Windows 8′s next victim: Microsoft kills the Start button

http://www.extremetech.com/computing/117241-windows-8s-next-victim-microsoft-kills-the-start-button

by ukdm • 14 years ago

71 85 14 years ago

apg2• 14 years ago

I've tried the initial Windows 8 developer preview, and I have to say it has been a jarring experience to switch back and forth between Metro and the "Windows Classic" desktop. The visual experience of Metro vs the Win7 style is so different that it feels slapdash and disjointed. This Windows 8 was just the initial developer preview though. I'm sure the next CTP will be worlds better - and I'm sure it Win8/Metro will be sweet on tablets.

There was a mega post at the build windows blog justifying (rationalizing?) their decisions. It's interesting reading to slog through. They've certainly put a lot of resources onto this decision, and it feels like the future of Windows based desktop PC's is in the balance. It feels like a really risky bet.

http://blogs.msdn.com/b/b8/archive/2011/10/11/reflecting-on-...

Ideally, MS would add a "Windows 7" mode that I can turn on and use my computer the way I've been accustomed to. I don't want to be learn more efficient with swipes/fewer clicks/etc - I've got a good thing going here. First thing I used to do with XP was switch it to the Windows Classic mode, so I'm probably not their target user.

FWIW, I also dropped Ubuntu post-Unity (running Debian now) and haven't looked back. This dog is too old to want to deal with learning any cheese moving tricks.

derleth2• 14 years ago

> I also dropped Ubuntu post-Unity (running Debian now)

Why? If you're technical enough to run Debian, you're technical enough to run Ubuntu with Window Maker or some other non-Unity UI.

TylerE2• 14 years ago

Because Ubuntu has become, for the last 2 years or so, a game of "what will they break next". Started, arguably, with the not-even-halfbacked initial Pulseaudio implementation, and continuing on to Unity.

MatthewPhillips• 14 years ago

Ubuntu 11.04 is a few versions behind on node.js. So a lot of modules won't install. If they're behind there I'm sure they're also behind in other programming environments as well. You can always install these things from source, but for programmers a rolling release distro like Debian or Arch makes more sense.

bo10243• 14 years ago

> and I'm sure it Win8/Metro will be sweet on tablets

Exactly. The hot trend right now is to throw desktop aesthetics and performance out the window and just build products for small touchscreens.

Dumb.

kijin6• 14 years ago

They will learn that it was a dumb move when corporate customers with hundreds of thousands of installations refuse to upgrade because the eye candy does nothing to improve productivity on their (obviously non-touchscreen) workstations. Coming Soon: Windows 9 Business Edition with the Classic keyboard-and-mouse UI.

ChrisNorstrom3• 14 years ago

EDIT: I am referring to the dumbing down, over simplification, extreme minimalization, and looks over usability of next generation UIs in general. NOT to Window's entire "Metro UI".

From this day forward we shall call this abomination "Kindergarden UI".

Example: Tom: "Hey how's Windows 8 compared to Ubuntu?". Stacy: "Oh they're both going to shit, they've got kindergarden UI now."

I wish Microsoft would realize that Windows is NOT OSX. In their desperate attempt to fabricate a Windows Cult following and "it just works" culture they're going to end up destroying the very thing that made windows what it is.

I tried unsuccessfully to convert to mac a few years ago, and numerous times to convert to linux. In my perticular situation, my linux installs have less stability than my windows 7 installation. After all trialing 10+ operating systems over the last 7 years I realized: I love Windows, it's Microsoft I hate.

drzaiusapelord• 14 years ago

Well, the preview of Win8 showed that you can switch between Metro and the classic desktop. When I deploy Win8 to my users, it'll be locked to the desktop mode. Metro will be a netbook/tablet/embed only thing.

Don't take the complete fail that Unity is and apply it to this situation. Shuttleworth has no big corporate customers he needs to cater to. Those that don't like unity can figure out how to install Gnome or LXDE or whatever. Windows on the other hand will have both options ready to go from day one with an ease of a click. MS knows who butters their bread: corporate clients.

nextparadigms• 14 years ago

I don't think users will easily switch from the XP/7 experience to the Windows 8 "tile" one. And it seems all they are doing is forcing even more this new experience on them.

Whether it's old Windows users, Mac users, or Linux users - the transition will definitely not come as easy for them as it was the transition from XP to Win7, which was also heavily helped by the fact that people were already very tired of XP.

freehunter11• 14 years ago

Everyone hates change and would love to go back, until they actually do go back. The status quo is familiar and therefore seems more efficient. It's "muscle memory". The current desktop system is a metaphor that never really played out.

