No Microsoft Start Menu for Windows 8 until 2015

Elevon · 3 Jun 2014 at 10:13

http://www.zdnet.com/no-microsoft-start-menu-for-windows-8-until-2015-sources-7000030100/

Microsoft's operating systems group has decided to hold off on delivering a Microsoft-developed Start Menu until Threshold, the next "major" release of Windows. Threshold, which may or may not ultimately be called Windows 9, is expected to be released in April 2015. I'm not clear whether the postponement is because the feature won't be fully baked in time, or if there's another reason for the change in plans.

It does not bother me eitherway ,it's not top of my must have list.

this_is_gav · 3 Jun 2014 at 10:36

I suppose it's quite a major change in terms of design, so I think it's worthy of major release.

I couldn't care less either.

tom_e · 3 Jun 2014 at 10:38

Makes no difference to me I've got a perfectly good start menu on Windows 8 using one of the mods.

markweatherill · 3 Jun 2014 at 12:45

'Pain threshold' springs to mind. Perhaps by April 2015 we will have reached it!

DaleTheWhale · 3 Jun 2014 at 12:54

Why go backwards? The start menu and start screen both work exactly the same way, I don't understand why this is still an issue.

Tute · 3 Jun 2014 at 13:06

Looks like I can safely sell my Windows 8 licence onwards then.

nutcase · 3 Jun 2014 at 13:48

ThaReaperGuy said:
Why go backwards? The start menu and start screen both work exactly the same way, I don't understand why this is still an issue.

This.

lsg1r · 3 Jun 2014 at 14:10

ThaReaperGuy said:
Why go backwards? The start menu and start screen both work exactly the same way, I don't understand why this is still an issue.

I actually had to do some work on a win 7 machine a few days ago and having been using win 8 as my sole os it actually seemed really slow to use the old start menu... even with a mouse, maybe MS were on to something, they just need to improve it a bit for 'power users'

TwsT · 3 Jun 2014 at 15:55

lsg1r said:
I actually had to do some work on a win 7 machine a few days ago and having been using win 8 as my sole os it actually seemed really slow to use the old start menu... even with a mouse, maybe MS were on to something, they just need to improve it a bit for 'power users'

I use 7 at work and theres nothing wrong with it. I just prefer 8

But then I don't really utilise the start menu I never have

mightymouse · 3 Jun 2014 at 22:15

really dont think it makes that much of a difference seeing that i use the search function more than anything

Steveocee · 4 Jun 2014 at 08:10

Why are people gripping onto the start menu?
The only difference I made to 8 was boot to desktop rather than boot to metro.

darael · 4 Jun 2014 at 11:24

I don't see why Microsoft are struggling to do what a few people can do at StartIsBack, for a couple of quid too!

ubersonic · 4 Jun 2014 at 12:04

/care, most people won't use it anyway and the whiners already have third party alternatives.

lsg1r said:
I actually had to do some work on a win 7 machine a few days ago and having been using win 8 as my sole os it actually seemed really slow to use the old start menu... even with a mouse.

Same, Metro can do everything Start can either just as well or better yet people still whine because it looks different (was the same when Windows 95 introduced the Start menu).

linktoinsanity · 4 Jun 2014 at 12:27

Meh, probably too late for Windows 8 anyway. It's already flopped. Will help to sell Windows 9 if they put the Start Menu back into that.

Not sure how it can be slow to use the old start menu. Windows Key + Type or just move mouse over pinned program. I have Windows 8.1 on my spare machine and haven't bothered installing a Start Menu, but that's mainly due to not using that machine much rather than preferring the Start Screen.

ubersonic · 4 Jun 2014 at 12:57

linktoinsanity said:
Meh, probably too late for Windows 8 anyway. It's already flopped.

Derp, because becoming the second fastest selling/uptaken O/S in history count's as flopping?

The only reason W7 did so much better was because it was released 8 years after XP so was desperately awaited, W8 came out 3 years after W7 and wasn't even in demand yet it became Microsoft's second fastest selling/uptaken O/S ever.

linktoinsanity · 4 Jun 2014 at 13:02

ubersonic said:
Derp, because becoming the second fastest selling/uptaken O/S in history count's as flopping?

The only reason W7 did so much better was because it was released 8 years after XP so was desperately awaited, W8 came out 3 years after W7 and wasn't even in demand yet it became Microsoft's second fastest selling/uptaken O/S ever.

We've already discussed this in another thread, but anyone with any intelligence can tell it has flopped, considering the fact that market share-wise 8.0 and 8.1 combined are less than even XP.

Elevon · 4 Jun 2014 at 13:17

linktoinsanity said:
We've already discussed this in another thread, but anyone with any intelligence can tell it has flopped, considering the fact that market share-wise 8.0 and 8.1 combined are less than even XP.

I would not call it a flop,personally it's one of the best OS from Microsoft ie fast,very stable,good driver support etc....

It'll be interesting to see what new ideas they have for Win9 down the road,I can't wait.

Market share for XP is not surprising,look how long it's been out(2001 to 2014) and how many pirated versions of XP are world wide,probably the most pirated OS from Microsoft,sure to be in top spot.

ubersonic · 4 Jun 2014 at 13:24

linktoinsanity said:
We've already discussed this in another thread, but anyone with any intelligence can tell it has flopped, considering the fact that market share-wise 8.0 and 8.1 combined are less than even XP.

Actually anyone with intelligence can understand that a new product already having 12.5% market share and growing every day is actually a good thing

Rroff · 4 Jun 2014 at 13:31

ThaReaperGuy said:
Why go backwards? The start menu and start screen both work exactly the same way, I don't understand why this is still an issue.

They don't, not saying either is "better" I can quite see why for some people's useage the start screen works well but its not for everyone - hence why I did a quick and dirty shell hack on Windows 8 for a Windows 95 style start menu as even on an 8" touchscreen its more efficent and faster for my style of use: http://imgur.com/8fvcPbu

I think some people forget or don't realise that Windows moved away from something not dissimilar to the start screen (program manager) albeit without live tiles towards the start menu model for a reason.

EDIT: On a related note just saw this http://i.imgur.com/sNWz1PH.jpg aka "Retro Metro" which is kind of brilliant in an ironic way even if it is likely a photoshop.

EDIT2: Personally I consider 8 a flop just because the UI is absolutely rank, sure you can hack it up into something semi decent with 3rd party tools, but out the box it looks like a cheap knock off as per one of the things I said before compare Windows Defender UI in 7 beside 8 :S

iamtheoneneo · 4 Jun 2014 at 13:47

linktoinsanity said:
We've already discussed this in another thread, but anyone with any intelligence can tell it has flopped, considering the fact that market share-wise 8.0 and 8.1 combined are less than even XP.

is this real life? Your actually comparing a new OS with one thats been around since the dawn of time and using it to form your argument.

what in the actual ****.