Windows 8 Consumer Preview Thread

Photek said:
... That makes no sense at all :confused: You do realise that getting to the Start screen is exactly the same as getting to the old Start menu is 7? As in - moving the mouse to the bottom left corner of the screen and clicking, so how could the new Start screen possibly be any slower with mouse?

And you dont have to hover your mouse there waiting for a icon to pop up. You can just immediately click in the corner and it works. You seem to think that you actually have to click on the Start screen thumbnail image that appears, but you dont.
Click to expand...

Because there is a delay with the window popping up before being able to click it maybe? Sometimes it shows straight away some times it doesn't bother to show at all until I re-adjust where the cursor is. Where as on all previous versions I could click an icon anywhere on it & the menu would pop up!

I don't know if this is because I'm using dual monitors? But it is definitely slower getting into metro/the start menu than it was with all previous Windows versions.

This is really my only complaint, Apart from apps taking up the full screen & not being able to move them around the screen & resize them as I would like.

A choice would be nice, Thankfully someone has done it for me so I don't have to rely on MS to do it.

[edit] Yes I was talking about the thumbnail, But to most people who are new to this they would maybe think the same also! But then even the little area to click is so small compared to the old menu button. So instead of having something visible there to click it is now hidden, That doesn't make sense to me at all.
 
Last edited:
Mattey1 said:
. Using the mouse to get to the start menu up is cumbersome & slow compared to just clicking the start icon on the task bar.
Click to expand...

What tosh, clicking on the start menu, compared to clicking in the start menu. There's no difference.

It's people scared of change, nothing more.

There isn't delay and you don't need to hover anywhere, just take mouse straight of bottom corner and click.

Once it's learnt it's actually a far better system. Start menu and search start are full screen. It's a lot quick to get to all your software. Then there's the unified menus that are the same in all software, so once newbies learn it. They can navigate any app, without thinking is it this or that. It's all very simple and nice.
 
Last edited:
Yes, true, Glaucus, but why do yo think this new system superior to the old star menu. To me it looks like a few bits tacked on to the end of a OS designed around phones and tablets rather than an OS designed for a PC. the start menu system wasn't broken so why fix it?

Of course, we will know, once Windows 8 is released, how people react to it - by the way they buy or don't buy it. I am not the only one here, I think, who doesn't see enough there to make it worth buying, especially because of the Metro interface.
 
Glaucus said:
What tosh, clicking on the start menu, compared to clicking in the start menu. There's no difference.

It's people scared of change, nothing more.

There isn't delay and you don't need to hover anywhere, just take mouse straight of bottom corner and click.

Once it's learnt it's actually a far better system. Start menu and search start are full screen. It's a lot quick to get to all your software. Then there's the unified menus that are the same in all software, so once newbies learn it. They can navigate any app, without thinking is it this or that. It's all very simple and nice.
Click to expand...

You might think it is tosh, But to me there is a clear difference between the two. Simple fact is I have to move the mouse right to the bottom of the taskbar & then click instead of clicking anywhere on the normal start icon (bigger margin for error while clicking).

I will go back to what I said before what is the point in having the blank space? why not make it a clear visual icon? Or at least make it so the button takes up the whole area & be blank just like the other side of the taskbar where show desktop is.
 
Mattey1 said:
You might think it is tosh, But to me there is a clear difference between the two. Simple fact is I have to move the mouse right to the bottom of the taskbar & then click instead of clicking anywhere on the normal start icon (bigger margin for error while clicking).

I will go back to what I said before what is the point in having the blank space? why not make it a clear visual icon? Or at least make it so the button takes up the whole area & be blank just like the other side of the taskbar where show desktop is.
Click to expand...

A simpler answer to this is that is is easier to use the present system on a tablet or phone with a small screen. There is no other reason i can think of.
 
Mattey1 said:
You might think it is tosh, But to me there is a clear difference between the two. Simple fact is I have to move the mouse right to the bottom of the taskbar & then click instead of clicking anywhere on the normal start icon (bigger margin for error while clicking). s.
Click to expand...