Will Windows 8/Unity/Gnome 3 be better? Who knows. Will be it worse? Probably not. More than likely it will just be "different". Either way, if computing doesn't keep changing and evolving, we're going to be stuck in the barely-functional status quo forever. I'm willing to live through (and learn to love) the rough parts along the way until we reach the best we can possibly do.

Zancarius• 14 years ago

> Everyone hates change and would love to go back, until they actually do go back. The status quo is familiar and therefore seems more efficient. It's "muscle memory". The current desktop system is a metaphor that never really played out.

This is largely quite true. I was probably one of the few people among my peers who actually appreciated the new taskbar introduced in Windows 7. Although that's not to say that criticism of Windows 8 isn't important; I think one of the things Microsoft did learn with the Windows 7 betas and release candidates was that feedback from the user base can very occasionally be helpful. In some exceptional cases, monitoring user feedback can short-circuit certain disaster.

The other thing to keep in mind is that change for the sake of change isn't always good--and likewise, it isn't always bad. Paradigm shifts will happen, things will change, and sometimes legacy designs will continue to persist for wont of familiarity. What I'm saying is this: Changing too much too drastically is a bold move. It might pay off; it might also be disaster.

My personal preference is to agree with apg; the developer preview was less than stellar, but my expectations weren't terribly high. I don't really like the paradigm shift Microsoft is trying to force across the Windows brand as it exists for a desktop OS, but it might be great for what it was designed for--tablets and phones.

It should be said that I also didn't care much for Unity even though I gave it an honest try for about two-three weeks. There were some things that it did well--and were equally quite handy--and there were others that felt too jarring and awkward. Metro feels somewhat similar in that regard. However, I'll reserve my full judgement until we're closer to a more finalized product so we can see what Microsoft's vision ultimately boils down to; thusfar, I'm not terribly impressed, but I admit they're making a decent effort. I do look forward to seeing the finished product even if I absolutely hate it. :)

georgieporgie• 14 years ago

I'm going to make the opposite argument. I think the current batch of Start Menu, dock, and panel launchers represent the product of continuous refinement. I honestly question whether the interface can truly be improved (versus made different) for current desktop interfaces. By current desktop interfaces, I mean a monitor, mouse, and keyboard. Right now, there no interface better for accomplishing real work on a computer.

Tablets and future, immersive, physically interactive interfaces (e.g. "virtual reality") will certainly be different, but I don't see why we should completely warp our well-established paradigms of interacting with current technology.

Incidentally, the greatest sin I see is that they seem to be keeping the Start Menu concept, but they're hiding it!

dacilselig• 14 years ago

A lot of people who are complaining are most likely suffering from Baby Duck Syndrome. I haven't had the opportunity to try out Windows 8 yet, but I'm sure this is a calculated risk which can hopefully appeal to newer generations.

danneu2• 14 years ago

This is how I feel about Unity and why I moved to Debian+Openbox.

Unity might be incredible on a tablet when ctrl+space to bring up a launcher and typing "fir<enter>" to launch Firefox is slower than slapping an icon with my sausage finger. But on the desktop, Unity is a step backwards and adds nothing to me when my fingers are on home row all day. And trust me, I really tried to use Unity and I'm rather open-minded about new paradigms (Openbox was new to me).

I haven't tried Win8 yet, but it sounds like a similar situation. But I don't feel like the future of Windows-based desktop PCs is under fire. As long as Windows has powerusers, there will always be a solution to what might be a step backwards in design.

cheald2• 14 years ago

I've been using GNOME 3 for a few months, and I actually am on board with this decision; it feels better, and looks fine. It takes some getting used to, but a button press (win key) or mouse flick is a lot faster than "mouse mouse to the corner, position it over the start button, click".

Does make me wonder how it'll work in multi-monitor setups, though. Presumably you can change the hot corner, but if that's not a launch feature there are going to be some severely annoyed users.

codesuela• 14 years ago

this is what ruined unity for me the launcher bar basically was stuck in the middle between screens the hack that makes it so you can move it somewhere else was only for x86 systems or something like that (found that out after it killed my X server). As for Gnome: on of my monitors is "2 larger and therefore I can trigger the shell by hovering over the left corner without "slipping" to the other one or click the icon. There is also a second hot corner on my other monitor (by default).

kijin6• 14 years ago

Hot corners are also a terrible experience when you're running the OS inside a non-fullscreen virtual machine. Sorry, your mouse just left the window instead of triggering the smart corner.

But then, if you're targeting the tablet market, none of this would matter.

mrj• 14 years ago

Yeah, that was my thought, too. Actually, I have a second monitor on that side, so trying to hit the corner would be a pain.

