Problematic perception that Win8 is a problem?

Topic

New Reply

I’m going to suggest that part of the problem w/ people using & understanding Win8 & taking issue w/ the UI may be the following…

One does not need to ‘dwell’ on Start. One can use the familiar Desktop & yet, still, select any desired APPs BUT, let or have those active APPs (say, like Weather) sit on the APP Bar… no interference w/ Desktop, no actually leaving it (to Start). I think maybe people are not aware of & using the APP Bar in conjunction w/ Desktop. If so, I suggest there would be much less grumbling about Start, APPs & the Win8 UI.

Cheers,
Drew

Reply | Quote

Replies

Just for grins and giggles……riddle me this

How is John Q. Public supposed to know all that, when he’s just gone to Wal-Mart and bought a new PC and gets it home and finds it has Windows 8 on it, and then he’s met by the Metro UI screen. ???

Can you say “Store Return!” ???

Reply | Quote

Just for grins and giggles……riddle me this

How is John Q. Public supposed to know all that, when he’s just gone to Wal-Mart and bought a new PC and gets it home and finds it has Windows 8 on it, and then he’s met by the Metro UI screen. ???

Can you say “Store Return!” ???

Take the time to LEARN how to use your computer. Google works just fine last I checked.
Plenty of content on YouTube in terms of Windows 8 tutorials and such.
The whole industry just can’t stop because you have people with absolutely no ambition and motivation to learn anything new.

If one switches to a MAC, there will still be some degree of learning that needs to be done, it’s like anything else in life.

Reply | Quote

Take the time to LEARN how to use your computer. Google works just fine last I checked.
Plenty of content on YouTube in terms of Windows 8 tutorials and such.
The whole industry just can’t stop because you have people with absolutely no ambition and motivation to learn anything new.

Now where have I heard pretty much those exact same words? Oh yeah the Linux guys.

Well you can see how well it’s worked to establish Linux as the market leader.

Reply | Quote

That is the conundrum MS is presented with. How to teach people to use this new OS. I suspect the sales people will learn quickly to point customers to these forums for help to get started. I would be willing to sell my tutorial on taking the scary out of this OS if it would help, :rolleyes:

Reply | Quote

It is, also, all in HELP in the OS, itself.

And allow me to say this about that (teehee)…

It doesn’t need or take heaps of “customizing”.

And maybe people won’t react, respond or adopt well, willing or enthusiastically, even, w/ interest or curiosity IF they hear BEFORE they themselves bother w/ it, that it is a “mess”. Rather would taint the notion of, even, investigating, for oneself. This would only increase & heighten any, possibly, already, existing trepidation.

Personally, after using Win8 daily for more than 5 months will not, cannot agree w/ the attitude or perception or portrayal of Win8 being a “mess”. I, too, had only prior Windows as a familiar reference. Yet, Win8 is not hard to learn or adjust to it, it needs no huge customizing or tweaking nor 3rd party add-ins or retro-fits. Nor do I (MY ENTITLED OPINION) find it kind or helpful to, in advance, give the impression that it’s awful & would be gruesome & distasteful to everybody & anybody to try using it. I will stand firm the “Tile Style”, the Start screen and APPs are not, actually, an issue & do not cause a problem, impedance or obstacle.

I, again personal opinion, not criticising anyone for differing views, feel Windows8, in reality, does not deserve to have people, in advance, thinking they surely must have a certain fearful, turned-off understanding of the OS. The OS is a fine piece of work & timely as we walk into the future of computing. The lack of a happy perception of Win8 and appreciation of it, in the ‘grand scale’ sense grows out of a lack of understanding of the OS and how it can, in fact & indeed be a pleasant, productive experience for End Users.

No my glasses are not rose coloured, I just feel like sharing the enjoyment that this technically impressive Windows8 Operating System is and can easily be for many on many devices.

Will there be enquiries, queries and requests for help and instructions? Yep, certainly. What I question is the idea that this is something terrible or why it has to be treated as something terrible. To me, an IT Pro, it is more like a ‘so what?’ thing, just the nature of the beast. Having to seek guidance to discover something is not terrible. Same happens in many contexts, always has, always will and certainly in technology.

The shocking (tongue in cheek) thing is, humans, being the creatures they are will, for the most part, @ some point cope. For some it will be their ‘familiar’ OS; for them, they will never have known what all the fuss was about, anyway.

Sorry, but, I just don’t/can’t buy into this idea that Windows8 is traumatic, terrifying nor weird or difficult to use. After more than 5 months, personally, I have, truly, found it quite the opposite.

Cheers,
Drew

Reply | Quote

All of us who quickly & easily discovered how to use Windows8 are, hate to surprise anyone, part of “John Q. Public”. Nor do any of same wonder about return policies… Hard to say… there may (shocker) be lots more of the same ilk. The tipping point lies in attitude & perception; I have said & expressed this before & will continue to hold fast to it. OR that’s my story & I’m sticking to it. Oh well…

Cheers,
Drew

Reply | Quote

Maybe y’all weren’t around when Windows XP first came out. Many of those PC’s went right back to the store. I know that from first-hand experience, because I used to install new PC’s for Circuit City.

When confronted with a brand new PC, not even set up yet, how on earth is the new PC user going to know how to even get through SETUP, let alone know how to get to a forum? His old PC may have crashed so he’s left with a new OS that is NOT friendly to the old XP user or even the Vista user.
He had Outlook Express for his email, for ten years or more, and that’s what he still wants. Windows Mail is close and I can make it work in Win-7, but won’t work on Win-8. ???

You “Experts” are so far out of touch with reality, you really need to get out of your comfort zone and see how the real world lives.

I’ve gone through this ‘New OS’ thing all the way back to Windows 95 and for the untrained user, it can be a nightmare!

Thank goodness, there weren’t that many changes in DOS, and if you knew DOS 2.0, you could work with DOS 6.22, but throughout the different versions of Windows, it’s been a completely different story. Every time a new OS hits the stores, my phone rings off the hook.

I’m currently learning Windows 8 for one reason, and one reason only, and that is so I can support my customers when they start buying new PC’s that come with Windows 8 on them. It will NEVER be my Daily OS of choice.

Cheers Mates!
The Doctor 😎

Reply | Quote

I have decided to keep out of the “Why or Why Not” discussions of Win 8. The 2 sides are very polarized and dug in. I will continue posts for directions on the “How do I do this discussions, but not the other. It just seems to be a loosing battle, no matter which side your are on.

Reply | Quote

I was very skeptical about acceptance of Windows 8 as well but I just built a new system for a friend. He had a legal copy of XP, so I installed it and then installed Windows 8 RP over the top counting on the fact that the $40 upgrade will then work. I gave him a few keyboard shortcuts and installed Windows Classic Shell and I haven’t had any other questions from him. He is a little more technical savvy than most people but hardly a Windows expert. He did have an issue getting sound to work but he was able to fix it himself.

I think Classic shell helps tremendously. I think Microsoft will be making a big mistake if they disable its operation in the released version and I think it points out they made a mistake in removing the start button. Now if I could only find a way to disable the hot spots, Windows 8 could be a winner.

I still plan on leaving my main PC (desktop) with Windows 7 but will upgrade my laptop. Perhaps if a killer Modern UI (oops, almost said Metro) app comes out, I will upgrade the desktop as well but it is plenty fast enough with Windows 7 and I don’t see anything in Windows 8 worth spending another$40 now.

Jerry

Reply | Quote

I’m still saying Win 8 UI until a decision is made by MS. Someone stated (I wish I could remember who) that a friend in the know tells him (3rd party info) that Classic Shell continues to work in Win 8 RTM which I would assume means it will work in Win 8 Pro.