Again rubbish, take your mouse all the way of the screen, your mosul automatically goes to the right lace, that means even though the area is smaller, it's far easier(as you don't need to aim) and no margin of error.

It's blank, as start button would not work in metro, there's no need for a button. It's a unified UI with system integrated menus. So menus and the way you do stuff is identical regardless of the application. That is massively better than what we have now.
 
Glaucus said:
Again rubbish, take your mouse all the way of the screen, your mosul automatically goes to the right lace, that means even though the area is smaller, it's far easier(as you don't need to aim) and no margin of error.

It's blank, as start button would not work in metro, there's no need for a button. It's a unified UI with system integrated menus. So menus and the way you do stuff is identical regardless of the application. That is massively better than what we have now.
Click to expand...

Take the mouse further than I usually have to? Why can't it be the same as the show desktop button on the other side? why is that button any different?

I don't get how a hidden button is massively better than what we already have? For a touch screen & phone yeah fine understandable but for the desktop with a mouse nope sorry I cannot agree with you.

Are you guys also using dual screens or not?
 
Last edited:
It's a few mm further, hardly a chore.

Got monitor and 28" tv connected.

Go look at metro and see why a button would not be good, again it's a unified UI. So if button doesn't suit metro, it won't be in desktop.
 
Glaucus said:
It's a few mm further, hardly a chore.

Got monitor and 28" tv connected.

Go look at metro and see why a button would not be good, again it's a unified UI. So if button doesn't suit metro, it won't be in desktop.
Click to expand...

I have a button now thanks to someones hack so I know how Metro works with a button & I must say it works exactly how I want so thanks to those guys who brought it back ;)

Do you have your 2nd monitor to the left or right? I have mine to the left of where the start menu would be.
 
Glaucus said:
It's people scared of change, nothing more.
Click to expand...

And what's the problem with that? What's the problem with not wanting to suddenly abandon a method that many people have used for decades, are very comfortable with and allows them to be productive?

The problem isn't anything to do with the users (which is a strange presumption anyway, you make a product to cater for your users, you don't make a product then cater your users to it), it's to do with the lack of choice.
 
It's about making it better for everyone and the future. It very much is catering for the users. A short period of relearning for decades of improvement is usefull.

People have said the same tiered arguments for every version of windows.
 
Glaucus said:
It's about making it better for everyone and the future. It very much is catering for the users. A short period of relearning for decades of improvement is usefull.

People have said the same tiered arguments for every version of windows.
Click to expand...

If everyone was using a touch screen for there desktop fair enough but I have no plans any time soon for a touch screen for a desktop PC, I like to use a mouse and when the focus of an OS strays away from the use of a mouse what is the point in using it for desktops.
 
That it's a unified UI, the same for all applications. The split screen which is a beauty and simple. Much easier than resizing each window separately. The new start menu and search menu is full screen and far easier to find stuff than the old start menu. That was extremely limited size wise.

Then you have a huge host of other stuff. Which has nothing to do with UI.
 
no, we haven't seen lots of people here demanding a larger area to click to find programmes! People are broadly happy with the way Windows 7 works and Windows 8 is not really adding anything more that a touch-screen interface for phones and tablets.
 
You're deluded, go have a look in the feature thread. There's a huge raft of improvements that aren't UI related. I can accept you don't like metro, however short sighted I think that is. But to say w8 is just a tablet UI is talking rubbish.

Most people don't use start menu full stop.
 
Last edited:
Glaucus said:
You're deluded, go have a look in the feature thread. There's a huge raft of improvements that aren't UI related. I can accept you don't like metro, however short sighted I think that is. But to say w8 is just a tablet UI is talking rubbish.

Most people don't use start menu full stop.
Click to expand...

I'm sorry, but that is bull, everyone use's a start menu who is running 7, your talking like 8 is mainstream all ready, just go take a look at what can be accessed by pressing the start button in 7 and then compare it to 8 (I'm sure there is a lot more going on in 7's start menu than 8)
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom