Holy Cow - Windows 8. OMG

[Mem]

I would have loved a new file manager. File Explorer is getting long in the tooth and I have to open multiple Explorer windows every day to do work.



I'm not saying Win8 doesn't have its good points. The problem is that Win8 should be a move forward from Win7. As it currently stands, it's one step forward, two steps back. The fix for the Start Screen issue is so simple it's braindead retarded not to have had it in the first place.

Telling me to buy a different OS kind of means Win8 has failed.

I'm using Win8 fine without a Start menu mod,I think its was more of a shock for users ie 18 years of no change to a major UI change, you could argue they could of added an option so users could do what they want either way.

I think the point with Microsoft is Metro Start is the new start menu,if you don't like it they or even I could argue why buy Win8?

I expect Metro to change again and again down the road,end of the day lets be honest its not hard to use Win8 or any OS like the very old days of DOS etc..,IRQ assignments,remapping memory,was fun back then or hard depending on the user.

Nowadays its more of a moan or shock about the old Start button menu missing(kind of sad in a way).

Linux is same in a way ie its going through changes.

I could also argue yet again that Win7 only brought two improvements over Vista SP1 as far as I'm concerned,ie speed increase and less UAC nagging, at least 8 offers more features over 7 then 7 ever did over Vista,so it depends on how you look at it,for record ironically I like all three Vista,7,8..

 

[pmv]

ALL NEW PCs coming with Windows 8!

Not really true, surely? I'm technically unconfident (or lazy, anyway) so in getting a new PC it would be a custom-build, can't face building the entire thing myself (did it once, not worth the aggravation, IMHO). Everywhere offering such things (even only partial-customisation, part-pre-built) give you a choice of windows 7 or 8 (or no OS).

Are you talking about laptops or maybe the Dells and the like?

 

[pmv]

Tinfoil hat much?

Microsoft has to my knowledge NEVER stated that the modern interface style was going to replace the desktop portion of the OS for content creators. Metro is simply a design pattern that is used for the start menu and apps submitted to the MS app store and works alongside the desktop.

Have they ever stated that the Modern Interface style _wasn't_ going to replace the desktop?

It's just that to me it looks troublingly like the desktop has now been relegated to an obscure 'geeks only' specialist app, very much like the way the DOS command line was side-lined to a special mode back when Windows itself first appeared (not that _that_ particular side-lining was a bad thing). It doesn't really look like 'works alongside', when the OS boots into Metro and the desktop just appears as one app amongst many.

Its not a huge leap to suspect that the next step they would _like_ to make (if they can get away with it) is to try and get rid of it altogether.

 

[Ketchup]

Not really true, surely? I'm technically unconfident (or lazy, anyway) so in getting a new PC it would be a custom-build, can't face building the entire thing myself (did it once, not worth the aggravation, IMHO). Everywhere offering such things (even only partial-customisation, part-pre-built) give you a choice of windows 7 or 8 (or no OS).

Are you talking about laptops or maybe the Dells and the like?

Point was somewhat limited at the end of the paragraph. Walk into a retail store and see how many computers they have with Windows 7. and TBT, the was an exaggeration. When Windows 7 came out, I don't remember seeing Vista computers still on the shelves 8 months after its release. At least the retailers are listening to their customers.

Example, pull up this link:http://www.bestbuy.com/site/olstempl...c=abcat0500000


Including the marketplace, BB actually has more laptops available with 7 than 8.

 

[Mem]

Point was somewhat limited at the end of the paragraph. Walk into a retail store and see how many computers they have with Windows 7. and TBT, the was an exaggeration. When Windows 7 came out, I don't remember seeing Vista computers still on the shelves 8 months after its release. At least the retailers are listening to their customers.

Example, pull up this link:http://www.bestbuy.com/site/olstempl...c=abcat0500000


Including the marketplace, BB actually has more laptops available with 7 than 8.

I would not be too concerned,Microsoft did state awhile back they are going on yearly upgrade so with Win8.1 around the corner I don't think Win9 is too far off.

Btw quite a few online stores will install Win7 with custom PC builds or if you phone them,at least in the UK so its still available.