I am not holding my breath waiting because it’s still 2 months away, but that would be good news.

Reply | Quote

Don’t hold your breath, Ted. Just breathe a little easier. Classic Shell works in Windows 8 Pro according to my source also.

Rich

Reply | Quote

I have a BIG question…as a Q public and member of the herd of the unwashed… what is metro and what is Aero

Reply | Quote

I have a BIG question…as a Q public and member of the herd of the unwashed… what is metro and what is Aero

Metro is a set of design principles used in various Microsoft software products. It started with the Zune HD music player. It spread to other products and finally to Windows. Aero is a visual theme introduced in Windows Vista and continued in Windows 7. It is being abandoned in Windows 8.

Joe

--Joe

Reply | Quote

Please, don’t misunderstand, Folks… Classic Shell is not a necessity, is not a ‘must have’ that must be added on to Windows8. It is an optional thing, not an imperative thing.

Cheers,
Drew

Reply | Quote

That is very true. Classic Shell is an optional app available for not only Win 8, but Win 7, Win XP, etc. It does however provide a “security blanket” (pardon my choice of words, just could not think of a more appropriate expression right now) if you will for those that are traumatized by the lack of a Start Orb. This app adds a Start Shell (can’t be called an orb as it looks like a shell) that has all the features of the Win 7 Start Orb and is actually more customizable than the previous Windows Start Orb.

Reply | Quote

That is all well & good but, people should be fully aware that there is no reason to be traumatized by the fact the Start icon is now rectangular instead of round. They should, also, be fully aware that Windows8 works perfectly fine the way IT is, rather than thinking it HAS to be made to ‘look’ or act like Windows7. As long as Folks are aware that Windows8 does quite nicely w/out adding this, rather than thinking it is a ‘must have’. That’s all 🙂

Cheers,
Drew

Reply | Quote

I find it a must have for my clientel. As I stated earlier, I think it was a huge mistake by Microsoft to leave this functionality out. It obviously would have cost them little to implement it and would have negated all this negative press. Of course it doe minimize trips to the Start Screen and interaction with Modern UI which Microsoft doesn’t want. They have too much to gain by introducing people to Modern UI apps and the Windows Store.

Jerry

Reply | Quote

FYI:

I never visit Start & am not ‘bothered’ by Tiles… simply select whatever APPs wanted, @ any given time, whilst remaining, 100%, on Desktop. Any APPs kept active are left sitting on the APP Bar, still, not requiring any visits to Start. In actuality, there is no (needed) functionality “left out” of Windows8. It’s just a matter of how it is used. It is the fault of “negative press” that gets lots of attention, is based on not grasping how the OS works (w/out adding anything) & gives people a false or misguided impression of the OS & its UI. As for the ‘Store’… nothing says people must shop there or @ Wall-Mart… the Store Tile, like any other, can be removed from Start. Nothing warrants or justifies the fuss being made. And as said, many times, (the fuss) distracts from the rest of Windows8.

Cheers,
Drew

Reply | Quote

Can you get to any control pane App without the visiting Start Modern UI? Or Do a File Search? With Classic Shell or the old Windows Start orb, everything is in one convenient place just a click away.

Jerry

Reply | Quote

“Can you get to any control pane App without the visiting Start Modern UI?”

Yes, Jerry, you can.

Cheers,
Drew

Reply | Quote

How ???

Jerry

Reply | Quote

I have covered this previously in other threads but, that’s ok… here is how:

1. This, I personally like a lot… have an Applications folder on the Taskbar. I have been trying to have the Win8 Build Team put this in the RTM. Currently, has to be created as a New Desktop Shortcut (%windir%explorer.exe shell:::{4234d49b-0245-4df3-b780-3893943456e1}). This is opened, make it the View & Sort preferred & minimise. Then select all applications from it. OR hit WinQ to see the same material displayed on a Windows8 screen.
2. Make use of the menu @ the Bottom-Left Corner… Rt Clk there to see it.
3. Make use of the Desktop Toolbar. Rt Clk on the Taskbar & it is one of the (already) available Toolbars.
4. Use the APP Bar. Keeps active apps (Weather, for example) @ the ready.
5. Use traditional browser windows not, IE APP.

There above it simple, easy, all, except #1, already native to the OS. Means Desktop is your helm & you are left w/ no need or reason to visit Start or be concerned w/ its Tiles. Still, choosing to use whatever APPS, if desired, but, from & whilst staying on Desktop. Ends up being fast, convenient, handy & efficient.

Remember, even if an APPis selected, one can go directly back to Desktop w/out using keyboard shortcuts because the Desktop will be sitting @ the top of the APP Bar… just simply go click on it there. All of this means nicely going to whatever, w/out Start & w/out, actually, leaving Desktop and w/out adding anything; you just access or use whatever, never leaving or going right back to Desktop.

Once I boot, I never see Start, again & w/out adding anything. It’s all subject/personal preference but, I just like the KISS principle. 8 works & navigates very nicely, as is so I’ve left it that way… I don’t hate Start for any reason, just don’t need & therefore can’t justify, bothering w/ it & jumping about when can just stay comfortably on Desktop.

Anyway, that’s how. 🙂

Cheers,
Drew

Cheers,
Drew

Reply | Quote

For me, if I did not have Classic Shell, Win + X and choose CP is the easiest method.

I simply like Classic Shell because I can use CP as a Menu list so when I hover over it I get all CP items in a list. I also use Classic Shell for WU and for apps I do not use often. For oft used apps, I have my Shortcuts Toolbar.

Reply | Quote

That’s fine, Ted. It’s just cool that people know & understand they can access all that same stuff & more quickly & easily w/in Windows8 Desktop, as well, w/out adding CS.

As long as they don’t get the impression that this is not the case.

For example, in the Desktop Toolbar is Control Panel that does, indeed, show all its items vs categories.

There is, certainly, nothing wrong or bad about adding CP, as long as people know it is not necessary.

That’s all.

I tried heaps of things before just staying w/ what the OS has natively. Other stuff was complicating things, more involved, had to be added, created redundancy or was plain unnecessary. Not anything terrible, but, only unneeded.

The only point is merely to, ALSO, mention, that navigating & the User Experience w/ Win8 can be appealing, as is (out of the box) AND w/out the Start screen.

Cheers,
Drew

Reply | Quote

Drew,

1. This, I personally like a lot… have an Applications folder on the Taskbar. I have been trying to have the Win8 Build Team put this in the RTM. Currently, has to be created as a New Desktop Shortcut (%windir%explorer.exe shell:::{4234d49b-0245-4df3-b780-3893943456e1}). This is opened, make it the View & Sort preferred & minimise. Then select all applications from it. OR hit WinQ to see the same material displayed on a Windows8 screen.
2. Make use of the menu @ the Bottom-Left Corner… Rt Clk there to see it.
3. Make use of the Desktop Toolbar. Rt Clk on the Taskbar & it is one of the (already) available Toolbars.
4. Use the APP Bar. Keeps active apps (Weather, for example) @ the ready.
5. Use traditional browser windows not, IE APP.

!
1. You are just building your own Start button with this one that does not have all the functionality of Classic Shell or the Windows 7 Start orb
2. This is the closest to having all the required functionality in one spot except search takes you to the Start Screen where you get the ugly tiles. Also there is a separate search for Apps, Control, and files. Classic shell and Windows 7 searches all catagories which is handy for some apps I ‘m not sure which category Windows places them in like the Snipping tool.
3. Desktop toolbar is also close but doesn’t contain search and administrative tools like Classic Shell
4. Big Screen waster. Doesn’t include Control Panel
5. Have no idea what you’re suggesting here.

