Microsoft Will Soon Bring Back The Start Menu In Windows 8.1

http://techcrunch.com/2014/04/02/microsoft-will-soon-bring-back-the-start-menu-in-windows-8-1/

by zastrowm • 12 years ago

371 290 12 years ago

techcrunch.com

ntakasaki• 12 years ago

Less blurry screenshot https://twitter.com/pouletfou51/status/451417213052809216/ph...

nacs• 12 years ago

Hopefully that Fisher-Price mess they have attached to the start menu can be disabled as well.

TheLoneWolfling2• 12 years ago

I doubt it.

As far as I can tell this is "just" another way of pushing Metro. Excuse me: the interface formerly known as Metro.

"Oh, people complained about us forcing Metro. So let's introduce it more gradually!"

bunderbunder3• 12 years ago

I doubt you'll be able to disable it, but presumably you could just remove all the tiles if you really don't want them.

Personally I think it might be a good idea. It seems like a reboot of what Microsoft was going for with the Windows Sidebar (or the Start screen, obviously) in a format that actually works with desktop Windows's overall UI paradigm.

derefr2• 12 years ago

I remember when people were switching from Windows Vista to Windows 7. Want to know what they missed the most? The sidebar widgets. There were all sorts of guides on how to get sidebar.exe running in W7.

The basic premise of W8, if you ignore all the window-management stuff, is that they put your sidebar widgets inside your start menu, and made that your desktop (thus also obviating desktop shortcuts.) They may have implemented it horribly, but if the W8 start screen was the desktop--if your taskbar and windows displayed on top of it--I think it'd be the perfect UX for a desktop.

Too3• 12 years ago

That blue and green combo really gave me vibes of windows xp, that is not a good thing.

bluthru• 12 years ago

I'd like to see them incorporate the recycle bin into the taskbar, similar to the dock in OS X.

deletes• 12 years ago

right click >> Properties >> Disable metro

I hope there is an obscure setting somewhere that would disable metro completely. As a programmer I see no benefit to it.

gordaco• 12 years ago

TBH I still find it very ugly, but then again I've disliked flat design since the first moment I've seen it.

I know I'm pretty much a caveman (and a minority) in this sense, but I really like the old, classic, sober windows 9x look and feel, so much that I doubt I'd use a new version of Windows that wouldn't allow me to use it. I'd rather do away completely with Modern UI in the desktop, but it seems some people like it; the more config options given, the better, at least for power users.

daigoba662• 12 years ago

It's interesting how similar it is to some of the concepts from this often linked write-up: http://jaymachalani.com/blog/2013/12/12/fixing-windows-8

zastrowm• 12 years ago

I'd hope they take more influence from the write-up, however. I like that they'll allow Windowed apps, but their current implementation now looks like they crammed together Metro and Windows 7 without any polish. The write-up, however, has a nice cohesive experience. Of course, Microsoft's startup menu is probably early alpha, so it's a moot point.

tsurantino• 12 years ago

This is definitely better. One subtle thing that it takes into account that's different from the Microsoft screenshot is that the current Microsoft version has two shortcuts for the Start Menu - the pinned start items separated by a line and the live tiles.

Jay put the live tiles where the items are currently separated by the line to make that cohesive experience. I really hope they move forward with that design for the next update.

rayiner2• 12 years ago

Microsoft just needs to copy Apple here. Have a desktop, but let Metro apps run in either a window or full screen in another desktop. Voila: integration of Metro and the desktop in a way that doesn't suck.

FreezerburnV• 12 years ago

That's coming in an update. Which is also mentioned in the article and shown in the image (look at the right-most window) :)

antonioevans• 12 years ago

I don't agree. Metro doesn't make sense if you have a desktop with apps on it. It's redundant. I have no access to the numbers but in my office no one uses the Apps except weather. Trying to create a ubiquitous system for tablets/phones/desktop ignores how people use each device.

kabdib• 12 years ago

It's worse than redundant, it gets in the way.

I upgraded to 8.1 from Win7 last week. My first experience trying to compare a PDF document with text file in another editor was quite unpleasant (Metro essentially makes apps modal, which is nuts).

rayiner2• 12 years ago

I can't stand the desktop with all the window management that is involved, so I generally prefer to just swipe between full screen apps. Sometimes you need to have multiple windows on screen, however, and so the desktop has a purpose, but as Windows moves forward it should be relegated to a secondary role.

bane• 12 years ago

I actually really like how full-screen works in OS X, in principle, and on one monitor. It's nice, isolated, you can navigate quickly via keyboard (ctrl+left/right, alt-tab) or 3 finger swipe. But it all falls apart on multiple monitors. It's better on Mavericks, but still isn't quite right.

I do love the keyboard extensions brought into play with Windows 7 for positioning windows, windows+left/right to align to exactly half of the current window, keeping hitting right or left over and over again to keep moving across monitors. Windows+up toggle maximize. It's ridiculously quick and simple and you can go from a bunch of maximized apps to comparing two things side by side without ever leaving the keyboard.

I can do this on my mac as well, but I have to install a flaky extension of some sort to make it happen.

momentarily• 12 years ago

Metro should have been device-aware (and still, toggleable) from the very beginning.

You can't impose a touch interface on desktop devices any more than you can impose a desktop interface on touch devices. Microsoft tried that, too, with Windows CE. It didn't work so well.

r00fus• 12 years ago

Good news, but why did it take so long for MS to grok this?

So far every single piece of news since Ballmer's abdication has shown clue.

Too3• 12 years ago

When making such a major change its hard to know if people don't like it simply because "its not like it used to be" or if it really isn't good. Only way to distinguish between those two is to wait.

I still see people today who configure windows explorer to show the menu bar, this was removed (default to hidden) in windows vista and there's basically nothing on that menu that can't be done in fewer mouse clicks elsewhere. These people don't even use the menu themselves, they are just used to seeing it there.

Haul4ss• 12 years ago

And every single piece of that news started under Ballmer's tenure. The new guy has been there < 60 days. The stuff they're announcing now was started months if not years ago.

RandallBrown• 12 years ago

Microsoft has nearly 100,000 employees. The company moves at a glacial pace, so changes like this that might seem small to you, will actually take quite some time.

clauretano• 12 years ago

and nearly 100,000 additional "dash trash" workers.

praseodym• 12 years ago

The Verge thinks this will be part of Windows 9 instead: http://www.theverge.com/2014/4/2/5574830/windows-9-start-men...

acqq4• 12 years ago

The Verge link doesn't mention Windows 9 anymore. And the screenshot actually contains the "Windows 8.1 Enterprise Build 9600" string (check the right corner).

https://pbs.twimg.com/media/BkPBkEXCcAEIbN4.png:large

Crito• 12 years ago

It's always nice to see UI/UX people respond to user input and admit when they are wrong, rather than berate their users for not understanding the product. This sort of humbleness seems to be becoming increasingly rare.

In the past Microsoft has done well for themselves by listening to their business users and prioritizing their concerns about backwards compatibility. I hope this revert represents a natural continuation of that policy.

soup10• 12 years ago

Except they've added all that metro crap to the already cluttered start menu. Their UI team is still a long way from acknowledging the failure of integrating metro with the desktop; and windows 8 will continue to be a mess until they do.

sonnyz2• 12 years ago

Hopefully they'll have an option to use a smaller start menu, like in the past.

bratsche3• 12 years ago

Metro itself wasn't the problem though, imo. It's the UX of going back and forth to do simple tasks that is the problem.

Example: how do you restart or shutdown your Windows 8.1 machine when you're on the desktop? Go to the start screen. Click your name, sign out, click the screen so it 'opens', click the power button, click restart or shutdown from the menu.

toxicityj2• 12 years ago

I don't know if I really mind the metro crap being there. Some of the "at a glance" stuff will be really useful (weather, mail, social, etc.) for quick views. In some ways that stuff already is useful, but having to roll out the big start menu that incompasses my entire screen to view was a bit silly, imo.

bushido2• 12 years ago

8.1 has the option to boot to desktop, they could enable that by default.

Personally I don't see Metro as a UI failure, my productivity actually increased with metro. I rarely need to use the mouse, which is great.

Also, hitting the windows key to switch screens is not a big deal, my grand parents complain about it a little, but the pains of having to explain finding stuff in the start menu to them and other older relatives has stopped happening.

Additionally with the docking capability of the task bar aka "pin program to task bar" had made the start menu quite redundant since win 7.

yaeger2• 12 years ago

Exactly.

I don't see MS as humble here at all. They are backtracking because they are forced to backtrack as it is evident that their idea of an OS does not work. But do they backtrack in the right fashion? No. "As little as possible" seems to be the mission statement.

People want the old start menue back. They voice their opinions as "Where is the start button?" To anyone with half a brain it should be clear that they didn't just mean the UI element of that button but the functionality behind it. And as much as I hate Microsoft's shortcomings as of late, I doubt that they really believed "Well, if they just want that button, give them the button but once clicked it'll still do the same shift to metro it did before. That should give people what they want" I doubt anybody could be that dense.

And even this "return of the old start menue" is not what people want. As they still keep on with the Metro part of things.

A simple choice during install. Is all that is needed. "Do you want touch or desktop?" Touch meaning Metro and desktop meaning, well, desktop. Without any metro tile nonsense what-so-ever. Done. All of the issues with Win8 and I mean all of them would be gone. But that doesn't fit with Microsoft's vision of having tiles everywhere. So, by the way they are "fixing" win8 and refusing to acknowledge that metro needs to die, at least on the desktop, I really doubt that "Win9" would be any better.

We finally get off the "every other version of windows is usable" because now, every version of windows will be worse than its predecessor.

tsunamifury2• 12 years ago

I agree, however some user-loved UX paradigms hold you back from moving the product forward (Faster buggy problem) and listening to your users complain about nostalgia slowly makes you less competitive once some other company launches a better, newer UX.

That being said, nothing is an excuse for a bad or confusing UX pattern -- and Windows 8 had plenty of those on TOP of removing the start button, making people less forgiving of its removal.

camus2• 12 years ago

makes me wonder,what kind of A/B testing they did before launching W8 at first place, or ModernUI was supposed to replce it, or was it just because some executive decided people did not need a start menu anymore.

Any input on that?

protonfish4• 12 years ago

My guess is the same user testing MS always does: ask the suits if they like it.

frik4• 12 years ago

Microsoft relied too heavily on metrics.

Windows 7, Office 2010, etc. "phone home" by default, sending them usage patterns. But power user usually deactivate such intrusive annoyance.

Lessons learned the hard way: Don't rely completely on automatically gathered metrics. Do not piss off the community that develops applications for your platform.

The_Octopode• 12 years ago

UI - users know what they want

Functionality - users think they know what they want

aaronbrethorst• 12 years ago

It undoubtedly helps that the key people behind the Windows 8 Ux have either left Microsoft or left the Windows org. So perhaps it's less 'we screwed up,' and more 'they screwed up.'

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Steven_Sinofsky

http://www.microsoft.com/en-us/news/exec/larsongreen/default...

http://www.geekwire.com/2013/microsoft-windows-shakeup-conti...

frik4• 12 years ago

For Win9 we can only hope the UI gets new sane colors! Windows 95, XP, Vista/7 all had nice color choices for their time.

The Win8.x metro colors look like chosen by a color blind person. Or to celebrate the 30th anniversary of Windows 1.0 by a retro color theme.

dragontamer2• 12 years ago

Wut? Did someone just praise XP's singular color scheme? I guess everything really does look better in hindsight.

http://windowsitpro.com/systems-management/windows-xp-color-...

plaguuuuuu• 12 years ago

95 was pretty groundbreaking. Vista was nice tho. But XP felt a bit fisher-price even at launch :p

The Win8 colors look like someone ate a color palette and then barfed it all over the wireframes. It's horrible

ekianjo2• 12 years ago

It's always nice to see UI/UX people respond to user input and admit when they are wrong, rather than berate their users for not understanding the product. This sort of humbleness seems to be becoming increasingly rare.