 

[akugami]

I'm using Win8 fine without a Start menu mod,I think its was more of a shock for users ie 18 years of no change to a major UI change, you could argue they could of added an option so users could do what they want either way.

I think the point with Microsoft is Metro Start is the new start menu,if you don't like it they or even I could argue why buy Win8?

I expect Metro to change again and again down the road,end of the day lets be honest its not hard to use Win8 or any OS like the very old days of DOS etc..,IRQ assignments,remapping memory,was fun back then or hard depending on the user.

Nowadays its more of a moan or shock about the old Start button menu missing(kind of sad in a way).

Linux is same in a way ie its going through changes.

I could also argue yet again that Win7 only brought two improvements over Vista SP1 as far as I'm concerned,ie speed increase and less UAC nagging, at least 8 offers more features over 7 then 7 ever did over Vista,so it depends on how you look at it,for record ironically I like all three Vista,7,8..

As for why I want Win8, it's because of the under the hood changes and improvements to security. How about gamers who want the latest and greatest DirectX version. There's genuine improvements in Win8 when Metro isn't getting in your way.
As for the Metro interface. They behave like apps on a touch based OS would. I did not buy Win8 to use it as a touch OS. I bought a damned desktop OS. I expect my desktop software to work in both windowed and fullscreen modes like desktop software should.

If you are going to argue in favor of the Metro Start Screen, show me how it is functional better than the Start Menu. Show me how it improves efficiency or provides a more logical use flow. Don't tell me to use a different OS as you've done in previous posts. That's you conceding that Win8's Metro Start Screen is failing and is not an adequate replacement to the Start Screen.

I have zero problem with new OS elements. I was all in favor of the Ribbon interface that started with MS Office 2007. When the replacement is less functional and clunkier than the old way, now we have a problem. Unlike Ribbon, the Metro Start Screen is currently not as functional or easier to use than the Start menu. Win8.1 looks to address some of these concerns but it doesn't make the fact that the Start Screen sucks any less valid. I'm sure one day the Start Screen may actually become a worthy replacement to the Start Menu, but that day is not now and I'm not sure it'll be when Win8.1 comes out either.

The most damning thing about Win8 is the Start Screen. Due to how inefficiently the Start Screen manages my installed apps (bad use of space and the lack of configurability), it makes it harder for me to access the various software I use. On a given workday, I have to use SQL Server Management Studio, a web browser, Outlook, Excel, Word, and Vmware. Windows 8's Start Screen makes it harder for me as I go through my daily workflow and there's no Start Menu which would help me tremendously because MS decided I didn't need one.

I've been doing a lot of hardware and software testing on Win8 for possible deployment. We're testing not just the software we develop for deployment on Win8 but the OS itself. In its current state, it is not a bad consumer OS. Or is once you configure it and clean up the Start Screen. For pro users, it's less efficient to use than Win7. And the lamentable part is the fix for Win8's most glaring weakness is so damned simple and obvious.

 

[Mem]

As for why I want Win8, it's because of the under the hood changes and improvements to security. How about gamers who want the latest and greatest DirectX version. There's genuine improvements in Win8 when Metro isn't getting in your way.
As for the Metro interface. They behave like apps on a touch based OS would. I did not buy Win8 to use it as a touch OS. I bought a damned desktop OS. I expect my desktop software to work in both windowed and fullscreen modes like desktop software should.

If you are going to argue in favor of the Metro Start Screen, show me how it is functional better than the Start Menu. Show me how it improves efficiency or provides a more logical use flow. Don't tell me to use a different OS as you've done in previous posts. That's you conceding that Win8's Metro Start Screen is failing and is not an adequate replacement to the Start Screen.

I have zero problem with new OS elements. I was all in favor of the Ribbon interface that started with MS Office 2007. When the replacement is less functional and clunkier than the old way, now we have a problem. Unlike Ribbon, the Metro Start Screen is currently not as functional or easier to use than the Start menu. Win8.1 looks to address some of these concerns but it doesn't make the fact that the Start Screen sucks any less valid. I'm sure one day the Start Screen may actually become a worthy replacement to the Start Menu, but that day is not now and I'm not sure it'll be when Win8.1 comes out either.