In summary, I find all these solutions inferior to Classic Shell and the Windows Start orb. Classic shell also has the advantage of less retraining for people moving up from Windows XP and Windows 7. Less work for me.

Jerry

Reply | Quote

& that’s cool for you & others. Just as long as people can, also, know Win8 works well & nicely w/out adding CS. As I said, I didn’t “build” anything… I’m using what is already there. I’m just not, unnecessarily using or going to the Start screen for things.

& by the way, it works just fine w/ nothing but, the Desktop tile on Start; that being the only “ugly tile” one would have (there) As for ugly, beauty is in the eye of the beholder & so is ugly.

Search from the Power Users menu does not take one to the Start screen.

Maybe tough trying to explain when can’t be shown. Just cared that folks not think life in Windows8 cannot be nice w/out CS… it absolutely can.

#3 what’s not in the Desktop toolbar is in the Power Users menu
#4 doesn’t use any screen space & is so helpful, hard to call it a waste & CP is already available @ or from, @ least, 2 other places.
#5 is referring to normal IE browser windows rather than the IE APP

It might be more a matter of people thinking they have to add something to avoid (using) something that is being suggested as problematic. Start screen & the rest are not, really, some bad thing that needs to be avoided, just can do everything & access everything w/out it and w/out adding something else, instead, to able to work w/out visiting Start & a slew of tiles.

Cheers,
Drew

Reply | Quote

We’ll just have to agree to disagree. I wouldn’t recommend Windows 8 without classic shell. You obviously disagree. Neither one of us is likely to change our opinion. So, I have nothing more to say on the subject.

Jerry

Reply | Quote

Jerry, it’s, certainly ok if you want to treat it as an ‘agree to disagree’ thing. I was only pointing out that Windows8 can work w/ CS but, that people, also, know & allow for the fact that it can, also, work w/out it.

Cheers,
Drew

Reply | Quote

OK, here’s a situation that can’t be helped. What about the older computer users in our midst – and there will be more and more and more of them as time goes by. Including all of the younger people here who will one day be in this same boat, no matter how smart and tech-expert they are right now.

This is relevant because it won’t be long until all new computers ship with Windows 8, which is radically different from what these older seniors know how to use.

I have an elderly relative whose main pleasure is writing emails, playing her online card games, and looking things up on the internet. Her old computer is about at the end of its lifespan, so, she’s getting a new computer. Her old one has XP and Outlook Express. The new one will have Windows 7. There is just about zero chance that at this point she will be able to learn another email program other than her good old Outlook Express or learn to use Windows 7 or Windows 8 other than to find her browser and card games and to open and use her email program. The disappearing windows when you hover a cursor at the right corner, and the fly-up icons when you hover over a taskbar icon will bug her and confuse her. The email program cannot be Windows Live Mail – at this stage, she could never use it. The exploded toolbars would be her undoing. Fortunately, we can put Windows Mail on her computer by giving her the missing .dll and following the SevenForums instructions.

I guess nobody gives a darn about elderly people who use computers or who use theirs for their “window on the world” and a chance to connect with friends and relatives and get their questions answered with Google.

I am pointing out that aside from all the techie arguments for and against this and that, one thing that is happening is that some older people are going to lose their ability to use their computer as Windows changes more and more radically and their old computers crash and die.

I just wish that they would make a relatively unchanging “senior citizens” version for our older folks. You know – just like they realized finally that they need to make simple cell phones with large buttons for older people. I don’t know if the long-time posters and experts or semi-experts here have had the pleasure of caring for an elderly person who did use a computer before retiring and now, say 20 years or more later, is in the mental state where they are finding it hard and harder to remember instructions or how to do things they once did easily, who can no longer figure out a complicated process, or adapt easily, if at all, to new programs and operating systems.

It is just plain SAD, that’s all, that some people who are going to have to get new computers a year from now (who may not even realize it yet or can’t afford to do it this minute), are going to find that they have something they can’t fathom, with no possibility of using even Windows Mail on it, and they are going to end up sinking further and faster into their declining years than they would otherwise. I do know what it takes to keep an elderly person who lives at home engaged and using their mind, and computers are one very excellent way to do this. You can encourage curiosity, and bring them outside of their little world at home, and keep them interested in life and feeling relevant and a part of it – not just family, but a part of the wider world.

So there is another side to this coin that nobody is talking about. It is one I didn’t even realize recently until a situation came up where it pretty much hit me all at once.

It is not necessary for anyone to respond to this post. If you spend a few minutes thinking about it and really understanding what I mean, as best you can, that will be enough. Reasons for “why it has to be this way” don’t count here and I am not looking for explanations about how we have to move on and all that. I know all that. What counts, in reference to what I am bringing up here, is the result, and the only thing I can imagine that could help would be if Microsoft were to make (as I said) a relatively unchanging program designed for the older seniors among us (whose numbers will always increase) so that they can continue to use their computer.

Reply | Quote

People often underestimate their ability to adapt and learn new things, sometimes to the point of extreme anxiety.
Barring serious mental retardation or dementia, learing takes a bit of effort at first but the rewards will quite often pay off in dividends.

Just as in life, it is a well known concept that things change and adaptation is needed. Programs will not be viable forever, therefore we must seek
updated equivelents, and there are viable alternatives out there. And there will always be someone to turn to for assistance.
THIS IS NOT ROCKET SCIENCE OR SOME FORM OF ELITIST KNOWLEDGE.

Some people get old and wise while other just get old. Try not to be the later.

Reply | Quote

People often underestimate their ability to adapt and learn new things, sometimes to the point of extreme anxiety.
Barring serious mental retardation or dementia, learing takes a bit of effort at first but the rewards will quite often pay off in dividends.

Just as in life, it is a well known concept that things change and adaptation is needed. Programs will not be viable forever, therefore we must seek
updated equivelents, and there are viable alternatives out there. And there will always be someone to turn to for assistance.
THIS IS NOT ROCKET SCIENCE OR SOME FORM OF ELITIST KNOWLEDGE.

Some people get old and wise while other just get old. Try not to be the later.

—————–

Clint, I appreciate what you are saying but I am talking about the *elderly.* People in their late 70s, 80s, or even a few in their early 90s. If you have not spent time around people whose memories no longer function as they did when younger, and who have lost much of their ability to conceptualize, then with all due respect you aren’t really aware of the type of population I am talking about. These are people who can use the computer but who will be unable to use the updated operating systems, particularly ones that are a radical departure from what they used to use.

Believe it or not there are many in the quite elderly classification who do not know the difference between a web page and an email – they know it looks different but can’t tell you why. They know they can address an email and send it but they don’t understand how it gets into their inbox or where it goes after they press send. Yet, these same people can write emails and read them, they can get google on the screen and type in a question. With a link at the browser toolbar or on the desktop, they can get Google images or maps and look at photos of things or find a street address or a town in their state. With links on the desktop, they can get to Accuweather or some other weather source, or to a news site or Wikipedia.

You are not *not* going to teach these people how to navigate Windows 8, or use an email program they haven’t been using already for the past five years and so on.

The population *you* are talking about is the group in their 60s to early 70s. I am talking about the group sometimes called the “very old” or “very elderly.” I know of many who are using computers into their 80s and older – they typed all their lives. They transitioned to computers late in life. But failing memories and failing abilities to see concepts and to focus widely comes eventually to all of us. When the day comes that their trusty old computer dies, and they are forced to get a new one with a newer operating system, many of these people will have to give up computers which provide them with, as I said, a window on the world and which keeps their minds active and functioning so they are not sitting and staring into space, half-watching TV mindlessly.

I wish Microsoft would come up with a “senior” version of Windows for such people that would not change much that they could use for as long as they are able to do so.

