Jump to content

Windows 7 Start Menu (no flames this time)


pepak

Recommended Posts

I know, but I hope MS will put Classic Start Menu as an option there in the RTM build...

1993 left the building a long time ago... perhaps it's time to refresh yourself with newer technology.

I agree, but "Classic" is not "old" for some people, just "Classic". They have been using Classic Menu, for the last, I don't know, 13 or 14 years? Can you blame them for wanting the Classic Menu? It's the way they knew Windows and learned about Windows, and suddenly that's all going to change. Personally, I like the new Start Menu, but it needs a few options for adjustment. I want to see "All Programs" directly when I press the Windows key, and right now there's no way to do that...

Link to comment
Share on other sites


hmm at first i was annoyed at the lack of classic start menu but from useing win7 a bit i dont dislike it as much and i do actually like the search. though i do agree i would like to see an option that would see "all programs" directly when u press win key

Link to comment
Share on other sites

So the hectic start menu is a tool to force search onto the users?

GL

No, it was used to provide search in Vista to the most commonly-used area of the OS, the start menu. Again, one man's hectic is another man's wonderful.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I don't get what the issue is in the first place.

Now I have no need to move my hand to the mouse, move the cursor across half the screen, click start, move up, click programs, look around, click some program group (repeat previous steps if apps are in subdirs), look for the program, move the mouse, click again.

I just hit the start key, and within 2 or 3 key presses the app is there. I can usually find the app quicker than it takes me to move a mouse to the start button. There's also the pinned apps at the top (and recent ones which often contain the app you're looking for too -- you can increase the number too), and the start key + number combos. In the ~1% of cases where this doesn't really work, then you have an extra click or something like that over the old way.

The search also gets to "deeper" items much faster, e.g. the device manager:

start dev enter (no need to even touch the mouse). You're already there.

vs

move to the start button, click, move up to settings if you're using the classic menu, click again, move to control panel, click again, wait for the control panel to open, spend a couple seconds to find the right icon, move the mouse to system, double click, read the tabs, move mouse to the hardware tab, look for the device manager button, move mouse, click on it. (you gotta reach for the mouse, look around for stuff and then move it 6 times, and click a half dozen times to get there)

Almost everything is faster to get at like that. Almost everything is, including MMC snapins: start then iis gets your the IIS snapin, start then ev gets you the event viewer, etc.

It's like a million times better -- a real godsend if you ask me. If that's what you call hectic, then I'll take all the hectic they wanna serve me!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The issue is forcing something onto someone.

I have nothing against the new start menu, let everyone use it as much as he/she likes, I just don't understand why the classic has to be banned. If it is a buggy code, can't the bug be fixed? If it has to be rewritten, can't it be done if enough people ask for it (new code, if the code was the problem, same old behavior)?

Let both coexist, and if one is better, it will win over.

GL

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The issue is forcing something onto someone.

They're not forcing anything on anyone. Feel free to stick to your existing Windows XP. They're not going to prevent you from using it. Similarly, you can move to another platform.

They decided to move forward with a new GUI and new ways to do things, much like they have with Win95 (or windows on top of DOS). They didn't offer you a choice back then either. If someone really wants their old ways so badly, then they can stick to their old software.

As for the "if it's better it will win win over" thing, it's not quite that simple. A large amount of people wouldn't change to anything significantly better, just because they know the old one. And if we always bent over backwards for them people, we'd still have an option for a win 3.1-like GUI in Win 8. They kept the old Win9x-era start menu as an option for all of XP's and Vista's lifetime, that's already pretty good. Eventually you have to lose the old legacy crap.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

They're not forcing anything on anyone. Feel free to stick to your existing Windows XP. They're not going to prevent you from using it. Similarly, you can move to another platform.

They decided to move forward with a new GUI and new ways to do things, much like they have with Win95 (or windows on top of DOS). They didn't offer you a choice back then either. If someone really wants their old ways so badly, then they can stick to their old software.