You must be kidding. In a big company like Microsoft I would have hoped they listen to user feedback BEFORE they release stuff, not just after. This is really the wrong way to design UI - they were clearly not humble in the first place when they pushed for the removal of the start button, but they still went on with it.

Fuxy• 12 years ago

It's about time. Windows 8 with metro is decent on a touch screen but on a device not touch enabled it's a nightmare.

Not to mention those touchpad gestures.

Removing start from the desktop was the worst move ever in history.

ryan-allen• 12 years ago

I agree, Metro on a small touch device is good, and being able to drop to the desktop to do "computer stuff" is awesome when you need it.

On a 27" desktop? Oh god, Metro is a nightmare. I've been using StartIsBack but I'm glad there'll be a properly sanctioned start menu soon. Hopefully it will lead to greater adoption of Win8, as besides that one major blunder, is not too bad at all!

darrenkopp• 12 years ago

After using Windows 8 since release, I kind of prefer the current start menu to the old school one, but I guess I'm in the minority.

ryanoshea2• 12 years ago

I agree. There's no lost functionality with the new screen, except not being able to see your desktop while you're in the Start screen. Let's think about what you can do in the traditional start menu:

- search for and browse for applications and settings (you can do this in the start screen)

- have quick access to favorite programs (this is what tiles are for)

- have quick access to settings shortcuts, like "Devices and Printers" (you can search for these)

- shut down/standby/power commands (these have been moved to a charm, but will return in 8.1 Update 1)

The only thing that has been changed, that people might not like, is the design, the layout, and possibly the change in UX getting from the start screen to a given action. But as far as I can see, every action you'd want to do on the start screen is just as accessible as it was in Windows 7.

To me, pressing the Start key on my keyboard and typing the first few letters of literally anything I want to do on my system is the most important UX component of Windows 8 & 8.1. Windows Vista introduced it, Windows 7 improved it, and now 8 and 8.1 made it shinier and faster. It's amazing to me how many people I see trying to use their computers without taking advantage of this functionality.

Of course, I might have just forgotten something. But it seems like people are mostly just complaining because it's different, regardless of whether it's actually worse.

DerpDerpDerp2• 12 years ago

Traversing the start screen menus without being able to see a webpage is a major downside for trying to figure out how to deal with their stupid settings layout, which is itself a second major downside to Windows 8.

Had they not spread settings between 2-3 different places, or left the menus being intuitive to make adjustments to the system, it might have been fine. But there's been several times I've had to resort to the internet to disable "helpful" features (like "power saving" by toggling my wifi on the desktop), and constantly toggling between the menu screen and the webbrowser because the menu ran full screen was rather annoying.

Not a good way to convince me you've made a good menu layout change.

flavor8• 12 years ago

To me, pressing the Start key on my keyboard and typing the first few letters of literally anything I want to do on my system is the most important UX component of Windows 8 & 8.1. Windows Vista introduced it, Windows 7 improved it, and now 8 and 8.1 made it shinier and faster. It's amazing to me how many people I see trying to use their computers without taking advantage of this functionality.

This is a great feature. I think it actually was introduced by quicksilver on mac, though - and has been around for a long time in various linux environments also. Gnome 3 and Unity (much reviled in the 'nix world) suffered similar criticism to Windows 8 in part because they got rid of the traditional start menu.

prawks• 12 years ago

To me, pressing the Start key on my keyboard and typing the first few letters of literally anything I want to do on my system is the most important UX component of Windows 8 & 8.1.

Agreed. It's something Spotlight has been incredibly successful at on OS X, and I'm surprised more Mac users don't hit Cmd + Space.

But then again, I'm also not surprised. It seems to me that the vast majority of users prefer a mouse or finger to typing on a keyboard, and when a search bar is not the main feature of an application, it goes unused. I know people who search for "gmail" on the Google homepage rather than clicking the header bar link, because the search bar is so prominently the focus.

w-ll• 12 years ago

I'm in the same group with you, I've gotten past those early Windows 8 woes, and now I like the new Metro start. Although my use is fairly narrow to just hitting the Windows key and typing the first few letters of the app I'm trying to launch, other than that it stays out of my way and if I need to look for something, its just as easy as launch pad on OSX.

tdicola3• 12 years ago

I'm fascinated that they still keep the Building Windows 8 blog up these days. You can go back and read their justifications on why they made the major changes that are now being backed out of win 8, for example start menu: http://blogs.msdn.com/b/b8/archive/2011/10/11/reflecting-on-... and http://blogs.msdn.com/b/b8/archive/2011/10/03/evolving-the-s... I would love to see an analysis of how with so much data and insight they built something people didn't want. Was it all just confirmation bias causing them to see what they wanted in the data?

drzaiusapelord• 12 years ago

Isn't a PR blog, by definition, more than a little disingenuous?

I imagine certain data was cherry-picked to tow the party line (Ballmer?) but now with the new talent coming into power, things are changing.

untog• 12 years ago

I imagine certain data was cherry-picked to tow the party line

There isn't any evidence of that. The far more interesting possibility is that the data suggested that they do what they did, but that the data was wrong. An examination of how and why that might be the case would be fascinating.

As opposed to saying "typical Ballmer!"

jamesaguilar2• 12 years ago

Certainly not by definition, although they may tend to be. The truth can be very good pr.

brc• 12 years ago

The expression is 'toe the line' - as in keep your metaphorical toes behind the metaphorical line - stay in line with everyone else.

tsunamifury2• 12 years ago

Your comment highlights the far more unsettling truth -- that a company with a great deal of resources, research and user-feedback still created something that the market rejected.