Again there is no point in pointing out that change has to come and everyone can learn if they apply themselves and all that. I am not talking about those people, I am simply voicing a wish. No need to reply, either.

Reply | Quote

Yeah, I see where your coming from, but I don’t see too many alternatives, except guided assistance from someone like yourself.

Reply | Quote

Yeah, I see where your comming from, but I don’t see too many alternatives, except guided assistance from someone like yourself.

Maybe I’ll write to AARP and suggest they make it a campaign. 🙂 If MS ever did such a thing, it would be walled off from everything else they do (at least in my imagination), and have nothing to do with their forging ahead with new versions of windows for everyone else.

Reply | Quote

I am going to emphatically agree w/ Clint! 1st am 60 yrs old myself. 2ndly I will not, cannot agree that a new Operating System will freak out the elderly, be impossible for them to learn and use. To suggest this, carte blanche, is very unfair. I have had many ‘older’ clients, some approaching computers for the 1st time in their lives & some that went from XP to Vista or Windows7; some of the 2nd group having used computers prior to XP, as well.

The argument being put forth is not addressing a particular demographic (any of which will be filled w/ exceptions to the rule or expectations or those who are not stereotypical). Not only in computing but, everywhere in our lives, society & culture, change exists, change comes, “New & Improved” keeps getting thrown @ people, constantly in & w/ all kinds of things. Some take to something well or w/ a keen interest, some don’t, be they young , old or in between. As Clint says, there is always, certainly usually, help & instruction nearby. The ‘older’ clients I have had, w/out exception have been keen to learn & excited to seek help & welcome it.

Plus, most of them have been around the block enough to know little stays the same. I have, also, found them well able to comprehend & accept explanations as to why technologies in computers have changed. All I have encountered have often said, “I had or it was” but, ok, that’s how it is now, then show me, again”. Many @ that age know change is life’s challenge, change is not a new concept to or for them.

And THAT is the point. This discussion goes around like a top… this group won’t for this reason & this one for that. It is not addressing the attitude or abilities of a group but, CHANGE (itself). The fact of the matter is, all the bashing of Windows8, the same basic sort of rhetoric we heard w/ each new Operating System is a comment regarding & against sheer CHANGE not the Operating System. Whether it is the elderly or anyone, it comes down to the individual & perception. No one is too old to learn If, still mentally sound and many, if not most elderly are pretty darned sharp. To say they can’t or wouldn’t want to learn is not giving due credit. I have taught elder clients & know they ARE willing & interested to learn things and ARE CAPABLE.

The idea that because something is new, different or changed that the transformation in & of itself is bad or the thing now presented or introduced is bad just, because it is not (any longer) what was before. This concept has never had merit or grounds and can’t possibly, ever have.

It is, also, constantly being forgotten that, @ the end of the day, Windows8 is , still, just another alliteration of a MS Windows Operating System for computers. Fundamentally, it is, still, ‘same church, different pew’; still, just click about & do the, basically same this & that as ever. Sure, it looks a bit different, you go about things a bit differently but, nothing that needs be PRE-JUDGED as overwhelming, scary or impossible, no matter what age group. As Clint said, it is just a computer not, rocket science.

As for mail handlers, specifically… again, the base is a constant… send, receive, inbox, sent, new mail, etc, etc…. IT is, still, a zoo w/ basically the same animals… maybe they are in different cages or the décor has been altered or someone made a polar bear blue but, it is, still, just another zoo full of animals; and maybe one will need a new map or a tour guide to help find one’s way around the new zoo. So what? That’s OK! And, even, older folks will & can find there way to the tigers.

Give older folks the credit they deserve, they’ve earned it. And there are heaps of IT Pros, myself included, happy to help them. We all had to learn all the changes in computing over the years and that doesn’t stop as we age. And this from a 60 yrs old who has gone through several Windows Operating Systems & who has had 1st hand experience w/ older IT clients.

Sorry, I didn’t mean to write so much, have it be so long. I trust didn’t bore anyone (too much).

Oh & by the way… nothing says anyone must go to Windows8 immediately… unless they want to or they happen to need or want a new computer @ some time when it/that will, indeed, be Windows8.

Cheers,
Drew

Reply | Quote

I am going to emphatically agree w/ Clint! 1st am 60 yrs old myself. 2ndly I will not, cannot agree that a new Operating System will freak out the elderly, be impossible for them to learn and use. To suggest this, carte blanche, is very unfair. I have had many ‘older’ clients, some approaching computers for the 1st time in their lives & some that went from XP to Vista or Windows7; some of the 2nd group having used computers prior to XP, as well.

The argument being put forth is not addressing a particular demographic (any of which will be filled w/ exceptions to the rule or expectations or those who are not stereotypical). Not only in computing but, everywhere in our lives, society & culture, change exists, change comes, “New & Improved” keeps getting thrown @ people, constantly in & w/ all kinds of things. Some take to something well or w/ a keen interest, some don’t, be they young , old or in between. As Clint says, there is always, certainly usually, help & instruction nearby. The ‘older’ clients I have had, w/out exception have been keen to learn & excited to seek help & welcome it.

Plus, most of them have been around the block enough to know little stays the same. I have, also, found them well able to comprehend & accept explanations as to why technologies in computers have changed. All I have encountered have often said, “I had or it was” but, ok, that’s how it is now, then show me, again”. Many @ that age know change is life’s challenge, change is not a new concept to or for them.

And THAT is the point. This discussion goes around like a top… this group won’t for this reason & this one for that. It is not addressing the attitude or abilities of a group but, CHANGE (itself). The fact of the matter is, all the bashing of Windows8, the same basic sort of rhetoric we heard w/ each new Operating System is a comment regarding & against sheer CHANGE not the Operating System. Whether it is the elderly or anyone, it comes down to the individual & perception. No one is too old to learn If, still mentally sound and many, if not most elderly are pretty darned sharp. To say they can’t or wouldn’t want to learn is not giving due credit. I have taught elder clients & know they ARE willing & interested to learn things and ARE CAPABLE.

The idea that because something is new, different or changed that the transformation in & of itself is bad or the thing now presented or introduced is bad just, because it is not (any longer) what was before. This concept has never had merit or grounds and can’t possibly, ever have.

It is, also, constantly being forgotten that, @ the end of the day, Windows8 is , still, just another alliteration of a MS Windows Operating System for computers. Fundamentally, it is, still, ‘same church, different pew’; still, just click about & do the, basically same this & that as ever. Sure, it looks a bit different, you go about things a bit differently but, nothing that needs be PRE-JUDGED as overwhelming, scary or impossible, no matter what age group. As Clint said, it is just a computer not, rocket science.

As for mail handlers, specifically… again, the base is a constant… send, receive, inbox, sent, new mail, etc, etc…. IT is, still, a zoo w/ basically the same animals… maybe they are in different cages or the décor has been altered or someone made a polar bear blue but, it is, still, just another zoo full of animals; and maybe one will need a new map or a tour guide to help find one’s way around the new zoo. So what? That’s OK! And, even, older folks will & can find there way to the tigers.

Give older folks the credit they deserve, they’ve earned it. And there are heaps of IT Pros, myself included, happy to help them. We all had to learn all the changes in computing over the years and that doesn’t stop as we age. And this from a 60 yrs old who has gone through several Windows Operating Systems & who has had 1st hand experience w/ older IT clients.

Sorry, I didn’t mean to write so much, have it be so long. I trust didn’t bore anyone (too much).

Oh & by the way… nothing says anyone must go to Windows8 immediately… unless they want to or they happen to need or want a new computer @ some time when it/that will, indeed, be Windows8.

