Windows 7 Start Menu (no flames this time)

[Win2k3EE]

Why would anyone bother to go to that length to get a "classic" menu? It's not classic to me as it involves more clicks.

There again, people will click one more time for their "classic" but not the "new" start menu.

I have no "extra" click to get to the flyout menu. simply move the mouse just like in xp and vista. How do you figure there is one more click to get to the classic flyout menu? And also, the "new" method is more than just one click. It is one click, scroll, scroll. And if you don't want to scroll scroll scroll, you have to take your hands off your mouse and actually type and as you type get "guesses" in return, and often presented with many options that are not even related to the place you are going.

classic menu, one click, move mouse, last click. Very fast. And the human eye is already "looking" for what the end user is on the monitor, so having the "full" view from classic, items are easy to spot, instead of scrolling the all programs in that little window. And let's not forget movement memory pattern as that because habit and so ingrained into a users experience that everything becomes second nature. And when that has been the nature for 15+ years.. well... I will stop here.

My point is, there is absolutely no extra clicking involved with the work around I found

was referring to the "classic" menu workaround posted in the link. not the actual classic menu of 95/2000/xp. even if it opens by mouse-hover, who wants their classic menu back that far away on the screen from the corner.

besides, for me, most of the commonly apps are already in the top 8. i have no need to go start--> programs --> look for apps. i can go to start --> app.

besides, with a scroll wheel, searching for an app is not a chore as it's made out to be.

why don't people just use a mac/linux instead of flaming this forum with useless complaints about windows and microsoft - which is what the forum is form.

Thanks for the link.

I gave linux and macs as an example. I used 'em for a while and found 'em BOORING, that's why I prefer Windows.

LE: After renaming Documents to Programs you must restart the PC, otherwise the folder freezes.

Edited March 10, 2009 by Win2k3EE

[stevettt781]

Hi i have found a piece of software which enables you to have the Windows XP Start Menu on Windows 7, i found this on http://www.sevenforums.com/customization/1...y-solution.html and hope it helps. i was going to attach the file here but it goes over the size limit so heres a link to it which is stored on my website: http://stevedemo.webs.com/csmenu_installer.zip

[day_chess]

I've been watching this and other forums for a bit, specifically the posts on the start menu.

It's odd how some posters sound like the voice of Microsoft, fervently trying to convince users that they don't want to use the classic start menu.

I understand the old start menu was tied to legacy code; it was time for it to go.

Replicating the functionality of the old start menu would be trivial under the new code.

Microsoft took a similar tack with Office 2007. Many of the same complaints were made, and ignored.

But Microsoft's attitude was not ignored at our company. This is the year 2009, and we have approx 2,200 workstations that still run Office 2003. The reason? Our users did not care for the 2007 interface. We saw no reason to fight that.

Approximately two years ago today, we had closer to 3,000 workstations using Office. We found that a number of our users were open to adopting OpenOffice instead. These were users who did not require us to cross-train them on a new product.

While I can't quite state that we'll be making a similar transition for our XP users (we've had little reason to adopt Vista; less than 100 of our machines run that OS) we are of course open to less expensive alternatives in the new economy.

While I have enjoyed trialing Windows 7 personally, I too would prefer the functionality of the 'classic' start menu. I was actually looking forward to rolling out the OS on a number of machines, but (I'm rather laughing to myself) this arrogant stance on the part of Microsoft, and some of the posters in this forum again make me hesitate to adopt this product. I am the primary person who makes this decision in the case of our organization; a small number of users will overrule me on this, the majority will be stuck with my decision.

Our little company won't make or break Microsoft. But I have to believe there are others thinking as I do.

I've actually been a pretty ardent Microsoft supporter. I'm getting over it. The forums I've read since January have posters using the identical language on different sites. This cannot be coincidence. Microsoft is shaping opinion through shilling - an ugly practice.

Dear Microsoft: Users like the posters of this forum are telling how they would prefer the interface crafted. Each time these topics arise, you use the phrase 'usability testing.' Each time you utter or type this phrase, I would like you to visualize the dollars that you will be turning down. I've explained in number of copies of software we have chosen not to purchase over a period of five years. Think of it what you will.

I'll now take a cue from Microsoft and share my message in another forum.