I deal with this fear by believing that users crave a personal vision. They can get into a product that is foreign to them as long as it represents a singular designed and cohesive flow. They reject 'design by committee' or data-driven designs because they represent the average of what all users want, not what any single user desires.

frozenport2• 12 years ago

Or it could be misused data. I suspect that MS may have placed too much weight on mobile users.

unreal372• 12 years ago

I actually read through one of those links, and wow, they really really went through great pains to explain every single decision with data and tracking. This really puts today's announcement into a new light. How DID they so blindly ignore the voices of users and trick themselves into believing the metro UI was better using all that data? There's so much of it that purportedly supports their old view.

I'm one who's never adapted to the new Windows 8, and prefer Windows 7 any time I have a choice. I actually feel that I use my laptop a lot less because it has Windows 8 on it.

chris_mahan• 12 years ago

That's because they stopped listening to people and started listening to data.

Let that be a warning to all these "data-driven-anything" people.

diydsp2• 12 years ago

From what I remember, they were pointing out an overwhelming majority of their users were only pressing the same 8 or so buttons at the bottom of the taskbar to start apps.

And I'm on board with that.

It's just that one needs the Start Menu to get those 8 or so buttons into the taskbar in the first place!!!!

"Yes, Mrs. Bathwater? Your baby is...thataway!"

atmosx2• 12 years ago

I don't know really. Since Balmer kicked in, Microsoft's decision making process is a sort of a mystery. Can a company with so deep pockets, so well establish fail consequently?

There are still around people running Windows XP because they consider them superior. I never had issues with Vista or 7 (although never used them as a desktop), but Windows 8 are a new low...

Already__Taken• 12 years ago

“If I had asked people what they wanted, they would have said faster horses.” - Henry Ford

Casing user opinion is in my opinion a pretty terrible way to do UX. It's an interactive process not a committee one.

I imagine they ignored all the noise by filtering out all comments about issues they already addressed, then looked at how the ribbon ui went down and ended up a superb success.

I support end users. Most wouldn't go into 'all programs' unless directed. None know that panel as the "start menu" any more since they took the word 'start' off it.

It's just not that big of a deal to skip over every other cool thing in 8 to stick on 7.

Personally I want to see windowed metro apps, the start screen maybe the bottom half height/full width of my display (13" 1080p) and a transparent background.

That would be good I think. The corners are a nice idea although i never really use the left one.

Can we all use this effort to cry for a feature that would actually help like say, native virtual desktops in Windows? Wicked useful.

namlem2• 12 years ago

I have a Venue 8 pro that is my only Windows 8 device and I love it. I don't know that I would like this in a larger/more expensive device, but it pretty much kicks the shit out of a Nexus 7. The screen isn't as nice, and the UI isn't as smooth, but an x86 and the ability to install Windows apps makes up for it easily.

throwawaymsft3• 12 years ago

I'm familiar with the mentality that designed these interfaces -- just a stubbornness that everyone thinks the way you do, and hoping data can do the thinking for you. All that data, but no insight into how an everyday user would react.

I mentioned it below, but keyboard analytics show the z key is hardly used and should be removed, perhaps available to power users.

tdicola3• 12 years ago

"keyboard analytics show the z key is hardly used and should be removed, perhaps available to power users"

LOL, too true. Let's replace Z with a '.com' key since the data tells us people are constantly typing '.com'. We can move Z to be Ctrl-Shift-A.

duncans• 12 years ago

I think Sinofsky had a Steve Jobs complex.

adamwong2467• 12 years ago

Never understood the fixation with the start menu. You start up metro and you are greeted with all those tiles- that is the new Start Menu. Why is that so confusing?

jamesaguilar2• 12 years ago

It's not confusing. It's unnecessary and difficult to navigate with a mouse.

tdicola3• 12 years ago

Also very annoying to be thrown out of your app when you just want to run a calculator or something small. Even more annoying when that calculator has to run full screen (or you have to waste time snapping it to some side).

adamwong2467• 12 years ago

True, while metro is really quite nice on a tablet, it is downright terrible with a mouse. I think this could be relieved by scaling down all the tiles on a mouse-and-keyboard setup.

But to me, thats an entirely different concern. It's frustrating that most users, of any platform, will simply scream and give up whenever there's a change in their routine.

benjohnson• 12 years ago

For me, there's no sense of order to the tiles - it's like walking into a cluttered room. Sure - you'd get used to where things were, but the initial reaction for me was of shock.

adamwong2467• 12 years ago

I actually like this. By removing the tree structure of the traditional menu, you allow the machine to do it's best to populate the screen with tiles it predicts are useful. Instead of forcing everything into a specific box, let the OS conform to the users history.

diydsp2• 12 years ago

And I'll add that it drove me nuts to see random, popcorn-like activity amongst the tiles.

I kept trying to find "control panel" to add a second monitor, for example, but one of those tiles spontaneously showed me a video of an fscking carnival in Rio!

Then, another flashed a bikini babe in Miami.

Then, another flashed a severe weather warning on another continent...

It was like being in the control room of a news station! Pretty like a Christmas tree or fireworks, but *first I have to help my girlfriend set up her computer to write her dissertation."

leddt• 12 years ago

The main complaint I think is the context switch. You go from desktop-world to metro-land and back again.

I think the new update will go a LONG way to reduce (or eliminate) these problems. The other major enhancement in my opinion is they made the taskbar accessible from metro apps.

adamwong2467• 12 years ago

Yeah. 2 totally different experiences in one OS? That reeks of design-by-committee.

giulianob• 12 years ago

You can now set the Metro background to the same background as the desktop. It's a small detail that has made the experience much less jarring for me.

overgard2• 12 years ago

Its not so much confusing as it is useless and annoying. It's just a really inefficient and wasteful design for a desktop OS. Basically, most windows users really liked the windows 7 start menu, and they replaced it with something that has no tangible upside and a lot of downsides.

adamwong2467• 12 years ago

I think this concern could be addressed. Simply scale down the tiles, which is the greatest unused aspect of metro. Those tiles can be big and touchable in a touch device and small and efficient on a non-touch device.

gagaga6• 12 years ago

Actually it's a terribly efficient design. The usability studies that involved eye-tracking showed that when the start menu is open, users gaze is purely focused on the start menu, not other objects on the desktop. If this is the case, then why not use the whole screen as your start menu? Now you can show many more apps, search results, and allow users to spatially group apps and folders to their liking.

