News - Windows 8.2 ‘Threshold’ to bring Start Menu back?

[Saracen]

Are Microsoft slowly peddling backwards here?

Remind me again, what is the start menu actually used for?

If Threshold does what that article suggests we think is likely, yes it is.

What it's useful for is doing things how I want to do them, because I've been doing it for a very long time, and see NO need to do them a completely different way unless I (not MS) get a considerable benefit from doing it.

What MUI boils down to, for me, is having to pay MS for the hassle of upgrading to use something I neither want, nor need.

If MS want to force MUI on us, fine. I quit using Windows. Not a problem.

If they want to retain people like me, and our upgrade fees for Windows and other packages, including Office, they WILL give in on this.

And I no longer much care either way, by the way.

[Percy1983]

It might be just me who will stay with the current start screen, after the intial shock it works better for, ie I have my programs grouped and bring different groups to the fronbt dependinf on what I am doing.

Each to there own.

[Saracen]

It might be just me who will stay with the current start screen, after the intial shock it works better for, ie I have my programs grouped and bring different groups to the fronbt dependinf on what I am doing.

Each to there own.

Agreed on the last line.

I've been grouping programs together, in Start menu, for years. For instance, business, communications, utilities, photo and graphics, games, personal, etc, are all menu items. So, click on menu, click on group, click on either application or document, and .... bingo. And one or two of those groups have sub-groups. In busines, for instance, each client/project has a menu entry, so one extra mouse click and I have all major documents for that client/project as menu items, be they doc, xls, or whatever.

For me, it works and I've been doing it so long I reckon I'd pass it on in my DNA. As you say, each to their own.

[th3_f15t]

I feel that the start menu, although useful, isn't a big part of my Windows experience any more, unlike the days of Windows 98 and XP. What with having all my programmes short cut on my desktop/task bar, I rarely use the start menu and when I do, I just search for the programme rather than trawl through the list of folders. However, as soon as I lost my start menu in Windows 8, I realised that it's like a pair of old, comfy trainers. Soon as they're gone, nothing else fits quite as well.

For me, and slightly off topic, the main hold back from upgrading to Windows 8 is the lack of performance increase in terms of gaming. Why would I want to re-install all my drivers and OS, at an expense, just for a tiny increase in performance? Windows 7 is fully supported and proven to run well so why bother changing?

Windows 98 = Good
Windows 2000/ME = Not so Good
Windows XP = Good
Windows Vista = Not so Good
Windows 7 = Good
Windows 8 = Not so Good

So bring on Windows 9?

[Blaineoliver]

Win + X - everything you need if you want to shutdown

[badsyntax]

True story: Windows 8.3 'Falafel' is well into development and contains some more feature reboots (many puns intended). This will build on the return of features in 8.1 and 8.2 that users have complained about the lack of since the original Windows 8 release.

Windows 8.3 sees the arrival of the Enhanced User Search Experience Avatar.

[Biscuit]

Hurrah!

I just hope they do a little more than a direct reinstall of the windows 7 start menu and they actually try and make it fit with the MUI design practice so that the two interfaces dont drift further and further apart

[shamus21]

Some Common sense coming from Microsoft at last.

[cjs150]

I run two windows 8 machine, one as an HTPC and the other as a general home computer for games, emails, word processing.

On the HTPC the lack of a start button never bothered me. I like the interface on an HTPC, but given what w8.1 did to the other machine I will not be upgrading soon.

On the general home computer I wish I had never installed w8. The interface just does not work for me, I live on the desktop, I have multiple overlapping windows, the Netro interface and "touch" is wasted on me

[edzieba]

Damnit, we were almost rid of the thing! The 'we fear change' crowd triumphs again, I guess.

[Odeas]

Win + X - everything you need if you want to shutdown

While I do agree, how do you know this if your new to Win8?
How would you achive that with only a touchscreen?

I've had to deal with friends and family upgrading, buying tablets n laptops with win8 and many struggle with such a simple task.
While the start bar is cumbersome now to some people its a familiar starting point for many and an easy to use menu for new users.

I rarely use the start bar myself but does come in handy and can be hidden if not wanted so I can't see much of a problem with bringing it back.

[aidanjt]

how do you know this if your new to Win8?
How would you achive that with only a touchscreen?

Exactly. ${unintuitive_workaround_here} isn't a solution to Windows 8's usability screwups.

[AGTDenton]

Remind me again, what is the start menu actually used for?

I use it to control my PC mixed with Run and Command Prompt.

[this_is_gav]

i think a lot of home users, schools & businesses will skip these versions until it is easy to navigate like windows 7, i for 1 see no need to upgrade my windows 7 gaming pc, i have windows 8 on an old laptop which i find a bit awkward to use especially annoying when wanting to shutdown menu wise! i just think it should of been a tablet os rather than a desktop as it's not very practical to use at the moment.

I work in a Middle school (some of them still exist!) and we'll be rolling out 8.1 the moment we've managed to get a couple of rogue programs working properly. The more efficient system demands means it runs better on the vast array of hardware configurations most schools have now with the budget restrictions (our annual ICT budget for the last few years has been zero).

[Saracen]

Damnit, we were almost rid of the thing! The 'we fear change' crowd triumphs again, I guess.

I don't fear change. I'm just bright enough to know when I don't like it, and when I'm being used, and when I do or don't have to go along with it.

I've not said MS shouldn't go to MUI. What I've said is if they do, I'm NOT going with them. They can do without me, but so can I do without Windows. And I will, if MUI is mandated.

But why is this a problem? If MS have a setting saying "MUI enabled?", or "Win 8 Modern mode, or Win 7 standard mode", then you can install 8.2 (or whatever) and use MUI, and I can install 8.2 and not use it. Why is that a problem?

But if it is, for MS, then fine, carry on as they are with MUI. The price will be quite a lot of upset, even angry, users, and quite a few leaving the MS fold.

Bear in mind, we pay to use MS products. Or most of us do, anyway. Why would we do that when the product on offer doesn't do what we want.

Suppose your local favourite coffee shop suddenly changed coffee blends to one you didn't like, and told you you had to drink it from a plastic beaker, through a straw. Would you say "okay" and carrying on buying it, or would you find a shop with decent-tasting coffee, and no fixation on straws? Anybody that likes straws and chicory coffee can carry on at the old place, but I'd find a new coffee shop .... or OS and Office suite.

I don't fear change. I just don't like MUI one bit, and am not carrying on paying for it, given that there are alternatives. And a lot of others feel similarly.

[cjs150]

Saracen +1

Coffee analogy is good. It also explains why MS are rowing back. For PCs too many people are not upgrading - they do not want straws and chicory.

I am not saying that w8 is a bad OS, I like it but only for certain uses and terrific on tablets. I would not use it for my work computer though