Dylan16807• 14 years ago

You don't have to position it onto the button. The button extends all the way to the corner. So it's a flick followed by a click. A flick alone will trigger the menu accidentally pretty often, and a flick followed by a hover is slower than a flick followed by a click.

cheald2• 14 years ago

I know, but psychologically, you end up aiming for the button, rather than hitting the "infinite margin" that is the corner.

I honestly don't think it's going to be a bad thing for me or the people that I know, but do I ever feel bad for tech support crews that already had issues getting old people to find the start button. :)

iamgoat• 14 years ago

Ever since MS removed the ability to dock toolbars to the left side of the screen (Vista/7) I've been using pinned start menu items and the Windows key to quickly access them. It didn't take long to get used to it and now I prefer having that tactile control. I won't miss the start button on screen. To me, it functions the same as the home button on the iPhone.

zyb092• 14 years ago

So is the start menu gone completely? With Windows7 it was actually on the way to become something like Spotlight (just not as good yet). I can't believe they'd patch that out, instead of improving on it, Windows needs something like Spotlight IMHO.

underwater• 14 years ago

I recall reading that you can type at the start screen to search. So you should still be able to use the same keypresses to search or launch an app.

xpaulbettsx2• 14 years ago

This is right - Win8 for power users is, "Hit Start button on keyboard, type what you want a-la QuickSilver"

notatoad• 14 years ago

Theverge says there's a hot corner to trigger the start menu, instead of a button.

But in all the releases so far, the menu has basically just been a link to settings, spotlight functionality is gone from it.

polshaw• 14 years ago

No it hasn't. You just type after pressing start.

CoughlinJ• 14 years ago

There needs to be a branch between the classic HID driven computing experience, and what is obviously an immersive, touch driven product. I feel like the Metro UI is what we'll be heading towards eventually, but I think some things just need to stay the same. A solid manipulative platform that is clean as it is elegant in its structure and its function is something I think a lot of us will need for the foreseeable future..

bo10243• 14 years ago

Agreed -- it's the difference between the keyboard/mouse and the touchscreen. They have different strengths and different use cases, so a one-size-fits-all approach is silly.

derleth2• 14 years ago

So, is the corporate upgrade path still going to be from Windows 8 to XP?

kijin6• 14 years ago

No sane corporation should allow itself to become a guinea pig for even-numbered Windows releases. Me (4?) was horrible. XP (5?) was OK. Vista (6?) was a bomb. 7 was OK. 8, meh. 9, maybe the tablet fad will pass by then.

Stick to odd-numbered releases, they're like LTS.

freehunter11• 14 years ago

When I look at things like the Samsung Series 7 Slate, I don't think tablets are a fad. It's a laptop with a portable screen, or a tablet with a dock and a keyboard. It's running a full OS, with real hardware backing it. How many times have I wished I didn't have to undock my laptop and lug the bulky thing over to a coworkers desk to show them something when all I needed was the screen?

Tablets and keyboards are the new laptops.

bitwize• 14 years ago

Don't think too hard about Windows version numbers; your head will asplode.

Windows Vista is Windows NT version 6.0; Windows 7 is actually version 6.1. Similarly Windows XP was version 5.1; its predecessor, Windows 2000, was 5.0.

Windows Me was version 4.9 of the Windows 9x code base (whose first version -- as an obvious successor to Windows 3.x -- was 4.0, Windows 95).

Luyt2• 14 years ago

Well, you have to look at those versions a little bit finer grained. Windows NT 3.51, 4.0, 2000 and XP were all very usable in a business environment; Windows 95, ME and Vista not so. Windows 7 seems workable, and with Windows 8 it seems that Microsoft wants again to alienate their business public, catering to 'consumer tablets' instead.

The funny thing is that during all those transitions, the basic Win32 API stayed more or less stable. The programs I wrote for XP (or even Windows 2000) still work well in Windows 7. They just don't have the visual bling (which my customers don't need anyway).

dan85• 14 years ago

If I remember well, XP wasn't received with great enthusiasm either. A lot of companies remained on Windows 2000. XP became good with the release of SP2.

Raphael• 14 years ago

Terrible move. It doesn't save any space because the taskbar is still there. And most people use wide screens, so there is plenty of room for shortcuts horizontally.

smhinsey• 14 years ago

I wonder if this is going to bring us back to the days where you need to run a server version of the OS if you want an environment suitable for doing technical work. I can't imagine running this on my dual 30'' setup.

thyrsus• 14 years ago

I suppose the off button will be easier to find, since you won't have to know that to turn off you have to click "Start".

derekerdmann• 14 years ago

If there's anything we've learned from the Engineering Blogs, they don't make major changes like this unless they have some kind of data that supports it.