The backlash came from the fact that it was a change from 20+ years of ingrained behavior, not that it was an inherently poor design. However, you could argue breaking the previous mental model of users will definitely create issues and therefore is a bad design.

wvenable• 12 years ago

My father-in-law resorted to navigating to Program Files to launch programs. Clearly there are some serious usability to discoverability problems if a normal user can figure that out but can't figure out the start menu.

macspoofing2• 12 years ago

My issues:

1) It's not that great for mouse/keyboard.

2) Having both Metro and Classic feels very disjointed. You get thrown into either depending on which application you open.

toxicityj2• 12 years ago

#2 has been my biggest issue with Win8 since beta. One of the first things I noticed was how weird it felt constantly switching between the two UIs. I could probably adapt to a metro-only UI (Lord knows I'd throw a fit along the way and it would take forever), but there is ZERO incentive to use it when the classic UI is there.

sliverstorm4• 12 years ago

I actually like "Metro Start Menu" better than "Start Menu" for the keyboard. Put simply, "Start Menu" is a tree. Lots of diving into nodes and scrolling up and down. Conceptually convenient and easy with a mouse, but the 2D grid in Metro is more convenient with just a keyboard.

adrr• 12 years ago

People like the start menu over a tile based system full screen solution. Apple tried to do the same thing with launchpad, i have yet to see anyone use it.

arjie2• 12 years ago

Personally, I feel overloaded with the full screen start menu. Many times I have gone to the start menu and then just reflexively hit Win + D immediately. Some times I completely forget what I wanted and have to return to context to figure out what I wanted.

Fortunately, I don't use Windows that much so I just cope with it when I do but I always dread booting it. I don't use it because I want it. And I swear I gave it more than an honest chance. For months, I told myself that it wasn't bad and I just needed to get used to it. I wanted to like it because it was an exciting new interface, but it couldn't be done.

I can't stand it.

skreech• 12 years ago

When using a touchscreen on a 13" ultrabook, the Win 8 start menu actually makes a lot of sense.

matt_heimer• 12 years ago

But forcing a touchscreen UI on everybody that doesn't have one is dumb. I don't see why they are trying to combine the two. Simply detect the form-factor, default to either the Metro or Win7 UI based on that and given people the option to switch.

teamonkey2• 12 years ago

I reckon, and I'm sure Microsoft and Apple do too, that screens without touch input will die out pretty quickly. Certainly within the lifespan of Win8 touch will be the norm.

And the Windows desktop in its current form is awful for touch screens, so it too will die out. Expect similar updates from Apple soon.

marknutter• 12 years ago

Might as well never change anything, ever. Sigh..

fournm3• 12 years ago

The Microsoft conundrum: Every UI, interaction, and functionality must always stay the exact same and never change or be iterated upon/refined, but why aren't they trying anything to meet X demand or Y new thing.

vertex-four6• 12 years ago

There's plenty of new non-Metro-related functionality in Windows 8 that nobody ever complains about. Especially on the management side of things. Of course, people who'd actually use that functionality don't use Windows 8 because of Metro.

GrinningFool2• 12 years ago

The problem isn't the start menu. A fullscreen searchable start menu is something people have likely gotten used to - except for a vocal minority.

The problem is the context switching. Some apps full screen (even when they don't make sense or I want them part screen). Some control panel stuff in 'apps' (which requires full screen); some still in the old control panel. Some in both.

Somewhere along the way someone started thinking the whole 'single task at a time [or at most two]' was a Good Thing - but then someone else said that we can't do that, and what we got was the ugly bastard child of both.

I've stopped booting Windows, haven't done so even for gaming in a couple of months now. It's just too annoying at 8.x.

edit: before someone calls me on it, why no I did not read the article - I've since gone back and done so, and it sounds like they'll be offering windowed mode for metro apps as well.

So I take it back, this has the potential to make it far less annoying (if they consistently make it available for all metro apps).

DerpDerpDerp2• 12 years ago

I mostly agree with your opinion about why Windows 8 was bad.

A full screen, searchable start menu isn't the worst thing - though it does mean I can't be read a webpage while looking for something (which is a slight loss on usability). This is just a special case of your point about only being able to do one (or two) things at a time, when on a desktop, I really want to be able to 4 or 5. It seems like an interface designed for a tablet stapled (badly) to a completely different interface.

Another problem is that they spread settings across 2 or 3 different places, hid things like shut down commands (because, you know, I'm never going to be shutting down my desktop!), and generally broke any consistency/sensibility to how the controls interface with the system.

jimmaswell2• 12 years ago

I end up dragging things onto/onto items on to open with/off the start menu enough that that was a major annoyance having it take up the whole screen.

bunderbunder3• 12 years ago

A full screen, searchable start menu isn't the worst thing

No, but it's a symptom of the worst thing. The worst thing is that Microsoft's UX team failed to realize that "The user's actually only interacting with this one thing right now" does not necessarily imply "This one thing is the only thing that deserves to even be visible right now."

jobu• 12 years ago

It seems like the thinking at Microsoft has been that "Windows should be the same on every platform" That's why they had a terrible desktop-like experience in the mobile WinCE, and a terrible mobile-like experience in desktop Windows 8. (There were also rumors a while back that Ballmer wanted to put a Windows interface on the Xbox.)

Mobile and Desktop are very different use cases, and it seems like Microsoft is finally understanding that.

ape42• 12 years ago

Yes, if I am using a word processor and want to pull up the calculator I don't want to lose sight of the document I am working on. Its nice that the old start menu didn't hide everything. Then when I get the calculator I want to see the number from my document -- don't want it taking up my entire 25 inch screen.

bananas2• 12 years ago

This.

I did a comparison photo (I can't find it any more) with my HP50g help up next to the Windows 8.1 calendar on my 27" display.

Embarrassingly bad.

stinky613• 12 years ago

I think if Microsoft made more of an effort to encourage users to filter the start screen by typing then this would all be less of a sticking point for people. If I have a word processor open and I want to use the calculator I press the windows key and hit c-a-l-c-<enter>. The calculator is up on the screen alongside the word processor and the desktop has been obscured for less than a second.

Pxtl2• 12 years ago

Yeah, the "windowed metro apps" thing is way more interesting than the start-menu.

I stubbornly insist that the idea behind a unified tablet and desktop OS is sound, it's just that windows 8 screwed the implementation with its Classic/Metro schizophrenia instead of focusing on the nature of the user's screen real-estate instead of the nature of the applications.

On a desktop I have space, so use my space for an always-visible taskbar and windowed apps. On at tablet I don't have space, so make the apps always-maximized and auto-hide the taskbar. But that doesn't mean unifying the OS was a bad thing - I'd want that auto-hide always-fullscreen tablet-oriented OS on an 11" ultrabook, even if it was the "desktop" form of the OS. And likewise, give me windowing on some kind of monstrous 23" tablet thing.

lugg2• 12 years ago

It sounds ugly and wrong to have both IMHO. Yet I use both in Mac is every day. Coding = full screen zone mode, debugging = panel / window mode. Window mode I find pretty much useless these days Im not sure what has changed but I prefer full screen and panels windows just add an extra step and use case of organizing my windows which should be handled for me in this day and age.

Side note, anyone know of something like awesome for Mac?

jc4p• 12 years ago

Speaking of the searchable start menu - I realized last week that hitting Win + S will open up just the search area over in a right sidebar. It's made me so much happier.

ssully• 12 years ago

This is the first time I have heard of this and I am genuinely angry that this is the first I have heard of it. Maybe I should of read a short-cut doc.

GrinningFool2• 12 years ago

Nice find, thanks!

vacri4• 12 years ago

My first experience with Win8 was trying to troubleshoot a legacy software issue where the relevant guide was in .pdf form... but the pdf viewer was fullscreen. It beggared belief that someone thought that you'd never want to see another part of the OS while working on a document, on a desktop system. How did they think that this would appeal to business users?

amercade• 12 years ago

Why not use windows 7 instead of 8? What can I get from 8.1 that 7 doesn't have? Other than a UI that I don't like very much.

bratsche3• 12 years ago

I know naming is tough, but couldn't they have called this something else? Windows 8.2? Windows 8.1.1 even?

joshbert• 12 years ago

I'm all for flat design should the context call for it. I don't feel like Windows 8 calls for it. I feel like that start menu looks infantile and cluttered.

Yes Microsoft, we get it, you invented metro. Stop trying to push it on us on the desktop.

Pxtl2• 12 years ago

This seems like the wrong solution to the problem. Merging the start menu with the desktop as a full-screen launcher was a great idea - the start menu is effectively a modal interface so it only makes sense to make it fullscreen, and the old "icons on the desktop" thing in Windows has always been a misfeature.

My problem is its terrible integration with old Windows apps, drawing a hard line between "Metro" applications and "Windows Desktop" applications.

The other stuff is just mechanical problems with pretending that an 11" screen is the same as a desktop monitor. Give me an always-visible taskbar, one that uses words instead of pictograms. I've got 2 23" monitors - I've got the space to dedicate some of that room to a taskbar. Also showing multiple applications at a time.

acqq4• 12 years ago

Full screen swap for some short term action is never a good idea on the 24 inch screen. I understand you only if you assume the use of 7 inch device.

frik4• 12 years ago

Finally, it took Redmond two Windows releases.

It's good that the "metro" apps now run in window-mode too next to Win32 apps.

Though, I wonder if Metro apps will be around in Win9. They could shut it down like Silverlight and the Vista/7 desktop gadgets. Instead of metro apps, saving websites to desktop (links) like in Win7 and FirefoxOS would make a lot more sense (IMHO).

druidsbane• 12 years ago

I think this is a great move, but why not enhance the run dialog so it works like Spotlight does on OSX: minimal, you type and it automatically searches. I like the start menu because its smaller than the start screen, but I prefer my launcher to be as tiny and powerful as possible without fullscreen flashing. Also, it lets me use the launcher to type in things that I can see from other windows, eg: calculations, paths, etc...

ape42• 12 years ago

Windows 8 - no start button or menu

Windows 8.1 - added the start button but has Metro menu

Windows 8.2 - merges old start menu and Metro menu

Windows 8.3 - Same as Windows 7 (hopefully)

frik4• 12 years ago

Windows 9 - coexistence of Win32 and HTML5 web apps; abandon metro WinRT API (like done before with Vista/7 desktop gadgets, Silverlight, etc.)

tericho• 12 years ago

All I want is to be able to open the calculator or preview a photo without it taking up my whole 24" screen and forcing me to ALT+F4.

wambotron3• 12 years ago

I don't really think adding in the start menu is the answer. I've been using Win 8 since release candidate and, although I was annoyed at first, I soon grew to enjoy the new UX.

When I use Win 7 now, the thing that annoys me the most is that damn start menu. It's clunky and feels like a chore to navigate through. In Win 8, you can switch over to the metro screen with the Win key, start typing and BAM. OR you can win+q and start typing while you're in desktop mode.

I never use metro, so I can't really talk about that. I'm not on a touch device for my desktop, though.

I think MS just has a reputation for being "slow" and "clunky," despite the reality that it's a blazing fast OS and, once you adjust to the new UX, a really nice workflow.

Just my 2¢.

penguin42• 12 years ago

Do people not realize you can "hit win key and start typing" in windows 7 too? I haven't clicked on "all programs" in months.

It does seem they made the type-to-search faster/more comprehensive in win 8. But there's no need for that to be full screen. A win 7 style start menu with win 8 style search is the best of both worlds.

wambotron3• 12 years ago

It's definitely not the same search

zaroth• 12 years ago

What is there "to navigate through"? In Win7, press start and type. At least the whole screen doesn't puke on you when you do it. I don't think I've clicked that 'All Programs' button in years.

But more realistically, all the apps I want to run are always already running. There's nothing for me to "Start". If not for installing security updates, my system uptime would be several years.

What I actually want is major improvements to Alt-Tab. The most frustrating thing is how it frequently screws up the z-order when I'm switching back and forth between multiple apps. It seems to forget where I came from, and a single Alt-Tab sends me to the wrong place. The window 'latching' and Win-<arrow> shortcuts they adding in Win7 does help a bit with this, but doesn't obviate the need for much better Alt-Tab.

I think the second major flaw is, just because I happen to have 10 different excel sheets, 10 PPTs, 10 notepads "open", does not mean each one needs its own blank square in the Alt-Tab view. They figured out how to stack properly in the taskbar, but it didn't translate to the Alt-Tab view?

The concepts of "open" and "running" seem quite outdated to me. Assume everything is "open", everything is "running", and I don't need to "Start" anything. But I do need good tools to context switch and organize multiple windows across multiple screens. A full screen of identical looking icons is NOT the best solution, IMO.

wambotron3• 12 years ago

I don't think metro itself is very good, and, like I said, I don't use it.

I use Win+Q for searching (much like I use CMD+space on mac) and never even open the metro interface. I agree with you that the start menu and the idea of running/open are outdated.

morbius• 12 years ago

Completely OT, but I just realized how pleasant Nadella was at BUILD, and how much he stressed the importance of MS' relevance in the coming years. It's so refreshing seeing Microsoft establish a really solid brand identity; they've now got an in-house phone development program, and apart from that terrible Scroogled thing, their branding and marketing is fantastic.

It's an aura I never got from Ballmer, who verged on either hostility or outright silliness. I'm extremely excited for the future of Microsoft, and backtracking on the Start Menu helps prove that they know what they're doing.

Okay, NOW they know what they're doing.

MCarusi• 12 years ago

So it took them a year and a half to do what they did back in 1995. Well that's...really sad.

gulfie• 12 years ago

Yet another stunning advancement in the computer sciences. I wonder how Knuth will respond to being one upped.

romanovcode• 12 years ago

It's funny to see how people were crying for MS to bring back the Start menu right here, on HN some time ago.

Yet now I see plenty of posts with "that is not a solution..". Can you ever be satisfied?

slavik81• 12 years ago

Have you considered that they might not be the same people? If they are, perhaps you should address them individually.

drschwabe• 12 years ago

Dunno how any self-respecting nerd can accept Windows 8 knowing the direction that MS is taking the OS.

No matter how many band-aids they slap on it, IMO the 'new direction' (or metro, or tablet UI or whatever you wanna call it) is and will always be Microsoft's way of controlling the UX on Windows to maximize the efficiency of their app store sales funnel. The end goal is obvious, a commission on every software transaction on the Windows platform ala Mac app store.

If Microsoft was instead focused on the strengths of their OS rather than clamping down and being an Apple copy-cat I would have no problems continuing my support for Windows, a platform I've used since 3.1

Clearly though, they are going the other way. This sentiment is shared by Gabe Newell and it's no secret that Windows 8 was the catalyst for Valve's decision to shift efforts to Linux. I hope anyone else with Windows software will do the same.

untaken2• 12 years ago

When I tried the public preview, my heart sank when I saw that "Store" icon in the start screen.

The new UI I can deal with or customise - I've been developing since DOS, I'm sure I can get used to it. But please don't remove the very reason Windows became so popular: a relatively open ecosystem.

As a result of that (and the destruction of VS), my personal projects are no longer under Windows, and my career is also shifting away from it.

I'm not anti-MS - I was once their biggest cheerleader. I just don't like their direction.

bobbles• 12 years ago

If having a store inside windows that becomes popular enough, there would be potential for windows to become free to install/use.. (hey pigs could fly) Would that alleviate concerns about it?

afhsfsfdsss88• 12 years ago

Leave it to Microsoft to do the right thing once it has exhausted all other alternatives.

Havoc• 12 years ago

Until they fix the retarded search I'm not interested. We've got powerful computers...wtf do you mean it can't search applications, control panel and docs in one go? It could under Win7...

dm2• 12 years ago

It's easy to add features but removing features will usually piss of consumers.

I understand that they wanted a unified tablet and desktop OS but the way to do it would be to always use the tablet interface on tablets and offer the start menu and other traditional features as optional on first boot.

Optional and advanced features are always welcome, but don't replace things I use daily without offering a way to use the old version.

Maybe the new start menu / metro is better, but I don't have time TODAY to come to that conclusion myself. So I avoided Windows 8, because Windows 7 works and the time spent learning new things just didn't seem worth the new features.

Good job Microsoft, thank you for fixing this.

Windows 9 will be an important one. I personally think that they should look at what made Windows 2000, XP, and 7 so popular and focus on those features first. Look at what made Vista, ME, and 8 unpopular and avoid doing those things. That seems easy, good luck!

drivingmenuts• 12 years ago

Metro is pretty good on a tablet.

It's horrible on a desktop.

Here's hoping they don't fsck up the tablet (which they probably will).

dustinupdyke• 12 years ago

I wonder how much this is driven by true user feedback and by pack mentality by mass media. I use it, and for the life of me, can't see all the fuss.

kijin2• 12 years ago

This will probably get buried, but I've been saying for months: I want Metro to be the default wallpaper on my desktop!

(Anyone wish to turn Conky into a Metro app?)

Add the usual wishlist item of allowing Metro apps to open in their own windows (perhaps only when you're in desktop mode), and that's as close to perfect integration as it gets between the two UI paradigms.

DigitalSea• 12 years ago

The start menu should never have been removed. Microsoft lost their way temporarily with Windows 8, in their minds everyone was using Windows 8 on Surface tablets and Windows Phone's, not on the desktop where 95% of their market probably is using Windows with a keyboard and mouse.