Cheers,
Drew

Drew – in no way did I expect you, in particular, to agree with me. You are welcome to defend Windows 8 to the death and that’s fine. Although you are 60, I would only point out there is a *vast* abyss between a 60 year old in good mental condition (assuming no early dementia or Alzheimer’s) and an 85 year old who is in their final years of being *able* to live alone, whose memory is slipping, who is unable to any longer grasp the concept of what a computer is all about. There are many of these today and will be more as our population ages and lives longer. That may, someday, include you as well even though at 60 I am sure you do not foresee that for yourself in the future. That is quite normal.

The individuals you are speaking of are the ones who have not yet reached this point, and there is where you went off on a tangent. I was not speaking of those individuals, and I very carefully have said that so that nobody goes off on a mistaken direction thinking they are responding to me.

There is absolutely nothing you can say that is going to change the fact that this group of people is not *able* to grasp change of any magnitude. If you are unaware of this now, you unfortunately will – within the next 25 years – become all too aware of it, either in yourself or those around you who are of the same generation. Nor can you change the fact that I do wish MS could come up with a simple and relatively unchanging version for our very elderly who are using computers for the reasons I said.

However, you need not defend Windows 8 to me – I didn’t bash it. You can be are a huge fan of anything new from and that’s fine with me. I am just a group member here, and nobody important – certainly not important enough for you to write such a defense of Microsoft’s new operating systems to me.

Oh, and by the way, you may want to read Clint’s *second* post since you say you agree with him. 🙂

Best regards –
Kelliann

Reply | Quote

Kelliann, the folks with whom you are referring to sound like they are bordering on some serious cognitive deficits and not just old age.
Would it be wise for these people to even be using a computer without some form of supervision?

Reply | Quote

Kelliann, the folks with whom you are referring to sound like they are bordering on some serious cognitive deficits and not just old age.
Would it be wise for these people to even be using a computer without some form of supervision?

Clint, these things come with very old age, sooner or later. Sure they can use computers as long as what they are using stays pretty much the same. And yes, they do require help – varying from once a week to once or twice a day. If you are a family member or friend who is looking in on these folks, you fix what needs fixing, remind when needed, place links on desktop where needed to simplify matters.

There is generally a pretty long period between when they are functioning pretty much as they were and when they truly can no longer use their computer – a period of years. During that time, many who don’t use computers just sink into more and more isolation as the years go by. It is pretty well known that the more active the mind is kept in daily living, the more curiosity is stimulated, the longer they function well. TV doesn’t do it. Books with complex plots can become hard to follow. Just like computers encourage the young to teach themselves in a sort of self-directed learning, they do the same at the other end of life for our very elderly who are in their last years – 5 to 8 years perhaps – of living independently in their own homes and apartments.

Reply | Quote

1. What I wrote was not, @ all, in any way a defence of Windows8 or any other OS. I was defending old people.
2. If someone has, unfortunately, deteriorated mentally then it has to be accepted that that is the obstacle not, any specifics or details about a particular OS.

Sorry you misunderstood me. I speak better than I write. I have not been living under a rock. I was talking about people in their 70s & 80s & allowing for the variations… some are going to have trouble w/ things, in general, but, there are many who ARE, still, very capable & mentally sharp.

I was more talking about the attitude towards change or new things. And the fact that there needs be a willingness to help people of whatever age & ability. What they can manage & to whatever degree or pace or understanding depends on them & their varying condition much more than on the nature of OS be it Windows 98 or Windows8.

Cheers,
Drew

Reply | Quote

1. What I wrote was not, @ all, in any way a defence of Windows8 or any other OS. I was defending old people.
2. If someone has, unfortunately, deteriorated mentally then it has to be accepted that that is the obstacle not, any specifics or details about a particular OS.

Sorry you misunderstood me. I speak better than I write. I have not been living under a rock. I was talking about people in their 70s & 80s & allowing for the variations… some are going to have trouble w/ things, in general, but, there are many who ARE, still, very capable & mentally sharp.

I was more talking about the attitude towards change or new things. And the fact that there needs be a willingness to help people of whatever age & ability. What they can manage & to whatever degree or pace or understanding depends on them & their varying condition much more than on the nature of OS be it Windows 98 or Windows8.

Cheers,
Drew

Oh Drew.

1. I carefully separated out the group I was speaking of, setting if off from the elders who are functioning well mentally and spoke specifically of those who are declining in their abilities. You need not defend the elderly in general to me. I have great respect for them and for their continuing upbeat efforts to cope by whatever means is at hand (including use of computers).

2. I carefully said that this had nothing to do with specific operating systems. You can’t change the fact that Windows 8 and even 7 contain some pretty significant departures from early systems. However, the point I made was that a particular population (which I defined) is unable to deal with significant changes. This does not constitute bashing of operating systems, in my opinion.

I certainly appreciate your comments, but they disregarded what I said and they went way beyond what I said.

Please don’t put words in my mouth or answer to things that I did not bring up or intend to bring up. I was very careful to define the limits of what I was saying so that this would not happen. Unfortunately, it did.
🙂
Best regards
Kelliann

Reply | Quote

Oh Drew.

1. I carefully separated out the group I was speaking of, setting if off from the elders who are functioning well mentally and spoke specifically of those who are declining in their abilities. You need not defend the elderly in general to me. I have great respect for them and for their continuing upbeat efforts to cope by whatever means is at hand (including use of computers).

2. I carefully said that this had nothing to do with specific operating systems. You can’t change the fact that Windows 8 and even 7 contain some pretty significant departures from early systems. However, the point I made was that a particular population (which I defined) is unable to deal with significant changes. This does not constitute bashing of operating systems, in my opinion.

I certainly appreciate your comments, but they disregarded what I said and they went way beyond what I said.

Please don’t put words in my mouth or answer to things that I did not bring up or intend to bring up. I was very careful to define the limits of what I was saying so that this would not happen. Unfortunately, it did.
🙂
Best regards
Kelliann

Reply | Quote

I think what we’ve got here Kelliann, is a small demographic that slips through the cracks, there just isn’t enough of them to make an impact.
And many of these folks would just not bother with a computer at any rate.

Reply | Quote

I think what we’ve got here Kelliann, is a demographic that slips through the cracks, there just isn’t enough of them to make an impact.

Clint – I completely agree and that’s a really good way to put it. And in the next 25 years, their numbers will rise significantly. The boomer generation is not one for giving up on what it likes and wants to do, so I think that there will eventually be considerable noise coming from them about their computer-related needs.

Kelliann

Reply | Quote

This thread started with Drew stating his opinions, these then became a discussion and almost descended into a flame.

Why did Drew feel the need to ‘enlighten’ us with his (personal, one-sided) insights in the first place?
To start a ‘Yes it is/No it isn’t’ argument?

He was not asking a question out of need, or giving useful advice to a reader even, just voicing unsolicited personal opinion.
Or ‘baiting’ the Forum as it is known.

I agree with whoever said “You techies are completely out of touch with reality”, and this thread seems to prove his point, with a stream of “I’ve sussed out Windows8 and can live without the Start menu, so anybody/everybody else can too” posts from – you guessed it – Techie’s!

Personally I have posed the question a few times, simply “Why remove the Start button?”, and the only replies I have had are similar to the above – ie. avoiding the issue, ‘you need to modernise’, ‘you can do it all with the Desktop/App-Barr’ etc. – so no proper answer at all yet, just ‘Techie’ ones……

Reply | Quote

Personally I have posed the question a few times, simply “Why remove the Start button?”, and the only replies I have had are similar to the above – ie. avoiding the issue, ‘you need to modernise’, ‘you can do it all with the Desktop/App-Barr’ etc. – so no proper answer at all yet, just ‘Techie’ ones……

I believe that for Microsoft the goal of Windows 8 is to unify all devices [phone, tablet, laptop, and desktop] under a single operating system. This is partly because there is less effort in having one operating system, rather than creating and maintaining two or three or four operating systems, bit it is more because Microsoft believes that usage is shifting to tablets and phones, and they are getting left out. They believe that they will get cross-over between platforms.

