New Start menu leaks in Windows build 9788

[Dahak]

i thought the start menu was going to be part of the update to windows 8.1? Did they cancel it and decide to put it for windows 9?

When they initially showed it off at build, they never really said when it was coming.
the rumors where that it was coming with win 8.1 update 2.

But then yes as Mem said it is pushed back to Threshold/Win9

 

[fleshconsumed]

When they initially showed it off at build, they never really said when it was coming.
the rumors where that it was coming with win 8.1 update 2.

But then yes as Mem said it is pushed back to Threshold/Win9

They probably see adding start menu to Win8 as a lost cause and hope to use it to drive sales of Win9 instead. It's going to be Vista vs Win7 all over again. Everybody will be jumping with joy even though both are going to be essentially the same operating systems.

 

[Mem]

They probably see adding start menu to Win8 as a lost cause and hope to use it to drive sales of Win9 instead. It's going to be Vista vs Win7 all over again. Everybody will be jumping with joy even though both are going to be essentially the same operating systems.

It's always easier to redesign and add a new Start menu to a new OS that is not out yet ie they can bug test in house rather then one that is out already, since you don't know what it will break via Windows Update and time it takes for testing etc so Win9 is easier for obvious reasons.

I could also add not like Win8.1 is really short of Start menu alternatives if you list all the third party ones that are available.


I can understand their thinking so releasing it on Win9 makes a lot of sense especially when it's not that far away from release.

 

[Ketchup]

If the leaked pic looks anything like what we will see in the next update of 8, I can't help but think even more faith in Windows will be lost.

Does Microsoft really want its home use customers to think they are just guinea pigs for whatever they think of next? Ever heard of a 'test group'?

How about this - for the next OS, why doesn't Microsoft just abandon the name Windows entirely?

 

[OneOfTheseDays]

I can't tell you guys much, but that is most certainly NOT the StartMenu you will see in Threshold. Windows team has completely redesigned every aspect of the Desktop in Metro 2.0 and that includes the StartMenu. I've seen it and it looks phenomenal, the Desktop is a true first class citizen again.

I'm not sure if you'll ever see that leaked iteration in a shipping release.

 

[Ketchup]

I can't tell you guys much, but that is most certainly NOT the StartMenu you will see in Threshold. Windows team has completely redesigned every aspect of the Desktop in Metro 2.0 and that includes the StartMenu. I've seen it and it looks phenomenal, the Desktop is a true first class citizen again.

I'm not sure if you'll ever see that leaked iteration in a shipping release.

Would you mind telling us a little about yourself/ how you know this? Or at least put some informative information in your signature.

 

[GrumpyMan]

I can't tell you guys much, but that is most certainly NOT the StartMenu you will see in Threshold. Windows team has completely redesigned every aspect of the Desktop in Metro 2.0 and that includes the StartMenu. I've seen it and it looks phenomenal, the Desktop is a true first class citizen again.

I'm not sure if you'll ever see that leaked iteration in a shipping release.

Thank you for that. I haven't seen anything I like leaked yet.

 

[akugami]

I actually hate the tree menu, regardless I hope they allow us some good customisation options on the Start menu in Win9.

I much prefer the tree view Start Menu.

In Windows 8, the Start Screen was such a crappy cluttered mess that I didn't know how this passed QA. This was fixed a bit in Windows 8.1 but now instead of a cluttered Start Screen, the All Apps screen is a cluttered mess.

I literally have a couple hundred icons floating around in the All Apps screen. Good thing there's a search in the All Apps screen in Win 8.1 because even though I know what I'm looking for but it's such a cluttered mess of icons that I can't find it. And yes, I've tried manually looking for a lesser used application and missed it, needing to resort to the search. Whoever thought this was a good idea should be skinned alive.

For me, and everyone is different, a hierarchical menu system is much preferred to what we have in Windows 8.

Compare this to Windows 7 Start Menu where I have an easy to navigate tree view, and I have a handy search window.

I can't tell you guys much, but that is most certainly NOT the StartMenu you will see in Threshold. Windows team has completely redesigned every aspect of the Desktop in Metro 2.0 and that includes the StartMenu. I've seen it and it looks phenomenal, the Desktop is a true first class citizen again.

I'm not sure if you'll ever see that leaked iteration in a shipping release.

That is welcome news. I look forward to an OS that is designed for desktop usage again.

I have nothing against a touch based interface in a tablet or other touch based device. I'm just against it in a desktop environment where 99.99% of users are using a keyboard and mouse. I'm speaking as someone who works in an industry that is based around software designed for a touchscreens.