My first purchase after buying Windows 8 was Stardock's Star8 which gave you back the start menu in Windows 8 and it only cost like $5. The fact I had to buy a separate application to bring back crucial functionality did irk we for a while, but it's good to see it's coming back eventually in its original form.

Don't get me start on the atrocious context switching. There is nothing more annoying then downloading a video, double clicking to play it only to have it load in the full-screen Metro Windows Media Player, then once you're done to be dumped back at the Metro tile interface again where you have to click on the Desktop tile to get back to point A.

I hope Windows 9 doesn't try and force new conventions that don't work on non-touch-screen devices again. Something tells me after the less than ideal Windows 8 sales figures, they won't make that same mistake twice.

hnriot• 12 years ago

Who still uses Windows!?! Linux at work, OSX in my bag. I couldn't bring myself to use Windows after all these years. 3.1 was great, since then it got worse every year. I gave up on Windows years ago.

It's like still using Hadoop now we have Spark.

frozenport2• 12 years ago

Slurm Queen: "Yes. Which is why we'll market it as New Slurm. Then, when everyone hates it, we'll bring back Slurm Classic and make billions!"

grn• 12 years ago

Why did they remove the menu at all? If removing it was such a bad idea then it would have come out in user research.

jon_black• 12 years ago

I'm seeing an increasing gap between what I need and what most people need. I haven't used a start menu for months since switching to i3wm and its dmenu, which is also making the mouse seem redundant for most tasks.

tonyblundell2• 12 years ago

I still think that a lot of the fuss is because people don't realise you can just hit the windows key and start typing to search in Win8. It's much quicker than using a menu.

yiedyie• 12 years ago

This seems like the forty years in the desert, back and forth, it is not efficient(actually is deficient) but it makes a good story.

I wonder why they dumped it for good in the first place why not make an option to chose when installing between the two interfaces.

throwwit• 12 years ago

They could've simply slowly transitioned to the 'metro' UI.

Step 1. Make advanced window positioning integrated with OS.

Step 2. Allow windows to fade into background (possibly live wallpaper).

Step 3. Make the changes more efficient to overall usage. Driving Adoption.

ssmoot2• 12 years ago

8 years ago I left behind .NET development and gaming PCs as a hobby for Ruby development on a Mac.

I got into crypto-currency mining last year. As that became less profitable I decided to sell most of my mining hardware, keep one R290, and build a gaming rig.

"Metro" (aside from forced full-screen) is the clean break Windows needed IMO. There were/are definitely usability issues with it, but mostly on the feature/app level IMO (it's difficult to know how to find the tool you're looking for in the new "Control Panel", it should not take minutes to figure out how to turn the computer off, etc).

The biggest problem with it was that it was inconsistent. Steam is a "Desktop" app. For no reason besides MS apparently didn't force developers to go Metro. That results in a really awful experience for users.

So this... bowing to the same crowd that said they'd never leave DOS for Windows '95. Or '95 for XP, or XP for Vista, and on and on... this is a huge mistake IMO. MS recommitting to a UX that's never really worked all that well, and at this point extremely dated.

zanny• 12 years ago

MS recommitting to a UX that's never really worked all that well, and at this point extremely dated.

At least a billion people have used and are experienced with the UX you claim as not working.

I'd say that is probably the best metric of a working UX. And the lack of Windows 8 adoption is another testament to that.

It doesn't matter if you think your next generation UI is an improvement, because there is one thing you can guarantee - if you are making radical UX changes, your userbase will not think it is an improvement. Change pisses people off, especially when they perceive it as unnecessary, and the Windows 8 UI mess came off to the vast majority of their userbase as unnecessary breakage of a 15 year UX their users came to expect.

ssmoot2• 12 years ago

More people have used and experienced CRTs. That doesn't make them superior. Just the state of the art for their time.

You're right. It doesn't matter that I think that. It matters that OSX can get people to convert because Windows is stale and it's desktop doesn't work well.

I didn't say "doesn't work". I said "well". Which is pretty subjective I guess, but I did qualify that it was an opinion so...

OSX has made changes. Some successes, some failures. The only real constant is that it does tend to change (at least to a greater degree than Windows IME).

Sure, MS may have the GM of operating systems on their hands. And there are a lot of GM fans with little Calvin & Hobbes stickers on their vehicles.

That doesn't mean there isn't room for improvement, and I'd be a lot happier as a PC user who only uses it for gaming if I never had to see the Windows Desktop experience again.

But I guess I'll be waiting for SteamOS for that to happen.

I mean, how many Xbox users want their much more Metro-like experience replaced with a standard Windows desktop?

I never argued it wasn't disruptive to goto Metro. As someone who uses BSD (OpenBSD load balancers), Unix (SmartOS VM hosts), OSX, Ubuntu (VMs) and Windows routinely, I just place good, intuitive UX above familiarity. It's the reason why Ubuntu is one of my least favorite distros with their alternative user-space tools and /etc design, and why the Windows Desktop is easily my least favorite GUI environment.

quattrofan• 12 years ago

Be nice also to have an intuitive way to close a metro app you've accidently opened when in the desktop. I end up using task manager to get rid of them, escape maybe?

dragoshell• 12 years ago

Have you tried Alt+F4?

tonyblundell2• 12 years ago

Drag from top of screen.

atmosx2• 12 years ago

I've written about this[1] some time ago. When I used windows 8, was the first time that I had to read a tutorial online on how to perform every day tasks after ... maybe 10 years.

I mean it's hilarious how bad the user experience of windows 8 in laptops with no touch screen is.

[1] http://www.convalesco.org/blog/2014/03/24/microsoft-windows-...

namlem2• 12 years ago

Honestly, I've grown to hate the start menu. I just want the launcher to be accessible with one gesture instead of two.

Microsoft Will Soon Bring Back The Start Menu In Windows 8.1

Related Stories