Submitted by
Users who Dugg This
vadapalli.suryanarayanaraju
82 Followers
gamingforever
8907 Followers
pizzaman99Feb 6, 2012
I am a technical support rep.
I dread this.
akronFeb 6, 2012
Don't worry, I'm still using XP.
adml_shakeFeb 6, 2012
I'm in IT and from what we've seen so far we have 0 plans to upgrade to this OS. The tiles thing on a desktop is stupid beyond words. It works great on a touch interface but on a desktop it makes no sense. We'll be sticking with windows 7 for awhile.
saramonFeb 6, 2012
Just want to let you know that you can restore the original Start menu ( I agree, not really practical on a desktop, I removed mine on my dev build), and it is about 20 percent faster then win 7. The new start search is pretty fantastic though, you don't really even need the tiles...
jvdiggnFeb 6, 2012
CLICK ON THE HOT CORNER!
Which one is that? my monitors corners all seem cold.
forchristaloneFeb 6, 2012
I work in IT as well and most of the company is still running xp. Will upgrade to 7 shortly but I think we will skip 8.
sixgunFeb 6, 2012
Good call, since it seems that microsucks only gets it right with every other release of windows.
caseycooldFeb 6, 2012
yeah I'm sure THIS won't come back to haunt them....
trivialanomalyFeb 7, 2012
Yeah, you got to wonder whats going on in their heads, when they start removeing and replacing major features that everyone is familiar with. Im' still trying to get my head around what they did to MS Word - changing all the menu's etc.
worldgate989Feb 6, 2012
How about they let us have a classic interface, some of us still like the 'start button'.
bobd1eFeb 6, 2012
Use Launchy. No need anymore :)
n0diggityFeb 7, 2012
Clippy? I need help making a word document!
gregwhitworthFeb 6, 2012
This is interesting, seeing as how Microsoft's own developer's information for the Windows 8 Beta shows the windows logo used for launching the button. I think that they will have migrate option. They would be dumb not to, I guess we'll have to wait to see.
http://download.microsoft.com/download/1/E/4/1E455D53-C382-4A39-BA73-55413F183333/Windows_Developer_Preview-Windows8_guide.pdf
saramonFeb 6, 2012
They will I assume, if not I am sure that a third party will do it, for instance I restored my old start menu on my dev build... You can also press the Win key on your keyboard to bring it up
karmashockFeb 6, 2012
It's nifty that MS is trying new things but most of their business model is built upon people not needing to try new things. They can just install the same old software in an updated rig and run it. Prior to the 64 bit versions of Windows 7 you could run lots of dos software with minimal effort on a windows machine.
They should keep a care to retain backward compatibility and make the UI changes OPTIONAL. Set them as the default option if you like but provide a "classic" option that lets people go back to the old way if that makes them happy. There's no good reason to force people to use a UI they don't like. That hte design people think it's better is just their opinion and not relevant to the consumer.
Remember New Coke? It was better according to the Coke people. They suddenly replaced all coke on the market with the new recipe. Result? Everyone flipped out and stopped drinking it. They wanted the old recipe. THis forced coke to recall the new coke and release Coca Cola Classic... only called classic because it wasn't NEW. When was the last time anyone saw new coke being sold? It's at best a novelty and a reminder to corporations like Coke that their brand is largely about stability and consistency... not improvement. If MS wants to improve their OS, add functionality... increase reliability... give it some wizbang graphics that will make the children happy. But if you change the underlying recipe... you're going to risk people dropping you for linux in the corporate world and OSX in the consumer world.
JLF2035Feb 6, 2012
If it's not optional at the beginning; I'm sure it will be, later on in a future patch.
The funny thing is, that I would actually choose OSX right now if it could play all the games I like.Comment is buried, click here to see the rest.
karmashockFeb 6, 2012
I had to hack windows 7 to let me manually arrange icons in folders like I did in windows xp. I also had to use several patches to get other features such as the folder size reported in the status of the window. The only way to get that in windows 7 without a patch is to right click and get properties. Prior versions of the OS would just tell you in the status bar.