[cluberti]

Dear day_chess:

As an admitted Microsoft shill (not for all their products, most definitely, but yes for Windows itself), I would suggest you take your concerns up with Microsoft. As you so rightly point out, they do spend untold millions on research and development, and it seems at least fairly certain that their research found that the new start menu was something people preferred over the old or they would not have changed the user interface paradigm so. It seems the folks who are voicing their concerns are not doing so directly to Microsoft, and this is a pity. Honestly, I'm one of those voices who prefer the new start menu, and I don't think it's a coincidence that lots of other people (who are not me, by the way, I can assure you) say the same thing. It's what Microsoft does - they try to make software that the vast majority of people will want to use (otherwise product doesn't sell, aka Vista). It would seem the vast majority of people DO like the new start menu, myself included, but if you want the old one back you really should complain to Microsoft (and perhaps start some online petition to bring the old start menu back). I'm being serious, if you feel that strongly about it that you'd change your entire computing architecture and software loads because of a simple start menu, you really should be making yourself more public where Microsoft will see it. A post on a random Internet forum is sound on the moon to Microsoft - however, some sort of grass-roots movement (if there really is that big a crowd, you should be able to get it started) that has a public face and can be easily found is FAR better than chopping a tree down in a vacuum, and at least has a better chance of producing results.

It's a pretty fair assumption they don't really care about us here .

[CoffeeFiend]

Microsoft is shaping opinion through shilling - an ugly practice.

Yes, because people who bothered to give the new stuff a chance (as in trying it for more than 10 minutes) and actually like it are all shills...

Most (not all, but nearly) of the people I've seen that don't like the new method never really gave it a chance. Once you're used to the new stuff, it's very hard to go back to the old way (what do you mean no search in the start menu? You mean I gotta go around looking for it now? Ow...) Most of those people are also the die-hard fans of older OS'es that often don't like, won't use, and won't upgrade to the new versions as it's "bloated" (as in, won't run great on their old P3) so nothing lost there IMO.

"Dear Microsoft: Users like the posters of this forum are telling how they would prefer the interface crafted."

Yes, listen to the 10 people who complain about it (far less 1% of its regular users, doesn't even register if you look at the whole user base). The other 99%+ seems to have no real complaints -- if anything I'd say it sounds quite good!

"Each time these topics arise, you use the phrase 'usability testing.' Each time you utter or type this phrase, I would like you to visualize the dollars that you will be turning down."

God forbid, it's actual everyday end-users that talk about this (I have before, and trust me, I don't get a penny from MS -- I'd happily settle for not having to pay them!). MS talked a lot about it (many great presentations on the subject -- you should have a look). They made decisions for Win7 that go against my normal setup (e.g. taskbar with 2 rows, and auto-hidden -- both being used by like < 1% of users). But the end result is still fantastic for the vast majority. That's what it's all about. Please most people. There will be a vocal minority whining regardless of what they do.

A lot of enthusiasts are thrilled about all those changes. It's like the first big upgrade to the GUI since Win95 (e.g. totally different taskbar for a change), or having toolbar buttons logically grouped by what it is they do (i.e. ribbon interface) instead of having to find a lot of the stuff deeply buried in menus (as there was limited space for buttons). We've had such big changes before (e.g. dos to windows, or win 3.1 to win 95) and most people adapted just fine. Some people weren't happy back then either, but I sure wouldn't go back.

[PC_LOAD_LETTER]

It's like the first big upgrade to the GUI since Win95

Yeah we should dig up some of those complaints about the worthless UI changes like the "new" Start Menu, the newfangled systray, shortcut, and long file names.

[GrofLuigi]

While we're at it, a menu that goes bottom up still is unnatural to me after 14 years. I'm dead serious.

GL

[CoffeeFiend]

While we're at it, a menu that goes bottom up still is unnatural to me after 14 years.

Unlock the taskbar and drag it to the top

[Guest ‡*¶‡�õ�]

Its not like applications like some of the Stardock apps wont exist that allow you to change your startmenu in many ways. Windows has always been highly customizable, sometimes requires an app but at least they always make one.

[DeathNACan]

I'm not going to argue whether or not MS should have removed the Classic Start Menu. That issue was beaten to death in another forum here. I will say this...

The best arguments against the new Start Menu and for Classic Star Menus are ergonomics and time.

Consider this, with the Classic Start Menu, you are three clicks away from an application (assuming you turned off Personalized Menus that is). Searching, on the other hand, requires two clicks to get there and then you have to type in the text box some or part of what you want. Wait for it to appear. The likelihood is that it will not be in the same place it was the last time you saw it because it got moved by the OS. I really love that when I'm in a hurry! Then locate it, if you can, then click on it again.