That someone who learns to use the user interface formerly known as Metro, on the desktop or laptop, will be more inclined to get a Metro UI tablet or phone, and in that way they will be able to gain entry into the growth part of the device spectrum. People who have Windows 7.0 phones seem to like them, but they have a very low market share there, and they have never been able to do much with Windows tablets, although in my opinion, that is because they are way too expensive.

So why kill the start button? That is part of a progression that will kill the desktop, so they can get to the one ring that will rule them all. So that all devices will have the Metro UI, and they will have a family of devices that all look and work the same.

Microsoft is not alone in thinking that one “scalable” operating system is better than two or three focused and sized operating systems. But there is also another faction that believes that an operating system focused on each class of devices is better.

I would like to see one operating system [and just because I would like to see it doesn’t necessarily mean that it would really be the best solution] with a separate user interface for each device. Metro is fine for phones and tablets, but I would like a fully functional desktop with a start button that is either a Windows 7 start button, or an improvement on the Windows 7 start button.

Drew will tell me that is not what I want, and that I really like Windows 8, I just don’t realize it.

Reply | Quote

I believe that for Microsoft the goal of Windows 8 is to unify all devices [phone, tablet, laptop, and desktop] under a single operating system. This is partly because there is less effort in having one operating system, rather than creating and maintaining two or three or four operating systems, bit it is more because Microsoft believes that usage is shifting to tablets and phones, and they are getting left out. They believe that they will get cross-over between platforms.

That someone who learns to use the user interface formerly known as Metro, on the desktop or laptop, will be more inclined to get a Metro UI tablet or phone, and in that way they will be able to gain entry into the growth part of the device spectrum.

So why kill the start button? That is part of a progression that will kill the desktop, so they can get to the one ring that will rule them all. So that all devices will have the Metro UI, and they will have a family of devices that all look and work the same.

I agree with your first paragraph. I think you are right in the second one too, but not sure that will do as much for them as they wish. I know an awful lot of people with iPads and/or iPhones with no interest in switching to a Mac computer.

And for the third idea of killing the desktop, maybe they’d like to but what the heck – even Apple hasn’t done that! I’d like to think they have better sense than that. I can’t see businesses or people who work from home giving up their desktops and laptops, no matter what MS wishes . However, if MS did kill the desktop I can easily imagine millions of MS users reluctantly switching to Macs to get the desktop. Just my “average user” opinion of course. 🙂

Reply | Quote

Well said Clint. People fear change. Its why some don’t update the decor in their homes for 50+ years, its why some people don’t use cell phones. I could go on. The point is that some will embrace the new Start menu, some will need a crutch by using the Classic shell, and some won’t touch it at all. In two years, this will be a completely non issue, just as it was once people got used to that funky new Start button thingy in Windows 95. The Start menu has been around so long that it’s become second nature. Its become a security blanket. I’m not saying that to be insulting, but there seems to be some pretty strong attachments to the Start menu.

Reply | Quote

“Why did MS remove the Start button?”

Here is the short, non-techy answer. Because people had stopped using it.

The simple truth.

Cheers,
Drew

Reply | Quote

”Why did MS remove the Start button?”

Here is the short, non-techy answer. Because people had stopped using it.

The simple truth.

Cheers,
Drew

Do you work for Microsoft? Or, how do you *know* that? Can you name a percentage of people who had stopped using it? More than 50 percent? It would require at least 51 percent to use the percentage as justification to do away with it, imo,.:)

Reply | Quote

Do you work for Microsoft?

An understandable question: Drew relentlessly touts Win8 while remaining utterly impervious to observations, however valid, about its potential drawbacks. I would have commented on his starting yet another redundant thread on this topic had you not introduced an interesting additional wrinkle to it.

But first, one comment about ‘change’. Change can be good when it’s necessary, change can be bad when it’s clearly not. Introducing a more tablet-friendly interface can be considered an example of the former, while failing to introduce it in a form that allows one to continue using the interface one is used to in a non-tablet environment is clearly an example of the latter. I suspect the latter reflects not a simple oversight but rather a profit-maximization strategy on Microsoft’s part: after all, if they can’t successfully obsolete their earlier products, sales of the later ones will suffer (how many fewer people would purchase new versions of Office if they didn’t also introduce new file formats that the old versions can’t process, for example?).

So some of us don’t find the Win8 interface at all intimidating: we simply find it annoying without much in the way of compensating redeeming qualities and are not inclined to reward Microsoft for so unnecessarily annoying us.

As for the specific problem you raise, there’s one obvious answer: have the elderly who aren’t eager to learn new interfaces simply continue to use the ones they’re comfortable with. IIRC Win7 will be supported until 2017 and should remain viable for considerably longer (as evidenced by the fact that I still use Windows 2000 – and am doing so right now – for most things that don’t require a later version of Windows, and places like msfn.org provide tweaks that allow Win2K to masquerade successfully as XP for many applications that I’d use if I didn’t have XP and Win7 systems available to run them on). XP will be supported until 2014 and, again, should remain viable (certainly for the things the people you’re concerned about are doing right now on XP) for a good deal longer as long as some active anti-malware product will still run there (Avira’s AntiVir still runs on Win2K and is actively updated, for example, though you need to be running an older version of its actual engine) and they’re sitting behind a hardware router/firewall (which would itself hold many nasties at bay even with a completely unprotected PC). Most current PC hardware still supports XP and much of it even still supports Win2K (I just bought an AM3+ Asrock motherboard that does, for example), so as long as you have or can acquire a valid XP (or even Win2K) license and installation media (media including a later service pack avoids installation problems with large and/or SATA disks) you’re good to go. Oh, yes: you’ll want a relatively up-to-date browser to guard against new forms of browser attacks (I’m using Firefox 12, the last to support Win2K, but once again msfn. org has tweaks that will allow later versions of Firefox to be installed) and, though perhaps less critically if you’re careful about opening email attachments, a recent version of an email program (I use Thunderbird, but if someone is still using Outlook Express I guess that continuing to do so won’t significantly increase the threat level over what it already is – just make sure that active scripting, etc., are disabled).

Running Win2K in the kind of environment I just described has resulted in zero malware infestations for us over the past decade or so, despite occasional surfing activity that could not reasonably be described as ‘safe’ (though I do use NoScript with Firefox). This has made me a bit cavalier about applying the latest Microsoft security patches, but msfn.org has modified a good many which post-date the end of Win2K Microsoft support if you’re worried about keeping a Win2K system relatively up to date (and, of course, Microsoft itself will continue to provide security updates for XP for another couple of years).

In summation, people who aren’t going to need to do NEW things with their systems (e.g., support new applications or new external hardware) don’t really have much reason to migrate to newer operating systems if they don’t want to. They certainly may need help setting up their existing environment on new hardware if their old hardware breaks, but once that’s done they can just continue doing what they’ve been doing all along for another several years.

(Whoops – I guess I should add that continuing to run Win98 – preferably, Win98 Second Edition – may not be quite as viable a proposition. Though msfn.org does have tweaks that will let a lot of XP applications run on Win98 and even some continuing security updates for it, it’s getting quite difficult to find modern hardware that Win98 will run on outside venues like eBay which may have a selection of older hardware available.)