The OS is becoming LESS useful... not more useful. UAC also broke many programs especially VNC and other remote programs. UAC doesn't so far as I know actually make the system safer. Are windows systems getting infected less? No... so what did that accomplish. Jack. And then DOS emulation in Windows 7 64bit is garbage. It worked pretty well in windows XP with lots of old DOS programs working just fine. But in windows 7 64 bit they won't even run. It's not something trival like games that can be addresses with DOSBOX. We're dealing with old databases and utilities that haven't been updated since the dos days because there was either no need or it was just too expensive to start all over again.
If MS forces people to recode their programs then they can recode them in ANY operating system. They don't have to stay on the MS train. They can jump. Forcing companies to recode is very dangerous and very stupid.
And changing the UI just pisses users off. There are some users that have been using a fairly consistent itteration of MS office apps. But with MS Office 2007 they changed the UI with no option to change it back. There are patches that will give SOME of the old menus back but it's silly that you even need to do that. Especially since now OpenOffice looks more like Office then MS Office.
Microsoft is making a huge mistake here. They need to understand their users and grasp that many of these changes are unwelcome.
JLF2035Feb 7, 2012
ok. and why exactly are you telling me all of that?
karmashockFeb 7, 2012
because you think the UI changes will be optional and they weren't in Vista or Windows 7.
leodinFeb 7, 2012
The problem with New Coke wasn't that people didn't like the taste, the problem was that they replaced regular Coke with New Coke, rather than giving customers a choice. And technically, Coca-Cola Classic isn't really the original formula - the switch to Classic also marked the switch to HFCS instead of natural sugar. Oh, and as an interesting aside, New Coke was sold for many years after the switch back to Classic as Coke II, further proving it was not the drink itself that was a failure, but rather the marketing of the drink.
Sorry about that, but I'm a bit of a soda geek.
karmashockFeb 7, 2012
It didn't sell. Classic which was designed to be as close to the old recipe as possible did.
And my reference was to support my argument about MS as it regards UI changes. In that context, my argument was valid.
leodinFeb 7, 2012
Well yes, I see the point of your argument, though I think it's only meaningful from a marketing standpoint - just because Classic was more successful doesn't mean that New Coke didn't have a place, it just wasn't marketed properly.
At any rate, I really just wanted to ramble on about soda history, because New Coke lasted a lot longer than most people assume.
karmashockFeb 7, 2012
people didn't want it.
And in the intervening years it has become an increasing novelty as it's phased out of existence.
Nearly all the sales to this day come from the "classic" coke. New coke remains a bad joke.
As to it lasting, mostly because companies are embarrassed when they screw up and try to phase out bad ideas slow enough to make it look like it was their idea or somehow make the failure less obvious. It was one of the most famous product disasters in US history.
In the parlance of this medium... Epic fail.
leodinFeb 8, 2012
People didn't want the concept of something replacing Coke... There was nothing wrong with the beverage itself, and in fact it tested very well, they just didn't want Coke to be replaced by anything. I don't know why you have to be such a ball breaker about, I was merely pointing out that the formula itself was sold for many years despite it being seen as such a huge disaster (just under a different label). I just, you know, wanted to point out some of the details that often get overlooked.
karmashockFeb 8, 2012
I'm not breaking your balls.
You're just pissing into the wind if you're trying to tell ANYONE that New Coke wasn't a failure. It was a failure. A huge one. You want to say the formula was fine? Well, it doesn't sell well and what approximates the old formula does.
QED.
So the question is... how damp do you want to get here?
Don't blame me... I'm just pointing out what you're doing.
leodinFeb 8, 2012
You're reading WAY too f**king much into this, buddy. All I did was point out that the formula for New Coke outlasted the name, and you want to get all pissy about it and start an argument. Excuse me for wanting to point out some things that people might not have known before. If you're going to push for this draconian "I'm right and you're wrong," bulls**t, that's fine by me, feel free to declare yourself the "winner," I was just pointing out a little soda history and you had to make a f**king spectacle of it.
karmashockFeb 8, 2012
I'm not pissy...
