and Live tiles are not  Gadgets  they are far more then that of a simple Gadget . And  you know having an option for 2 different user experience  is  just a Wast of Freaking time for users and Microsoft and  is a UI nightmare it  feel way out of place  which the start screen does not    look we have  had the old start menu from windows 95 up till windows  7   at some point anyways weather ya liked it or not someone at Microsoft would have imposed a new  user interface anyways   a new user experience a  new Paradigm   but you know what that is happening now .  You wont see users 20 years from now complaining   ther is no start menu because they wont know ****  the start menu is  and they care less  so your  resistance  of hanging on to something Microsoft  changed and took out  is stupid  When the start screen does exaxtly everything the start menu did  but better and  more customisable

notuptome2004

Windows sideshow was not a success  and Live tiles are not  Gadgets  they are far more then that of a simple Gadget . And  you know having an option for 2 different user experience  is  just a Wast of Freaking time for users and Microsoft and  is a UI nightmare it  feel way out of place  which the start screen does not    look we have  had the old start menu from windows 95 up till windows  7 at some point anyways weather ya liked it or not someone at Microsoft would have imposed a new  user interface anyways   a new user experience a  new Paradigm   but you know what that is happening now .  You wont see users 20 years from now complaining   ther is no start menu because they wont know ****  the start menu is  and they care less  so your  resistance  of hanging on to something Microsoft  changed and took out  is stupid  When the start screen does exaxtly everything the start menu did  but better and  more customisable

 
The reason we have had the old start menu from windows 95 up till windows 7 is because it is intuitive, and more importantly, IT WORKS. Clearly you like the new GUI, but you have to stop angrily insinuating everyone else is wrong and stupid for not agreeing with you. Your opinion here is outnumbered by dozens to one - does that not tell you something? Very simple : it does not work for us, we do not like it, and we think MS made a huge mistake - what part of that do you not understand?? Getting angry at us is not going to change how we view W8.
 
Now I've seen it in action, not only do I take exception to the removal of the start menu as it was, W8 is also UGLY. Those colored box tiles are something I'd expect on a plastic toy made for a 3-5 year old kid. Maybe that is appropriate for some users out there..., but I am not one of them.
 
I have to ask; do you work for MS or something - that might explain the frothing-at-the-mouth zealotry..
 

No i dont work for Ms.   but anyways ther is more to windows 8 then a freaking start screen or start menu   

notuptome2004


No i dont work for Ms.   but anyways ther is more to windows 8 then a freaking start screen or start menu   

 
 
Seriously I think its time you took your W8 sales pitch and moved on.

notuptome2004
 

No i dont work for Ms.   but anyways ther is more to windows 8 then a freaking start screen or start menu    

 
No one is denying that however there is NO, absultly NO reason to take out such a useful and powerful tool like the start menu. it takes one click to get to my most commonly used applications my Task bar is for ACTIVE applications and my desktop even if I used it would require to minimize everything to get to.
I will admit to having some pined applications to the task bar, and I love the ability to do so, I have my web browser and my windows explorer pined there, but thats it. my most commonly used apps are in my start menu, and my less then commonly used apps I would go start menu, all programs and from there its easy to find. SO the reason for taking it out is ****ing stupid, I dont know anyone with win 7 who does not use the start menu, It makes all my apps in ONE easy to find place. 
 
The change is not due to users not using it, the change is for the sake of change, and thats just unneeded.
 

 you thought all this was a Sales pitch well if it was  i would be Fired instantly how horrible but as a  Argument or topic discussion it works for what it needs to work for  nothing more  but hey end of  discussion on 1  freaking feature   oh well  it is what it is  

Gonna point out one thing i love microsoft did with windows 8 is the more configurable multi-monitor  options  Microsoft has really listened to the users on this one   got a screenshot from another users  PC showing off his configuration .
 
Note : you can have  different    wallpapers per screen if you choose or just one   but the  as you can see you can have multi taskbars  using  different behaviors per screen