Now most people would think, how could this be a problem? But consider this: having to do this a several hundred to a thousand times a day or more a day as an IT Support Professional does. Not all software and upgrades are pushed out automatically (Not to mention new builds that have to be customized). Also, when you're in a hurry and have a hundred workstations to work on, even the time it takes the OS to search and list what you want is costing you productivity.

Now add to that, the Power User who can also go through applications like an beer through an alcoholic's bladder.

Just in case you don't believe that all those little clicks can add up, Google carpal tunnel, tendinitis and rotator-cuff injuries. Or you can just ask me, I got the hands, arms and shoulders to prove it and I got them one click at a time.

We are supposed to be clicking and typing less, not more! Is this really an improvement?

Edited July 30, 2009 by DeathNACan

[DeathNACan]

Its not like applications like some of the Stardock apps wont exist that allow you to change your startmenu in many ways. Windows has always been highly customizable, sometimes requires an app but at least they always make one.

Most companies will not allow the deployment of third-party applications like that even if the user is willing to pay for it. Therefor, this option is not available to the 99 percent of all users in the work environment. The reasons for this are quite simple: first they do not want to pay for it, third party applications have to be tested for compatibility and then supported which is an added cost. The same is true of freeware and public domain applications. It doesn't always make sense, but that is the way it is.

Nice suggestion though.

If you find one that will emulate the Classic Start Menu, let me know.

[DeathNACan]

I have a question.

Doesn't it take more system resources and time to build or search a database of applications (even if it is the windows registry) for a list of programs than it does to display a static list without searching it? Assuming that Personalized menus are off that is.

Wouldn't the Start Menu come up faster if all the OS had to do was sort, then display a listing rather than sort, search and display a list of the results? Is the new method actually more efficient or just more bloated code with the illusion of improvement?

There are several instances where the new start menu structure becomes a hindrance.

Myself I do like the search function however I would like to see it coupled with a cascading menu of applications like the 'Classic Menu'. To have to use the small scrolling box to find things is going to be a hassle... and here's why.

I have over 210 distinct applications on my primary development machine... most of which I use infrequently as the need arises. I have the Menus sorted hierarchically by category which means currently I can find things just buy moving my mouse through the various categories without clicks.

While I do agree the search will be handy take this example: I have a Korn Unix Shell installed for doing some script editing occasionally.. maybe once or twice a year at most. When the application installed it didn't use Korn, or Unix, or Shell in it's name... It's called KSH Emulator. Now I am not going to remember that a year from now but presently it's not a big deal because there it is filed nicely under my scripting development menu. I don't have to expand little folders to find it and scroll up and down... no matter how infrequently it's used and how much I forget it's name I can still have it open in a second or two.

The new Start Menu will be a plus to most users, but to blindly tell everyone this is better for them only proves your ignorance on how others may need to work with their tools. There is no one method that is best for everyone and there is no justification to force one method on everyone.

As for the required code to display the 'classic menu' being gone, this is just plain untrue. The new start menu can display a cascaded menu of any of the right side groups (documents, pictures, games). The ability to display a cascaded menu will never be ripped from the Windows API, it's been around since Windows began. To claim that this somehow cleaned out legacy code in the shell is untrue. At most it cleaned out a couple of API calls and a branch or two, hardly any extreme level of code cleanup that will magically make Win7 so much easier to manage.

Just my 2c.

Edited July 30, 2009 by DeathNACan

[DeathNACan]

I know what you mean. Someone here suggested third party alternatives. As far as I know, there are none for the Start Menu. Is anyone out there aware of an option to either recreate the Class Start Menu or emulate it?

Also, I tried one for Office 2007 under Vista, it did the job (sorta) but was buggy as can be.

I've been watching this and other forums for a bit, specifically the posts on the start menu.

But Microsoft's attitude was not ignored at our company. This is the year 2009, and we have approx 2,200 workstations that still run Office 2003. The reason? Our users did not care for the 2007 interface. We saw no reason to fight that.

[DeathNACan]

I have found a third party application that seems to work very well. Unfortunately, you have to pay for it. For those interested, it is called "Seven Classic Start".

[PC_LOAD_LETTER]

I have found a third party application that seems to work very well. Unfortunately, you have to pay for it. For those interested, it is called "Seven Classic Start".

LOL. for the record the link is http://www.sevenclassicstart.com/ and theyre actually asking 20$ for it. hell you could buy windowblinds for that and customize the whole dang OS to look like crap.