I'm not the one with his dick out pointed into breeze and drenching himself.
I'd say you're getting more "pissy" by the moment. :D
New Coke failed. it was a bad idea. Coke realizes that.
If MS realized it's flagship products were like Coke they'd more accurately understand why fooling with things is a bad idea.
Want to change the lettering on the can? Go for it... want to change the color of the can from red to yellow? Stupid.
Just be careful about what you change and remember to protect the legacy of your product and brand.
Closed AccountFeb 6, 2012
i like my start button damnit. dont touch it.
randancingFeb 6, 2012
Perhaps they could have that little paperclip come down and question you as to why you want to use a particular program. It could also send a complete snapshot of your desktop to MS to determine if you have both the legal right to use that program and the necessary skill level (as determined by MS) to use that particular software. If it is determined that you are a 'safe' user it could monitor your keystrokes and maintain a proper level of security for the system by disallowing potentially dangerous actions on your part.
satori3000Feb 6, 2012
Nothing wrong with win 7, no reason to upgrade.
rudegarFeb 6, 2012
if there is a hotspot or whatever they call it
and if you click on the windows key and it give you a menu of sorts
I dont really care if they made a start button icon on the taskbar
lvaneedeFeb 6, 2012
Im not too bothered, as long as they replace it with something that does basically the same thing.
I can see a lot of hate coming for this though. I hope they dont have an option to put it back.
thespookFeb 6, 2012
I HATE accidental-corner-hovering features! On my Mac, If I move my mouse to get it out of the way, I sudden have weird things happening like windows minimizing or the dock appearing. Fortunately, I disabled them. Windows does not need this. -,-
craigreedFeb 7, 2012
You have to purposely set up hot corners and if your used to them they're a great way to improve productivity.
craig1958Feb 7, 2012
Yup, they are handy if you set them up they way you want; I don't use the upper hot corners because they are too easy to hit by accident, but I use the lower ones. I tend to use trackpad gestures for most things anyway.
langfordFeb 6, 2012
What drugs were they using when they decided that the central menu that controls the entire interface should be moved to an unlabeled hidden control scheme that is different than anything that had ever been required before? If this were a game, finding the corner would be a fun puzzle, but it isn't a game, it is supposed to be a tool.
between Windows 8, Mac OS X Lion, Ubuntu Unity, and Gnome 3, it is a dark day for user interfaces.
craigreedFeb 7, 2012
The only thing wrong with Lion's interface is apple forgot that people sometimes use 2 displays when creating the full screen stuff, apart from that it's the best the interface has ever been.
craig1958Feb 7, 2012
I agree, they need to fix that full screen issue for two monitors; I never use full screen mode (unless I'm watching a video) because I don't want to lose my second monitor. Also, I would like to have the option of switching desktops on just one of the monitors; but I understand why that might get messy.
Otherwise, I have no problems with lion.
BTW, why does windows have a "start" button anyway; what is it supposed to do?
craigreedFeb 7, 2012
I think the original idea was it was a "Start point" for all your computing needs, launching apps, settings, help, rebooting or shutting down.
I guess they thought having everything in there would make it easier then digging through your folders every time you want an app but when you have lots of software it just gets cluttered and clunky, not the exactly best solution they've ever come up with.
Now that they have a screen with a bunch of icons on it I guess they figure the start menu is redundant.
craig1958Feb 7, 2012
Don't they have some kind of launch bar or dock, or is that what the start button was supposed to do?
I haven't spent any time on a windows machine in about a decade, so I have no clue what they've done recently.
craigreedFeb 7, 2012
When windows 7 came out you could pin select apps to the "Launch bar" or whatever but yeah thats what the start menu was meant for, they even built their spotlight clone into it with windows vista.
craig1958Feb 7, 2012
Thanks. I guess the windows guys will figure it out. They complain as much as the Mac guys when something changes. I know people who refuse to use anything newer than windows XP.
mawdsFeb 6, 2012
Making the 360 dashboard easier for the Kinect overall made things harder for people without it.