The most damning thing about Win8 is the Start Screen. Due to how inefficiently the Start Screen manages my installed apps (bad use of space and the lack of configurability), it makes it harder for me to access the various software I use. On a given workday, I have to use SQL Server Management Studio, a web browser, Outlook, Excel, Word, and Vmware. Windows 8's Start Screen makes it harder for me as I go through my daily workflow and there's no Start Menu which would help me tremendously because MS decided I didn't need one.

I've been doing a lot of hardware and software testing on Win8 for possible deployment. We're testing not just the software we develop for deployment on Win8 but the OS itself. In its current state, it is not a bad consumer OS. Or is once you configure it and clean up the Start Screen. For pro users, it's less efficient to use than Win7. And the lamentable part is the fix for Win8's most glaring weakness is so damned simple and obvious.

It's not a question of with me arguing for Metro since I use multiple operating systems ie typing this on Linux,its a case of using Win8 the way Microsoft want you too(Win8 way if you like) ie organise your work tiles and columns,rename ,remove tiles etc and shortcuts on your old desktop,personally Win8 is just a slightly different way of doing things.

I have seen arguments on both sides ie those that think it's fine and those like you that don't,end of the day home consumer has a choice however work environment is a different ball game, with respect you get paid to do a job with tools at hand.

Metro could do with more customisation for the user and I for one hope we do get that in 8.1.
I can respect you think it hinders your productivity and less efficient in a work environment,maybe send feedback to Microsoft and let them know.As to software a lot of software you can use in windowed and fullscreen mode on old desktop UI (obviously impossibe to test it all).

Btw I normally post as a consumer and gamer user,personally I have never found a perfect OS and that includes all my Linux distros too.Gaming wise we got really nothing new in Win8 ,DX 11.1 big impact on gaming it's a must buy(not)....The gamers got the very short straw unless you count Microsoft store and those free games.
I can see where Microsoft should of gave more thought to the work/office environment rather then forcing a hybrid OS on everyone.

When the replacement is less functional and clunkier than the old way

You could argue that's down to preference and user in question,personally I don't find it that way ie just a different way of doing things like on some of my Linux distros.
Getting back to the start button menu argument I have seen plenty of posts on both sides, some glad it's gone and others want it back,as always best option would be let the user have a choice either way(I said that in an earlier post) but Microsoft in their wisdom want you to do things their way,good or bad that's the way it is for the moment.

Last point I still feel Microsoft are still experimenting (hybrid OS wise)if you like and Win9,10 etc should be interesting to see what they come up with.

 

[Pia]

I would have loved a new file manager. File Explorer is getting long in the tooth and I have to open multiple Explorer windows every day to do work.

Suggestion: ditch Explorer and switch to a 3rd party file manager. I've used FreeCommander on Windows for about two years now. Tried some others, but this was easily the best one.

 

[akugami]

Suggestion: ditch Explorer and switch to a 3rd party file manager. I've used FreeCommander on Windows for about two years now. Tried some others, but this was easily the best one.

A lot of my work includes remote troubleshooting of computers. I'm logged in remotely to other computers half of the day. I also try to stay away from 3rd party add-ons because it's not certified with our software solutions. Plus I don't want to depend on them because then I'd probably punch the monitor when I'm remotely logged onto a client's computer.

 

[beginner99]

it just takes longer to navigate sub-menus than it does to click on an icon that is directly visible immediately.

You do know you can create shortcuts on your desktop and then double-click them?

Or pin them to the taskbar?

Both optionas are way faster than having to go to modern ui start.

 

[Scooby Doo]

You do know you can create shortcuts on your desktop and then double-click them?

Or pin them to the taskbar?

Both optionas are way faster than having to go to modern ui start.

Not to mention if you have quite a few programs, it takes longer to scroll across the screen than it does to open a subfolder. A quick click-click and your there. And even if they're all on screen it'll still take longer to drag the mouse over to it

 

[WildW]

I think the Start Menu is a symptom of a more general change that people are worried about. Windows has looked basically the same since Windows 95, and people are used to it. You boot up a freshly installed Windows 8 machine and it looks more like an iPad. The desktop is hidden away, and when you do find the desktop it's totally empty and there's no start menu, as if it were abandonned.