I hope Cluberti doesn't mind me quoting him,

Well, one man's useless is another man's treasure

Microsoft had a great track record with maintaining compatibility. Progman was possible until XP SP2. Not that I used it, but it was an option. The XP start menu is just - what - 6 years younger than classic? I hope they get rid of it too in the future. :ph34r: And why don't we get rid of the Internet? It's old.

As for the "if it's better it will win win over" thing, it's not quite that simple. A large amount of people wouldn't change to anything significantly better, just because they know the old one. And if we always bent over backwards for them people, we'd still have an option for a win 3.1-like GUI in Win 8.

So if that isn't forcing, I don't know what is.

They kept the old Win9x-era start menu as an option for all of XP's and Vista's lifetime, that's already pretty good. Eventually you have to lose the old legacy crap.

I'll manage, but what about those 95% of users I see every day that don't use the SM at all, just litter their desktop with icons? :w00t:

I guess I'll never understand why do I have to search if I know where it is.

GL

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I guess I'll never understand why do I have to search if I know where it is.

Because it is new, exciting, enhanced and the MS experts are sure that it's the best thing for you. ;)

Don't want at all to start or cause the start of yet another argument, but you remember a famous soft drink company that had to go back from the "new, enhanced" formula only to the "Classic" one and recently also plans to remove the "Classic" from the bottle/can?:

http://adage.com/article?article_id=134222

jaclaz

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I don't get what the issue is in the first place.

The issue is that while the new menu is far more operative than the classic menu for users who leave the menu in its default state, it is far less operative for those few of us who modify the menu to be operative. I mean, I am happy for those users who get their productivity increased by the incorporated search, but I am less happy that I am forced to use the search because the more efficient approaches have been declared obsolete and removed completely.

I just hit the start key, and within 2 or 3 key presses the app is there.

Start + 3 keypresses was worst-case scenario for every single application in my setup. With forced search, Start + 3 keypresses is no longer the worst-case-scenario, but the best-case (don't forget the ENTER you need to actually start the program).

In the ~1% of cases where this doesn't really work, then you have an extra click or something like that over the old way.

That's what I am complaining about :-)

start dev enter (no need to even touch the mouse). You're already there.

vs

move to the start button, click, move up to settings if you're using the classic menu, click again, move to control panel, click again, wait for the control panel to open, spend a couple seconds to find the right icon, move the mouse to system, double click, read the tabs, move mouse to the hardware tab, look for the device manager button, move mouse, click on it. (you gotta reach for the mouse, look around for stuff and then move it 6 times, and click a half dozen times to get there)

As I said, the new start menu is pretty fast when compared to the inefficient default classic menu. It is much less appealing when you consider an optimized menu (where I could achieve the same thing with two keypresses).

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The Classic Start Menu is so "inefficient" that KDE has it, Gnome too, even OS X. They must be mad keeping "old" stuff...

cluberti, I think you can't see the difference between OLD and CLASSIC. Let me give you an example: Opel Vectra 1996 VS AC Shelby Cobra 1966. ;)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

look at KDE4 ;) They also made the startmenu with the new search. The new startmenu was introduced with XP in 2001 and updated with Vista in 2006. You had 8 years to learn to use the new one. If you are not willing to learn it use your XP until the support ends and after this change your job where you don't have to learn new things and do the same monotone work everyday.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Look, eventually you have to either manage two codebases for two different start menu and shells, or you cut ties with one. Windows 7 cut the ties, as Vista did with the program manager from Win3.x. I know that Microsoft will not make some people happy with the removal of classic, but the decision was made that the superbar and searchable menu is the new "classic" going forward.

I would agree that other shells are starting to go this way, the way Apple went with OS X and the dock, as a previous poster mentioned KDE has started down this path as well.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

man, its sort of either you for or against , i personally find the new start menu is faster with the search if you use it correctly ...

but one can only hope( not me ) that they give you classic in a later build

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...