 

[Imaginer]

in a desktop environment where 99.99% of users are using a keyboard and mouse...

I AM using 8.1 in a manner on a pure Desktop PC.

I rather not go back to a smaller Start menu. Give the option to have both (if it appeases those that don't get the view below).

Start Screen = Better Desktop Icons at different sized importance, catagory groupings, "infinite" scrolling of tiles + easier "Show desktop" button without the mess of reactivating your windows upon launching a desktop icon (Windows key, Start button (now)

Not sure why most people cannot fathom this, and immediately WANT to dig down menus. It is Ribbon + Office introduction all over again.

Desktop to me = working temporary scratch space for files and folders. It is like placing all of your appliances (re. programs to launch), pencil sharpeners, egg timers, and coffee maker on your desk that also tables your papers you are writing on along with notebooks.

And there is NOTHING stopping anyone from pinning to the taskbar either, Vista, 7, or 8/8.1. File Explorer has relatively been the same in 7 and 8, the bulk of what I consider the "desktop" experience, but can also be done fine in touch. That is not changed for the worst for me.

 

[bgt]

Win 7 is looking better all the time.

Win 7 is dead in january 2015()

 

[Mem]

After what I read in the paper about the NCE of Microsoft saying " want to focus more on mobile devices and less on PC" which means don't expect a classic desktop OS back because that is not their main goal.

 

[Ketchup]

Win 7 is dead in january 2015()

Nobody really cares about the end of mainstream support. I do hope we have something better by the extended support end date in 2020 though.

 

[Mem]

Nobody really cares about the end of mainstream support. I do hope we have something better by the extended support end date in 2020 though.

We should be on Win10 by then .

 

[Plenipotentiary]

classic shell replaces windows 8 start menu. no need to mess around with that crap.

 

[code65536]

I AM using 8.1 in a manner on a pure Desktop PC.

I rather not go back to a smaller Start menu. Give the option to have both (if it appeases those that don't get the view below).

Start Screen = Better Desktop Icons at different sized importance, catagory groupings, "infinite" scrolling of tiles + easier "Show desktop" button without the mess of reactivating your windows upon launching a desktop icon (Windows key, Start button (now)

Not sure why most people cannot fathom this, and immediately WANT to dig down menus. It is Ribbon + Office introduction all over again.

Desktop to me = working temporary scratch space for files and folders. It is like placing all of your appliances (re. programs to launch), pencil sharpeners, egg timers, and coffee maker on your desk that also tables your papers you are writing on along with notebooks.

And there is NOTHING stopping anyone from pinning to the taskbar either, Vista, 7, or 8/8.1. File Explorer has relatively been the same in 7 and 8, the bulk of what I consider the "desktop" experience, but can also be done fine in touch. That is not changed for the worst for me.

+1

Most of my 8.1 deployments are non-touch, too.

 

[Mem]

+1

Most of my 8.1 deployments are non-touch, too.

I hate touch,even fingerprints on the screen,pure mouse and keyboard user with Win8.1 that finds it simple to use as a desktop OS.

 

[blankslate]

I much prefer the tree view Start Menu.

I rather not go back to a smaller Start menu. Give the option to have both (if it appeases those that don't get the view below).

Well the good news is that you both should be able to customize the UI in threshhold to your individual tastes.

Which was the only real thing wrong at the release of 8.0 you got the UI they gave you and if you wanted to customize it you had limited options without installing a third party program.

As a result even though there weren't many if any at all issues with Win 8, a large plurality of (if not most) people who are not techies meaning no one who would go out of their way to post in a forum like this one, think that Win 8 is a failure.

Before you argue with the above statement. Remember it is concerning people who are not as enthusiastic about tech as others hence the italicized underline.
My evidence for the previous statement is the relatively slow adoption of Win 8 compared to Win 7 and the likelihood that most enterprise customers will skip Win 8 and perhaps adopt Win 9 (that is if they don't procrastinate on updating until they have to like they did with the end of xp extended support).

It's part of the reason that the new menu is not showing up in 8.x update y.

Why put a new feature in a windows version that has a tarnished reputation among a lot of people when you can use is as a must have feature for a new Windows version.






It's very likely that windows Threshold will default to a desktop or metro interface in a rather logical manner depending on the hardware it detects.

http://www.zdnet.com/windows-thresh...-plan-to-win-over-windows-7-users-7000031070/

With Windows 8.1 Update, Microsoft officials designed Windows around a set of profiles based on the hardware specifications of the devices in use. Certain devices running Windows 8.1 Update include Power and Search buttons on the Metro-style Start screen; others don't. Some of those running Windows 8.1 Update have their machines start up by default in the Desktop/Win32 legacy environment, while others on touch/mobile-first devices start up in the Metro-Style Start Menu by default.