I know, you pin some shortcuts and things are back to normal, but that first impression is strong. Microsoft are heavily pushing a change towards a different type of interface, one seemingly geared towards people who don't know how to use a computer, but who can point at what they want.

Sure, just ignore the Metro apps, don't use them, uninstall them. Fine. But that damn Start Screen won't go away. . . as if the front door of my house suddenly opened into a brightly decorated kiddie's playroom. Sure, I can ignore the toys, or even throw them out. . . but really I'd rather I had my regular hallway back. If I could uninstall Metro I would, so would everyone. That's why you can't.

 

[Mem]

I think the Start Menu is a symptom of a more general change that people are worried about. Windows has looked basically the same since Windows 95, and people are used to it. You boot up a freshly installed Windows 8 machine and it looks more like an iPad. The desktop is hidden away, and when you do find the desktop it's totally empty and there's no start menu, as if it were abandonned.

I know, you pin some shortcuts and things are back to normal, but that first impression is strong. Microsoft are heavily pushing a change towards a different type of interface, one seemingly geared towards people who don't know how to use a computer, but who can point at what they want.

Sure, just ignore the Metro apps, don't use them, uninstall them. Fine. But that damn Start Screen won't go away. . . as if the front door of my house suddenly opened into a brightly decorated kiddie's playroom. Sure, I can ignore the toys, or even throw them out. . . but really I'd rather I had my regular hallway back. If I could uninstall Metro I would, so would everyone. That's why you can't.

That's why I added Decor8 and free OblyTile it makes Win8 Metro look so much better, the choice to choose my own Metro tile icons is nice,I just wish Microsoft will give us more customisation options ie various Metro tile sizes etc.... I could do a lot of improved customisation in Metro if they give me the tools.

 

[andy2000]

That's why I added Decor8 and free OblyTile it makes Win8 Metro look so much better, the choice to choose my own Metro tile icons is nice,I just wish Microsoft will give us more customisation options ie various Metro tile sizes etc.... I could do a lot of improved customisation in Metro if they give me the tools.

It reminds me of the DOS days when everyone used a different add on file/directory manager to make things easier. Using someone else's computer was always tough because you were presented with an unfamiliar file manager interface, and you had no idea where they kept various files and programs.

 

[mikeford]

First system I put 8 on was our Media PC a HTPC and file server currently running win764. Stuff just did NOT work, several of my media cards had driver issues even IF they had Win8 specific drivers. Our home network has a variety of PCs running as old as Win98, and Win8 didn't want to work with them, didn't see our network printers, etc etc.

I put three or for days into it, and "may" try it again mostly to free up win7 license, but just as likely I say F MS and switch to some linux and make the system strictly media serving.

 

[bshole]

If I could uninstall Metro I would, so would everyone. That's why you can't.

ROFL!!!!

 

[Ketchup]

ROFL!!!!

Same thought. Great line. Tempted to put that one in the signature WildW.

 

[Makaveli]

Didn't pay attention to the video long, because of two things:

He mentioned of religiously doing a clean install. Now I use to do these all the time on occasion back in the Windows 2000 / initial XP days. Now? It takes forever to get things back up from scratch. When I had a virus back in Windows 7 that what I normally clean install on that took control and prevented me of going into various settings and task manager to disable the running virus? I safe mode and did a rollback with the system restore. And did some final cleanup after if I remember.

Never, did I ever wanted or needed to "clean install" anymore. After initially installing a new machine from scratch, that is all the "install" I had to do.

If I bought a pre-built computer, I cherry pick the programs I want to uninstall anyways. There is absolutely no need to nuke a hard drive to start fresh.

Control Panel in Windows 8? When you are viewing the desktop, the charms bar's setting icon will vary depending on what is shown on the display. In a app? The settings will then show a list of settings for the app. In the desktop? It will show "Control Panel". It was NOT THAT HARD. Hidden, but not hard.

Conversely, a windows button and typing in "Control Panel" brings that up too.

Or you could just create an image after a clean install with all your apps setup.

Instead of doing things the hard way.