I suspect we haven't even seen half of the things that will make this paradigm work, and I'd bet they have extensive Usability tests to back all of it up.

drivebyacct23• 14 years ago

Good. The variety of uber-usable menus in Linux for many, many years has spoiled me and I always wind up resenting almost every bit of the Start menu experience when using Windows. I love to espouse about Cardapio because it's that awesome. cardapio: http://i.minus.com/i9sRs.png

I think it's going to be jarring to move between classic and Metro modes, but I don't think there's a clear way for Microsoft to alleviate that. I also don't think it's unreasonable to say that there is a tablet paradigm that can live alongside the regular desktop paradigm. I think there are some that expect Microsoft Office and a twitter app to be equally usable via a mouse and a finger and I'm not sure that's entirely reasonable. At the very least, the hacker in me has no problem with needing to break out a mouse and keyboard to really get things done.

serge2k• 14 years ago

that looks like it provides pretty much the same functionality as the start menu.

Windows 8 is looking like such a failure.

drivebyacct23• 14 years ago

Cardapio (in most major Linux distros) is almost always, at most, two levels deep, categorized by app, and doesn't include a per-app folder including 6 different shortcuts, readme, uninstaller, etc. It's much cleaner to skim through, it's much easier to find, say, an "Internet" application out of all of them installed, has search and favorite folders baked in.

It might be the same functionality, but that's not really saying much. Linux and Windows fundamentally offer the same functionality.

apg2• 14 years ago

I'm not so sure that the need for touch is really that great in a desktop environment. It's probably cool for someone looking over your shoulder and wanting to take control of your computer. But for sitting at the computer and making something happen... I don't think the usability needs to be 'equal'. And in the desktop world it should favor the keyboard/mouse.

Here's an anecdote for touch vs. mouse/keyboard:

Pretty sure I'm not - nor is my family setup - typical of a windows user. We have two touchscreen desktops in our house.

I have a two year old that can work the touchscreen very proficiently. My 5 & 7 year old stick with the mouse and never use the touch, I almost never use touch, and my wife rarely uses it.

Based on my personal observations, on the desktop, touch is good for very new users or those who lack the physical coordination to control the mouse and keyboard. Otherwise, mouse and keyboard wins.

The Windows 8 mouse experience is really lacking at the moment. I expect that gets a major update in the next version.

drivebyacct23• 14 years ago

I agree with you, that was the point of my post. I think that touch interfaces and desktop interfaces can stay distinct or complementary. I think there is an expectation that Windows 8 must make a touch based app great in desktop mode and vice-versa which I think is untenable.

It's like old efforts to make cars and vans run on the same body. The cars handled like vans and the vans handled like awkward cars.

If you're looking to only use a mouse, I suspect you will be spending time in Desktop mode. I know that the CTP has enhanced the mouse support in RT mode, but it's still touch-first apps. I don't like tablets and don't love the nature of touch interfaces and I know that I will not be happy with a mouse and WinRT mode ever. Frankly, if the buttons and layouts are accommodating for touch interfaces, it's NOT going to be optimal for use with a mouse. (I think some additional evidence of this would be the intrusion of ribbon into Windows Explorer. IMO it's pretty obvious that it's motivated by touch interface needs.)

voodoomagicman• 14 years ago

I think there is a lot they can do to make moving between metro and the desktop less jarring. They could very easily skin the desktop away from faux 3d glossy semitransparent things to solid colors for window borders and menus with clean edges, icons, and text.

In the developer preview it looked awful to have the black windows button on the aqua 3d suparbar. Why not just make the whole thing black? I think the desktop would look great with solid white / colored windows over a good photo.

contextfree• 14 years ago

interesting to see how much commotion this apparent change has caused, since it's almost purely cosmetic - the actual start menu itself was gone (or replaced) already in the DP.

scott_s• 14 years ago

It’s even worse for first-time users: There’s no visual cue at all for returning to the Metro interface.

This mattered two decades ago. It does not matter now. Two decades ago, there was a large number of people who were just starting to integrate computers into their daily lives. This is no longer true. Computers are integrated into people's daily lives. The only people [1] who are "just starting" to integrate computers into their daily lives are the same people who are "just starting" to integrate using a toilet into their daily lives.

From now on, people will grow up with computers, and I think we should design interfaces to reflect that. "But what about first-time users?" should no longer be an interesting question.