According to my sources, Microsoft will continue in this vein with Windows Threshold. The Threshold OS will look and work differently based on hardware type.

Users running Threshold on a desktop/laptop will get a SKU, or version, that puts the Windows Desktop (for running Win32/legacy apps) front and center. Two-in-one devices, like the Lenovo Yoga or Surface Pro, will support switching between the Metro-Style mode and the Windowed mode, based on whether or not keyboards are connected or disconnected.

(Update: It's worth pointing out the Mini Start menu is expected to be customizable. Users will be able to include Metro-Style apps or remove all Metro Style apps/tiles from the menu so that only Desktop apps are included in the Mini Start menu — either as tiles or in list form.)

The Windows Weekly show on twit.tv a streamcast network run by Leo Laporte (which is why I watch shows on that network being a fan of tech tv) covers some of the above points in video form

http://twit.cachefly.net/video/ww/ww0369/ww0369_h264m_864x480_500.mp4

in the segment from about the 11 minute mark to the 22 minute mark.



The important take away from this is that if MS executes Windows 9 aka Threshold properly then people who post in threads like these can stop taking potshots at each other or the "masses" for not "being able to adapt" to the UI or for adopting the new UI just to be "able to look down on those who prefer not to".

Instead the UI can be customized to the way the user wants to interact with their PC(s) or mobile device(s).

Here's hoping.



....

 

[akugami]

I AM using 8.1 in a manner on a pure Desktop PC.

I rather not go back to a smaller Start menu. Give the option to have both (if it appeases those that don't get the view below).

Start Screen = Better Desktop Icons at different sized importance, catagory groupings, "infinite" scrolling of tiles + easier "Show desktop" button without the mess of reactivating your windows upon launching a desktop icon (Windows key, Start button (now)

Not sure why most people cannot fathom this, and immediately WANT to dig down menus. It is Ribbon + Office introduction all over again.

Desktop to me = working temporary scratch space for files and folders. It is like placing all of your appliances (re. programs to launch), pencil sharpeners, egg timers, and coffee maker on your desk that also tables your papers you are writing on along with notebooks.

And there is NOTHING stopping anyone from pinning to the taskbar either, Vista, 7, or 8/8.1. File Explorer has relatively been the same in 7 and 8, the bulk of what I consider the "desktop" experience, but can also be done fine in touch. That is not changed for the worst for me.

You're describing the way you use Windows. That's fine. There's nothing wrong with it. The problem with your comments (especially the bolded parts) are that you cannot try to make that a blanket statement for how others should use the desktop. Everyone works differently and as long as we are comfortable doing it and able to work efficiently, that's all that matters.

I still use Windows 7 as my work computer OS but I've used Windows 8 since late last year. Here's the major difference between Windows 7 and Windows 8 that I've found. I can access my software much faster using the tree view Start Menu on Windows 7 much faster than doing so from the Start Screen without the need to spend extra time customizing shortcuts and stuff. With the way I work, the tree view Start Menu is much more efficient for me.

While I've now matched my Windows 7 efficiency level when using Windows 8, it was only after using it for a few weeks and tweaking it as I found things not to my liking. One of the major issues was deciding how many shortcuts on the Start Screen I needed and how many pinned applications on the task bar I needed. I had to balance between clutter, and the need to quickly access the software I use.

Personally, I found it annoying that I even had to spend time analyzing what software I needed to have pinned to the task bar and Start Menu just to reach the same efficiency level of a default Windows 7 install that required almost no tweaking. And I'm someone who is fairly proficient using Windows. Imagine how the average user who is barely computer literate feels when confronted with the cluttered Start Screen or All Apps screen.

 

[Mem]

You're describing the way you use Windows. That's fine. There's nothing wrong with it. The problem with your comments (especially the bolded parts) are that you cannot try to make that a blanket statement for how others should use the desktop. Everyone works differently and as long as we are comfortable doing it and able to work efficiently, that's all that matters.

I still use Windows 7 as my work computer OS but I've used Windows 8 since late last year. Here's the major difference between Windows 7 and Windows 8 that I've found. I can access my software much faster using the tree view Start Menu on Windows 7 much faster than doing so from the Start Screen without the need to spend extra time customizing shortcuts and stuff. With the way I work, the tree view Start Menu is much more efficient for me.