 

[Makaveli]

Why metro sucks has been covered about a thousand times already by a thousand different people so ill just quickly illustrate this:

My start menu
Zero organisation by me, i haven't modified it manually since i installed windows all this stuff here appeared automatically

My start menu initial view
Couple of apps that are used but not enough to warrant a taskbar pin, i did this manually

My metro start screen
What a fucking mess... seriously? This is better somehow? I mean just look at it! It yeah... it looks like 90's AOL, or the yahoo homepage, ugh!

My metro all apps page
Same thing as the start screen, a complete and utter shambles, it takes up more space and is more of a mess than the start menu. How is this crap better??

So in short we've gone from a reasonably organized setup that is efficient with space to a bloated mess in which organization was a complete afterthought. Im all for change when its for the better, i embraced windows XP's start menu refinements as opposed to the old 98/95 start menu that was far less efficient with space, i warmed up to the superbar when i realized its basically a more efficient way of doing the quicklaunch thing. Metro though? No this crap is worse in every conceivable way, it perplexes me to think there's people out there who embrace this on a desktop, few as they may be i really wonder what they were doing previously with their computers to have metro be an improvement...

/Thread

You sir are the winna and 100% correct.

And to answer your last question they are probably the typical facebook IE lite user that doesn't really do anything work on a computer. Thats why metro doesn't bother them.

I actually had some dad tell me hey my son learned it and he's 11 i was like get back to me when your son has a dual monitor setup and starts working on databases or does anything other than sit on facebook all day.

 

[darkewaffle]

Just because the start menu is alphabetized doesn't make it efficient; really alphabetization is only helpful when sorting groups or 'details'; above that level organization should really be done on a logical basis. Navigating a PC is much more about groupings than alphabetization on most levels. (eg: There's a reason programs install to c\program files\ and not c\program name\)

When I remote into my XP box at work for some old stuff, I have a full column and a half of items that scroll across my screen, and it was even longer on my older, smaller monitor. It works, but there's really nothing particularly good about it; it's merely what we're accustomed to.

Advanced control schemes/support for gestures, radial menus, extra mouse buttons, hotkeys and other modes can significantly improve user experience. Win8 isn't there yet, but that's because so much of it is still experimental, trying to learn what works well and what is intuitive to the user.

But I think they're on the right track; control should be as relative as possible and absolutes should be avoided whenever possible. Being 'forced' to navigate to corners for functionality is what we're used to, but when you think about it, how efficient is it really? I just got a dual monitor setup at work and already I find myself annoyed navigating to the start button when it's a screen and a half away, I'm using the windows key and simply typing what I'm looking for more than ever before. I don't think that the Start Screen necessarily improves that really (personally I think of it as more of a Desktop/Start hybrid), but if nothing else I appreciate them recognizing that the old way of doing things is far from the best way. It'll improve with time, and I look forward to it.

 

[Makaveli]

Just because the start menu is alphabetized doesn't make it efficient; really alphabetization is only helpful when sorting groups or 'details'; above that level organization should really be done on a logical basis. Navigating a PC is much more about groupings than alphabetization on most levels. (eg: There's a reason programs install to c\program files\ and not c\program name\)

When I remote into my XP box at work for some old stuff, I have a full column and a half of items that scroll across my screen, and it was even longer on my older, smaller monitor. It works, but there's really nothing particularly good about it; it's merely what we're accustomed to.

Advanced control schemes/support for gestures, radial menus, extra mouse buttons, hotkeys and other modes can significantly improve user experience. Win8 isn't there yet, but that's because so much of it is still experimental, trying to learn what works well and what is intuitive to the user.

But I think they're on the right track; control should be as relative as possible and absolutes should be avoided whenever possible. Being 'forced' to navigate to corners for functionality is what we're used to, but when you think about it, how efficient is it really? I just got a dual monitor setup at work and already I find myself annoyed navigating to the start button when it's a screen and a half away, I'm using the windows key and simply typing what I'm looking for more than ever before. I don't think that the Start Screen necessarily improves that really (personally I think of it as more of a Desktop/Start hybrid), but if nothing else I appreciate them recognizing that the old way of doing things is far from the best way. It'll improve with time, and I look forward to it.