Reply | Quote

I highly dispute that people stopped using the Start button. I know that Microsoft purports to have studies that show decreased usage, but i and most everybody I know find it highly useful. Rather than going to several different places for Search, Programs, Control Panel, and shutdown, its all in one handy place with the Start Button.

Notice that many of the users on this forum that installed Windows RP also installed classic shell to get it back.

Jerry

Reply | Quote

No I don’t work for MS directly. Both me & my company are MS Partners. I hadn’t been using the old start button & or menu hardly @ all for a long, long time. And, yes, I do know the studies & shown it to be a majority, as in well over 50%.

One can actually find things, get to things, do things (navigate) in 8 w/out the other, old stuff faster, more efficiently & directly than before.

Nor it is a choice between old start button & menu and the Win8 Start screen… I & countless others, don’t use or need that screen. Once on Desktop, I do not visit Start.

Ergo, discussions as to Start being good or bad, nice or not, become a moot point.

Cheers,
Drew

Reply | Quote

I hadn’t been using the old start button & or menu hardly @ all for a long, long time. And, yes, I do know the studies & shown it to be a majority, as in well over 50%.

The question was whether you could quote a percentage of users who stopped using the start button, so apparently your answer should have been “No”.

The thread Why Microsoft killed the Windows Start button which you started only quoted Microsoft citing data which showed “Start menu usage dramatically dropping” due to applications being pinned to the taskbar (which I could believe for Windows 7, but not Windows in general).

Where is the study that says the majority of Windows users don’t use the start button?

Bruce

Reply | Quote

The question was whether you could quote a percentage of users who stopped using the start button, so apparently your answer should have been “No”.

The thread Why Microsoft killed the Windows Start button which you started only quoted Microsoft citing data which showed “Start menu usage dramatically dropping” due to applications being pinned to the taskbar (which I could believe for Windows 7, but not Windows in general).

Where is the study that says the majority of Windows users don’t use the start button?

Bruce

The is a series of post on the start screen in the building Windows 8 blog. See Evolving the start menu[/url], Designing the start screen[/url], Reflecting on feedback[/url], & Designing search for the start screen[/url].

Joe

--Joe

Reply | Quote

The is a series of post on the start screen in the building Windows 8 blog. See Evolving the start menu, Designing the start screen, Reflecting on feedback, & Designing search for the start screen.

Joe

Thanks; that’s all very interesting and I hadn’t seen most of it before.

But nothing there says that most Windows users don’t currently use the start button.

Those articles all justify the Start Screen which most Windows 8 users seem to avoid like the plague*.

(* General impression, not documented study! ;))

Bruce

Reply | Quote

“Notice that many of the users on this forum that installed Windows RP also installed classic shell to get it back.”

This may well be because they do not know or understand how 8 can be used enjoyably w/out it. Maybe they have tried to discover or listen to the fact that CS is not a necessity to have a nice navigating experience.

A lot of what people are reading & hearing is likely throwing them of stride, so to speak. It IS quite possible… I & many others have, actually, been doing it for months so some of us know it can be done.

No use of the Start screen & no use of CS & yet things are quick, easy & slick.

Still, each to their own… just be good if naïve people don’t get the impression that adding CS is a MUST. It’s not.

Cheers,
Drew

Reply | Quote

I agree that there is a percentage of people still using the Start menu, but based on many years of experience with end users in several different industries, the vast majority of non technical users I’ve seen want shortcuts on their desktops, especially executive management. They find the Start menu confusing. Well over 80% of people I deal with are confused when I ask them to click on the Start button and then click “All Programs”. This includes friends and family that I have to support now and again. Why? Because they never use it and are not familiar with its layout. The people that tend to use the Start menu are a little more (though not necessarily a lot) more technically savvy than the average user. So the assertion that non-technical people “need” the start menu is not an accurate assumption, IMO. I’m not saying the Start menu is entirely obsolete, but I don’t believe that a majority of people use it or need it.

Reply | Quote

The bottom line here folks is the Start Orb is gone, period. If you want Win 8 (an excellent OS) but you can’t live without it, install an alternative and be done with it. It takes about 1 minute to install Classic Shell, and perhaps another 10 minutes to customize it the way you want it. Done!

Reply | Quote

The bottom line here folks is the Start Orb is gone, period. If you want Win 8 (an excellent OS) but you can’t live without it, install an alternative and be done with it. It takes about 1 minute to install Classic Shell, and perhaps another 10 minutes to customize it the way you want it. Done!

Exactly. So people are still using a start button. But will enterprises want to install third-party, open-source utilities with no guaranteed support and customize them for thousands?

Bruce

Reply | Quote

The bottom line here folks is the Start Orb is gone, period.

Let’s not change the subject, Ted: the bottom line at the moment is whether Drew can back up a very specific assertion which he made and claimed (but did not cite) substantiation for.

Reply | Quote

The bottom line here folks is the Start Orb is gone, period.

A statement like this is called “Begging the question”. It is a fallacy of presumption. Microsoft has deleted a very valuable resource, the start button. But if you try to jump from there to saying it is the bottom line, you have begged the question.

Reply | Quote

Bruce, I suspect as Enterprise customers upgrade to Win 8 they will customize their copies to work in their systems by what ever means they have at their disposal prior to installing it on their various PC’s. They might also set up a short training program to go over the basic changes. It took me all of an hour or so to put together my short tutorial on getting started with Win 8.

-bill, I have not changed the topic. What difference does it make? This discussion on the Start Orb and replacements has been ongoing for several months with no new or additional info presented. We are not going to have a Start Orb whether anyone can show statistics on how many people are using the Start Orb or not. It’s gone. It’s makes no difference in how we use Win 8, on how we change or customize Win 8.

Reply | Quote

-bill, I have not changed the topic.[/quote]

Sure you did, Ted: the question was whether Drew had the data he claimed to have to back up his assertion that a majority of users didn’t use the Start orb, not whether Microsoft was going to include the Start orb in Win8 (which as you observe does not seem to be a question at all). The answer to that question would help people evaluate whether Microsoft’s decision in this area was backed by actual user considerations (as Drew claims) or by something quite different.

What difference does it make?

The difference is that knowing whether Drew actually had the support for his assertion that he claimed to have or was just blowing smoke would help people assess how credible a lot of the other things he claims may be – and since he’s posting so prolifically on this subject, getting a handle on just how much respect to give his claims is of some interest.

Reply | Quote

Bruce, I suspect as Enterprise customers upgrade to Win 8 they will customize their copies to work in their systems by what ever means they have at their disposal prior to installing it on their various PC’s.

I suspect they won’t bother (to upgrade OR customize).

They might also set up a short training program to go over the basic changes. It took me all of an hour or so to put together my short tutorial on getting started with Win 8.

And how long/much to deliver it per thousand users?

Microsoft does not claim that the statistics are anything more than an additional data point in their decision making process.

Which makes it doubly wrong for anyone to claim that the start button is gone because most users stopped using it. It’s not true AND it’s not why Microsoft did it.

Bruce

Reply | Quote

My point is it makes no difference on the installation, customization or use of Win 8 in the least. Keeping a discussion going on why the Start Orb was removed is a moot point. It is pointless from both sides of the issue because it’s gone. It makes no difference to MS whether we in this forum like or don’t like the fact that it’s gone. The decision has been made and if we wish to use Win 8 we must abide by this decision.

If someone uses this one thing to justify to themselves to not use Win 8 then that is their decision. We have discussed so many good things about Win 8, and we have discussed many alternatives to this one thing that IMO it is pointless to continue. This will be my last post in this thread because I want to discuss important things with Win 8, and something like this that I have absolutely no control over is not worth spending any more time on. So I guess it also makes no difference to me as to why it was done.