While I've now matched my Windows 7 efficiency level when using Windows 8, it was only after using it for a few weeks and tweaking it as I found things not to my liking. One of the major issues was deciding how many shortcuts on the Start Screen I needed and how many pinned applications on the task bar I needed. I had to balance between clutter, and the need to quickly access the software I use.

Personally, I found it annoying that I even had to spend time analyzing what software I needed to have pinned to the task bar and Start Menu just to reach the same efficiency level of a default Windows 7 install that required almost no tweaking. And I'm someone who is fairly proficient using Windows. Imagine how the average user who is barely computer literate feels when confronted with the cluttered Start Screen or All Apps screen.

Problem is people like different things even with OS and also use them in different ways,the best we can hope for in whatever they do, is hope we have very good customisation options,at least that way you can try and get things to your liking.

I think some people should realize there is no perfect OS and what one person likes somebody else does not,middle ground is needed and that's where having good customisation options come into play.

It's also not easy for Microsoft for those stubborn users set in their ways,I think we have all come across those both in and out of work etc....Microsoft don't have an easy task by any means.

 

[gmaster456]

Classic shell on Windows 8.1 does it for me. Not exactly pretty but it works and that's all I need. Windows 7 is still my primary OS on most machines anyway. Sad to see it losing mainstream support in a few months but it is 5 years old already.

 

[sourceninja]

I AM using 8.1 in a manner on a pure Desktop PC.

I rather not go back to a smaller Start menu. Give the option to have both (if it appeases those that don't get the view below).

Start Screen = Better Desktop Icons at different sized importance, catagory groupings, "infinite" scrolling of tiles + easier "Show desktop" button without the mess of reactivating your windows upon launching a desktop icon (Windows key, Start button (now)

Not sure why most people cannot fathom this, and immediately WANT to dig down menus. It is Ribbon + Office introduction all over again.

Desktop to me = working temporary scratch space for files and folders. It is like placing all of your appliances (re. programs to launch), pencil sharpeners, egg timers, and coffee maker on your desk that also tables your papers you are writing on along with notebooks.

And there is NOTHING stopping anyone from pinning to the taskbar either, Vista, 7, or 8/8.1. File Explorer has relatively been the same in 7 and 8, the bulk of what I consider the "desktop" experience, but can also be done fine in touch. That is not changed for the worst for me.

As a server engineer. I kinda need those menu's to drill down. I go into an environment, I see a product I've used like twice maybe 5 years ago that the client needs support with.

"Let's see, I remember an application for this called....was it netba...no, symant...no backup mana...no...." So much easier to just click start, programs, and ohhh there's the folder for that product, here's the apps. Memory comes back, all good.

 

[andy2000]

I can take or leave the start menu, it's all the strange inconsistencies and hidden controls that I dislike about 8. I've been using Windows since before 3.1, and I literally pulled the plug in frustration when I first played with 8 (didn't want to waste any more time looking for shutdown). Having two of everything (where neither version does it all) is also insane.

 

[zokudu]

I don't understand the arguments going on in this thread to be honest. They are bringing back the start menu, drill down tree view and all. You can remove the tiles from it as shown at //build/, and it has the shutdown, sleep, logoff section just like the windows 7 menu. Windows 8 already has a fully functioning control panel and you don't need to use the Metro control panel for anything exclusive in 8 so I highly doubt that will change with the next version.

What argument is there against this right now? They are giving you what you want and *hopefully* keeping the start screen for people who like it. Who is this change really displeasing?

 

[akugami]

I don't understand the arguments going on in this thread to be honest. They are bringing back the start menu, drill down tree view and all. You can remove the tiles from it as shown at //build/, and it has the shutdown, sleep, logoff section just like the windows 7 menu. Windows 8 already has a fully functioning control panel and you don't need to use the Metro control panel for anything exclusive in 8 so I highly doubt that will change with the next version.

What argument is there against this right now? They are giving you what you want and *hopefully* keeping the start screen for people who like it. Who is this change really displeasing?

1. It's unknown if this is what will be coming to Windows 8 or Windows 9. I paid for Windows 8, and use it on my home system. It means I'd have to shell out more money to get back a feature they removed.

2. Some people express credulity that not everyone works the same way they do. I know it's hard to understand, but not everyone does things the same way but we're still able to get from Point A to Point B.

 

[Mem]

1. It's unknown if this is what will be coming to Windows 8 or Windows 9. I paid for Windows 8, and use it on my home system. It means I'd have to shell out more money to get back a feature they removed.

Why do you have to shell out money,what about the many free Start Menu alternatives that are available?