You should install ultramon it will allow you to have a start menu on both monitors.

I was doing that years ago very easy fix.

 

[darkewaffle]

You should install ultramon it will allow you to have a start menu on both monitors.

I was doing that years ago very easy fix.

I've tried Actual Multi Monitor, and it's got a pretty good feature set but doesn't play nice with Business Objects so it's essentially unusable for me and I've yet to try any other options. However, adding a second start button is not a solution, it's a bandaid.

Frankly, corner based navigation is an even less efficient with multiple monitors because you now lose the ability to 'overshoot' in a general direction and know you'll end up at the proper part of the screen. It's a workable usage model with a single monitor because you 'cant miss' and the travel time with a single monitor is pretty negligible. But once you move to multi monitors, an operation as simple as closing a window on monitor one becomes a 'can miss' operation. It's not that it's difficult by any means, but you're taking one of the most elementary movements and now requiring some [small] measure of precision and introducing a failure rate into something that shouldn't have one. To me, one of the best solutions available for this is gesture support. Which in my opinion is an improvement to single monitor usage as well, just less so.

I've only been using them for a few months (and even then, not all of them) but Opera has supported them for ages. And it's so natural and comfortable to me now; even on a mouse with no thumb buttons, "back" is just "right click, drag left"; it can be done anywhere in the window and requires far less extraneous navigation. What's more, it's intuitive; knowing that simple gesture, it's fairly obvious what "forward" would be, and even if you can't guess what "stop" and "reload" are exactly, they're going to follow that same predictable pattern.

I think if this kind of input 'language' can be standardized (and that would almost certainly have to start with Windows) it can dramatically improve mouse support and utility, improve screen real estate (imagine if file/save/print and other such ubiquitous functions no longer needed their own buttons), and expand PC usage scenarios (eg: I used to use a laptop fulltime, on the couch/in cramped locations being forced to switch from keyboard/mouse to 2hand keyboard is not very natural/comfortable).

Or we can just grow a tail to use the mouse fulltime with two hands still on they keyboard and that'd work pretty well

 

[Aikouka]

I went with Windows 8 for my new PC build, and it's not too bad. I knew what I would like about it, and I was pretty spot on. Frankly, the best parts to me are the improved task manager and file copy dialog. It sounds kind of mundane and silly, but I really like all the information on them. Although, I probably would've rather paid $10 to upgrade Windows 7 to those newer variants.

What don't I like about it?

1. Lack of a Start Menu Option - Well, this is pretty obvious as most people that have gripes about Windows 8 complain about this. Honestly, since I can pay $3 and fix it, I'm not really that worried about it. I can still access the Metro Start UI by hitting CTRL+WIN, so that's fine.
2. UAC Always On - This is my biggest problem with Windows 8. I've been using computers for a long time, and I don't think I need any hand-holding when it comes to operating one. Because of that, I really dislike UAC. In fact, turning it off is one of the first things that I do with Windows 7 installations. When I moved the slider down in Windows 8, I was surprised at the lack of a restart prompt, but I didn't think much of it... until I got an administrator rights required prompt! Now, to be fair, it is possible to disable UAC through the registry; however, based on what I've read on the Internet about this process, if you disable it, you cannot use the Microsoft Store built into Windows 8.
3. No Non-Metro Default Apps - Honestly, for a lot of actions in Windows 7, I just used default apps. For example, when I wanted to look at a photo, I just opened it in Photo Viewer. The problem now is that Photo Viewer is a Metro app, which means you're stuck in an annoying full-screen view. Although, apparently, it's not hard to fix given Photo Viewer still exists in Windows 8.
4. New Theme Settings Aren't Intelligent - I sort of struggled to think of a short title for this one, so let me explain. I tend to use very dark desktops. In Windows 7, I used Aero, and I would set the the Window Color to Gray with a low intensity. So, I pretty much had a black window. In Windows 8, the minimize and maximize buttons are built into the window frame, and they are black by default. If you make your window frame black, the buttons are not visible. You'd think they would ensure the buttons are visible based on the color used, and if not, they adjust it to a more visible color (i.e. white). This doesn't end up being a huge deal as I just use a darker gray now.