Making Windows easier for tablets will in turn make it harder for the majority of people that use a mouse and keyboard.
craig1958Feb 7, 2012
My daughter has an Xbox, who designed that silly UI? I can never find anything on that POS, did they intentionally put everything in the least intuitive location they could find? I know it's just a toy, but they could have put a little more thought into the interface.
esc27Feb 6, 2012
Microsoft Bob 2.0
caffienemanFeb 6, 2012
did they check with the Rolling Stones first?
sonicgardenFeb 7, 2012
i love this commercial
mredofcourseFeb 6, 2012
This has to be one of the stupidest things they've done in a long time. The Start menu is still going to be there, the button itself is going away. It's not as if there's no real estate for it, it's just Microsoft deciding to hide it to make things cleaner. That's really dumb, and it's things like that which make me hate WP7.
confuciussayFeb 6, 2012
Looks like Windows 7 for me for 5 more years yaaaaay
magnetism86Feb 6, 2012
I hate the new Metro UI from on Windows Phone 7 and from what I've seen of Windows 8. I don't understand how anyone can like those monochromatic blocks of color bulls**t.
I'm going to stick with Windows 7. Thank you very much.
thandermaxFeb 6, 2012
NOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO!!!!!!!
Then how can I start my computing ?
skinturtleFeb 6, 2012
People hate change. I bet even before there was a release of any pictures of the UI...people were saying, "I hate it."
"You haven't even seen it yet!"
"But I'm sure I'll hate it"
Ada_BFeb 6, 2012
Windows 7 Pro already got rid of 'Start.' Instead, there is the microsoft quad-color flag just like the Windows 8 screenshot, that does everything the Start button does. Skinturtle noted that people hate change, and is correct in that people often hate change before they've given it a chance. That said, MS has a history of screwing up a good thing for purposes of 'change.' Reference MS Word 10, the biggest POS clusterf--- in the history of personal computing.
skinturtleFeb 6, 2012
It's pretty obvious when you see interface designs such as this...that they have way too many people making the decisions about look and feel. Also...why doesn't Microsoft hire decent designers?
skinturtleFeb 6, 2012
That screen shot looks terrible. What a disaster mix of color
gossipninjaFeb 6, 2012
I like how windows uses some stat to say that "with windows 7, start button usage is down 60%"
What they dont tell you, is that is only because win vista / 7 gimped the start menu, making it next to worthless
cawpinFeb 6, 2012
If by worthless you mean you don't need to use it 99% of the time, then yes. Hit Window key, start typing the name of the program you want, click.
trythinking1stFeb 6, 2012
This is what happens when you let the UI designers loose to "express themselves artistically". You build a reasonably good UI, people recognize it, why force everybody to relearn everything...? and don't get me started on that Ribbon thing in office.....*face turns red, starts steaming out the ears*
untitledavFeb 6, 2012
Wow yet another change on UI site. This is where I have problem with windows products today. MS is focusing on UI instead of features and citing edge solutions. After working with windows for past 20 years I really do not want to learn again and again where the hell they put start button now. I like to sit in front of the machine and get my work done not 'play' with UI.
dragularFeb 6, 2012
I had a long six-paragraph comment on this, but I can basically sum it up with:
"Oh God. Ugh."
mrbussiFeb 6, 2012
Its being replaced with "“hot corner”, according to a report from The Verge. The hot corner, which you activate by either touching or mousing over one of the screen’s four corners, will supposedly activate a start-style menu screen when the operating system is both desktop and Metro UI mode."
Doesnt seem to be too big a deal
wuvvatvFeb 6, 2012
Hello all I am actually running windows 8 on my computer right now. I must say I love it. It's awesome. and yes no start button no start bar, but what it does have is like a separate desktop that looks like a cell phone its an app center its crazy cool. the app store for windows 8 is called metro apps. and its not running yet but you have all the tools to build apps for the store.
you can get your copy of windows 8 build preview from the Microsoft website.