[1] I'm sure someone can come up with specific counter-examples. I submit that those cases are rare enough that they shouldn't be a primary consideration for designing interfaces. Of course, there should be interface back-doors for disabilities and such, but that is not the same as primary considerations for most people.

DarkShikari• 14 years ago

It's not about new to computers, it's about new to your interface.

If you have a new interface, especially one that works differently from the old interface in a notable way, you can't assume that everyone will instantly figure out your new interface without cues.

freehunter11• 14 years ago

I think it would be quite unlikely that the majority of users would be given a Windows 8 machine without some kind of tutorial. Windows has had a "Welcome to Windows" since at least Windows 95 (IIRC). Corporate users are generally given a brief documentation page on how to use their computer (we rolled out Windows 7 last summer with a 3-page document with screenshots of how to get around).

There will be precious few who can never get the hang of it.

mirkules• 14 years ago

Even if there are no first-time users anymore, I think computing in general can benefit from User Interfaces being developed as if they are developed for first-time users, and the advanced options layered underneath. This is where OS X gets things right.

In addition, computers may be integrated into daily lives, but I think this definitely does not mean the opposite - that people have learned how to operate them properly, despite them being so integrated. If level of integration into society means that user interface does not need to cater to beginning users, there would be no designers left to make designs - only engineers (perish the thought :) But seriously -- and forgive me for using a car analogy -- but the basic operation of a car is actually simpler, rather than more complicated.

To be fair, some OS X advanced options are in hair-pulling places, which I believe only underlines how hard it is to market computers to the masses with differing layers of knowledge

timkeller• 14 years ago

8 is looking more and more like Vista Take2.

And yes, that seems silly and inflammatory... but it has all the hallmarks of Vista's over-zealousness, last minute changes and disdain for Microsoft's core customers.

crististm• 14 years ago

I can't believe this started 17 years ago. It couldn't be _that_ long... Yep, it is...

Looks like the desktop metaphor is back in business.

Skywing• 14 years ago

After reading the article and hearing that you activate the start menu by "flicking" the mouse to the bottom left, I instinctively tried it myself and noticed an issue. I'm running a dual monitor setup, where my second monitor is to the left of my main monitor. Flicking the mouse to the bottom left just causes it to go to the second monitor, if I'm not careful. Now, to enter the start menu, I am going to have to carefully move the mouse down to the bottom left, just as I do with the start button as it currently is. This just seems like it's more prone to issues than the start button, for not much gain. Of course, I am open to trying it, just like I have every previous Windows version.

LoneWolf• 14 years ago

From the few screenshots and videos I saw of windows 8 I cant make myself like it, the metro interface looks good for a tablet I agree with that, but for a desktop? I dont think so. Guess I will have to wait until I get my hands on it to know for sure.

yason• 14 years ago

If it activates from the corner like in Gnome 3 then this is much better than the Start button.

The Start button was always a few pixels off the edges so you couldn't just shove your mouse to bottom-left corner and click. Instead, you had to find the corner and offset the mouse a notch towards up-right to hit the button.

ppog• 14 years ago

They fixed that in Windows XP. (Although in Vista they made the Start button circular so it no longer appeared to occupy the corner pixel, the entire bottom left corner did remain hot, and remains so in Windows 7.)

frio• 14 years ago

Out of interest: has Microsoft commented at all on whether this new UI will integrate with the Kinect for PC? While my screens are far enough away that a touchscreen would prove arduous, flicking and sliding through screens with gestures might tie well to the Metro experience.

RexRollman• 14 years ago

I've once used a program called "Start Killer" on my Windows 7 desktop, which removed the start menu button. I did this because I thought the desktop would look better without it. The Start menu would still come up when the Windows key was pressed, so that still worked, but I quickly found it annoying because there was no way to activate it with the mouse (which I did more often than I realized).

As for Windows 8, I have high hopes for it because I like Windows 7, but I do think Microsoft is going to end up with a weird GUI mashup if they are not careful.

danneu2• 14 years ago

Ever since I started using launchers to find programs/files/settings, I realized the pointlessness of a Start button. For Windows, I used Launchy. In Linux, I'm typing the program name into terminal.

The average user uses the Start menu as a browseable library of their installed programs (which it isn't even good at), so I think a direct list of apps is better all around with an option to launch apps from an intuitive search bar.

Tichy• 14 years ago

I really dislike this trend in UI design. The reason is simple: I want a fair chance to discover how to do stuff on my computer. I don't want to read handbooks or worse, watch tutorial videos.

The point of a good UI is to make a handbook superfluous.

Windows 8′s next victim: Microsoft kills the Start button

Related Stories