Honestly, out of all of these, #2 is the only one with the potential to be a true deal breaker for me. I've already set UAC to auto-accept all elevation requests, and that seems to abate the annoyance for now. I'm tempted to just turn it off since I doubt the

 

[Mem]

I went with Windows 8 for my new PC build, and it's not too bad. I knew what I would like about it, and I was pretty spot on. Frankly, the best parts to me are the improved task manager and file copy dialog. It sounds kind of mundane and silly, but I really like all the information on them. Although, I probably would've rather paid $10 to upgrade Windows 7 to those newer variants.

What don't I like about it?

1. Lack of a Start Menu Option - Well, this is pretty obvious as most people that have gripes about Windows 8 complain about this. Honestly, since I can pay $3 and fix it, I'm not really that worried about it. I can still access the Metro Start UI by hitting CTRL+WIN, so that's fine.
2. UAC Always On - This is my biggest problem with Windows 8. I've been using computers for a long time, and I don't think I need any hand-holding when it comes to operating one. Because of that, I really dislike UAC. In fact, turning it off is one of the first things that I do with Windows 7 installations. When I moved the slider down in Windows 8, I was surprised at the lack of a restart prompt, but I didn't think much of it... until I got an administrator rights required prompt! Now, to be fair, it is possible to disable UAC through the registry; however, based on what I've read on the Internet about this process, if you disable it, you cannot use the Microsoft Store built into Windows 8.
3. No Non-Metro Default Apps - Honestly, for a lot of actions in Windows 7, I just used default apps. For example, when I wanted to look at a photo, I just opened it in Photo Viewer. The problem now is that Photo Viewer is a Metro app, which means you're stuck in an annoying full-screen view. Although, apparently, it's not hard to fix given Photo Viewer still exists in Windows 8.
4. New Theme Settings Aren't Intelligent - I sort of struggled to think of a short title for this one, so let me explain. I tend to use very dark desktops. In Windows 7, I used Aero, and I would set the the Window Color to Gray with a low intensity. So, I pretty much had a black window. In Windows 8, the minimize and maximize buttons are built into the window frame, and they are black by default. If you make your window frame black, the buttons are not visible. You'd think they would ensure the buttons are visible based on the color used, and if not, they adjust it to a more visible color (i.e. white). This doesn't end up being a huge deal as I just use a darker gray now.

Honestly, out of all of these, #2 is the only one with the potential to be a true deal breaker for me. I've already set UAC to auto-accept all elevation requests, and that seems to abate the annoyance for now. I'm tempted to just turn it off since I doubt the

None of those bother me,UAC is a lot better now then the old Vista UAC nagging days infact UAC is about the same as Win7 in my daily use.

No Start Menu again not needed IMHO since I have both Metro and Win+X menu,old desktop taskbar etc customised to my needs.

As to photos,I normally access them via File Explorer (I have lots of photo folders)on old desktop UI with Win8 so that opens normal photo viewer like Win7 which you can minimize ,move the window around etc..

I use black window borders for colour and can see your point of view here,however when you mouse over them they do get highlighted with a different colour (white in my case) so you can see them ie minimize symbol etc...

I guess no right or wrong ,just the way different users see and have opinions on things .

 

[Chiropteran]

You do know you can create shortcuts on your desktop and then double-click them?

Or pin them to the taskbar?

Both optionas are way faster than having to go to modern ui start.

How is double clicking faster than single clicking? Opening a program from a desktop shortcut requires moving windows out of the way so you can see it. Pinning multiple programs to the taskbar takes up valuable real estate needed for multitasking.

When I run a program from the start screen, I press windowkey and click. It takes less than one second, and doesn't even require me to move the mouse over to the task bar. Since the icons are so huge and I can arrange them into groups of my choice, it's gotten to be that with muscle memory I can instantly open programs without even thinking or looking, which can't be done for desktop icons simply because of all the tedious micromanagement required in moving windows away or minimizing them to see the desktop.

That said, I do pin programs and occasionally use desktop shortcuts, but only sparingly. I have a couple of my most often used programs pinned and a few things I have been too lazy to move are still shortcuts on my desktop. The start screen, if used properly, actually has advantages.