Enjoy
ferencofbudaFeb 7, 2012
Has Microsoft even heard of "if it ain't broke, don't fix it?!"
kalvinbFeb 7, 2012
Every other Windows release is a turd. I'll check back in with Windows 9. Windows 7 has classic mode so you can get rid of the nonsense and it's 64-bit so it makes sense as an upgrade from XP. Not sure what the selling point of 8 is. The job of an OS is to run your apps and get out of your face.
sonicgardenFeb 7, 2012
even MORE reason to stick with XP :D
0xtremeFeb 7, 2012
Unfortunately Windows 8 metro-crap was designed for the dumbed-down mass audience with a very low IQ. I understand MS position. They must adapt for the mass, in order to continue profiting. I'll be sticking to Win 7 for a LONG time, unless Win 7/XP theme comes out for Win 8 via a hack.
xwhyFeb 7, 2012
This could be just he thing that gets me to buy a Mac!
Well, no, forcing an upgrade in the future by discontinuing support will do. It. So I have some time.
bloodrainFeb 6, 2012
i would not care if their a easy option for it. where i can set to use it or not .
thewriteguyFeb 6, 2012
Why Microsoft seems really fixated on the tiles-swiping-side-to-side concept for Windows 8 is baffling. Swiping side-to-side can be a pain if its use is required too much -- most who regularly use iOS or Android devices prefer to arrange their favorite apps on one or two home screens, I have noticed. Now imagine having to scroll side-to-side all the time on a desktop or notebook to access your applications, but using a mouse or keyboard arrows.
I have been starting to feel that Microsoft simply doesn't "get it" when it comes to this, and that Windows 8 may be headed to disaster when it is finally released if the company keeps insisting that the Metro stay in place as the default UI.
captswuitsFeb 6, 2012
Wait, so its going to be iOS (mac)?
bcm79Feb 6, 2012
This is a symptom of their idea of one OS everywhere. What's good for phones is not necessarily good for tablets, or convertible laptops.
What's good at home is not good at work. Spartan and functional at work, like the Windows 2000 interface, candy like Vista at home where people buy on feature lists.
bradleyquistFeb 6, 2012
"End"
ancientshoesFeb 6, 2012
i'm sure they'll have an option to put it back on....right? right?
Sir_GibbyFeb 6, 2012
Not the start button! No more clicky click...
getphutureFeb 6, 2012
Nobody told if this "start" button will still be available as an option. Keep it, windows is not like a 30$ upgrade. Regards to the UI, it's a good move... for people migrating from V3.1 lol
phazoniFeb 6, 2012
Since Windows 95. MS has effed up every-other desktop OS release. There is no reason to believe that this one will be any different. Just look at their history.
Windows 95
Windows 98
Windows 98 Second Edition (SE)
Windows Millennium (ME)
Windows XP
Windows Vista
Windows 7Comment is buried, click here to see the rest.
satori3000Feb 6, 2012
sorry, what was wrong with Win98?, that brought us FAT32, made things lots faster.. otherwise I totally agree.
phazoniFeb 6, 2012
Windows 98 was the least offensive of the lot but SE added USB support and therefore became the more sustainable version of 98.
satori3000Feb 6, 2012
ok, so we are in agreement that Win98 was good, but yeah, it's been a s**t-show ever since other than xp, and even xp was crap out of the gate.
jacquelynekFeb 6, 2012
Go mac and you'll never go back.
dynamooFeb 6, 2012
Where's the button that makes it act like Windows 2000? That's how I like my UI, and I should be able to have it that way if I want it. MS always seem to add features, but take away CHOICE. It's a bit like the vanishing menu from Office 2007 and 2010.. there was no need to take it away, but they did. Humph.Comment is buried, click here to see the rest.
molyazziFeb 6, 2012
thanks you for inform
jatinahuja1Feb 6, 2012
thanks you for inform
Clinton247Feb 6, 2012
hi