Reply | Quote

I agree with Ted. It is what it is. If you want to use Windows 8 with a Start icon, you can always install Classic shell like I did in my copy.

Jerry

Reply | Quote

See the section entitled “How is the Start Menu used?” in Evolving the Start Menu for some statistics. These stats just measure the difference between Vista & Win7. They show a big drop in usage of specific entries and areas in the start menu. A surprising drop in opening the start menu at all. There is no mention of differences from XP (et al.) and Vista.

Microsoft does not claim that the statistics are anything more than an additional data point in their decision making process. Read Stephen Sinofsky’s reply at Mon, Oct 3 2011 4:48 PM. Also at Sat, Oct 8 2011 1:23 PM

Joe

--Joe

Reply | Quote

My point is it makes no difference on the installation, customization or use of Win 8 in the least.[/quote]

Of course it does. People who find the Win8 user interface to be less approachable than what they’re used to will most certainly affect the ‘use’ (and uptake) of the system. In fact, that (not what Microsoft will or will not include in the system, which is already decided at this point) is the specific subject that Drew raised (however redundantly) in this thread, and hence discussing the origins and possible effects of Microsoft’s decisions in this area is precisely on-topic.

The fact that such discussion may be of no interest to you does not mean that it is of no interest to others here (whose level of interest can to at least a first approximation be judged by their participation in it). When I’m not interested in something my usual course of action is simply to ignore it, but for whatever reason you seem to have difficulty doing that when this subject comes up.

Reply | Quote

Let’s admit for a second that the Start button is really needed. Would that be a reason not to use Windows 8? The lack of a button?
On the other hand, if the OS has huge benefits, why dwell eternally on the Start button? I fail to see why, in all honesty.

I think the Start button is used as a big friction point by those who dislike or want to dislike the new OS and that’s why the discussion is rather unfruitful, IMO. Actually, if I see a negative in the removal of the Start button is the fact that we have to endure the discussion on it again, and again, and again. To click the Start button, I need to move my mouse down. If I move it down and I get a menu, it doesn’t make much difference to me.

I am not totally happy with MS explanation’s for the removal, even more so, because I do use the Start button in Windows 7. Of course, as I have a few main apps pinned, I use it less than in XP or Vista. Pinned apps was a nice UI feature of Windows 7. That won’t stop me from using Windows 8, though,because there are so many positive things about it, than dwelling on a button (or its absence) makes no sense to me.

All new OSes have things we like less and remove stuff we were used to and that is discomforting. It happened with me every single time I upgraded and I have always upgraded to a better OS. Some days into a new OS, it’s actually harder to go back to previous versions. Once I upgrade one of my computers, I need to do it with the other, cause I simply can’t stand going back to the old OS. Surely this will happen with Windows 8 too.

Reply | Quote

Let’s admit for a second that the Start button is really needed. Would that be a reason not to use Windows 8?

If it IS really needed, then BY DEFINITION the lack of it would certainly seem to be a reason not to use Win8.

if the OS has huge benefits, why dwell eternally on the Start button?

Your premise is what’s debatable here. Many people do not seem to believe that the OS ‘has huge benefits’ at all. Of course, even if it DID have huge benefits there would remain the question of whether the absence of a Start button (and other related interface changes) would constitute a sufficient deterrent that many people would still not adopt it because they felt that their existing systems satisfied their needs more than adequately (which I guess is just another way of observing that Win8 would not offer ‘huge benefits’ to them even if it might offer such benefits to people with more specialized needs).

I think the Start button is used as a big friction point by those who dislike or want to dislike the new OS and that’s why the discussion is rather unfruitful, IMO.

Discussions certainly tend to be unfruitful when you start ascribing ulterior motives to others simply because you don’t happen to agree with (or in this case even to understand) their viewpoint. You might consider working on developing better insights into how to deal constructively with others (hint: it can start by assuming that the views they express are honest ones, and can continue with the realization that views you don’t share may have validity which may not be immediately obvious to you).

Actually, if I see a negative in the removal of the Start button is the fact that we have to endure the discussion on it again, and again, and again.

You really don’t, you know: there’s always the option simply to ignore the discussion if it doesn’t interest you (as I just observed to Ted). And if people like Drew would just let the subject lie rather than continually revisit it because (apparently) they feel that they need to keep an active ‘defense’ of Win8 in the public eye you’d also have less to complain about.

I am not totally happy with MS explanation’s for the removal, even more so, because I do use the Start button in Windows 7.

Ah, yes – another (though anecdotal) data point.

That won’t stop me from using Windows 8, though,because there are so many positive things about it, than dwelling on a button (or its absence) makes no sense to me.

It really doesn’t need to make sense to you if it makes sense to the people interested in discussing it.

Once I upgrade one of my computers, I need to do it with the other, cause I simply can’t stand going back to the old OS. Surely this will happen with Windows 8 too.

And (as I observed in a previous submission) that’s quite possibly just what Microsoft is counting on: had they retained the original interface alongside the new one, there would have been somewhat less incentive to upgrade across the board for the purpose of keeping all your systems consistent.

Reply | Quote

Ok, I’ll try to address this and I know you are questioning my credibility so here goes…

MS had been ‘tracking’ GLOBAL usage trends for a long time only to discover the start button/menu was not being used, by the majority. I know, specifically, regardless of where else I’d read of it previously, I heard it when I sat through the Keynote Presentation the 1st morning of BUILD back in mid-September last year… when the DP of Windows8 was 1st introduce to Developers & IT Pros. If, necessary, I could try to find something documenting the ‘surveying’ & the exact results but, as I said, I do know it was well over 50%.

Next: What everyone or most everyone is failing to include is that there IS, still, a Start icon that is supposed to lead to ‘All Programs’… that square thing @ the bottom-left corner leading to the Start screen.

That said… here’s the rub; this makes people think attention MUST be given to that screen & tiles there. That part is optional. (1) that screen can, actually, have NO tiles on it except, Desktop… no plethora of tiles for everything under the sun & no need or reason to visit said screen… not avoiding it, not suggesting it’s bad… just simply cus it’s not necessary… leaving no reason to get all hung up over the Start screen or any tiles on it or discussion of it (all).

I am not alone in this… one can work in Windows8 w/out any tiles on Start & w/out ever visiting it so to have oodles of discussion about it becomes a moot point. To lose sight of (being able) to appreciate all there is about Win8 beyond & besides Start gets silly & sad.

Now, I have said this before but, that’s ok. In truth, navigating in Win8 is faster, more direct, things more readily @ hand, more efficient in Windows8, w/out adding anything, than in prior Windows. One can bother to add CS or whatever, thinking or having been told it is necessary but, the reality is, there is no need. Yet, a huge fuss & debate rages. Frankly, much of this grows out of not understanding Windows8 & how it can be used such that no loss of anything is felt.

Think about this… even w/out CS, just Win8, w/ what is offered out-of-the-box I can fly all over the place w/ less time & effort than before it, w/ fewer clicks and all of it, not only w/out adding any 3rd party stuff but, also, w/out the Start screen or any Tiles. And the last part only cus I like to keep things simple & efficient.

People can & will use CS. All I’ve wanted it for people to be aware that it is not a necessity. And to know that using Win8 w/out it not only possible but, a pleasant experience.

I guess we can graciously talk about it for another 6 mos, even though won’t change anything. We can discuss ‘why’, even though won’t change anything. OR we can accept things & maybe, be willing to know that the suggest ‘loss’, really, does not create any suffering. Sometimes, I hate to say it but, it comes to sound like it’s merely a ‘bandwagon’ to jump on joining in on the whole start button/menu/Windows8 Start screen rhetoric.

I go back to saying how much I wish someone who is saying all this stuff could sit beside me @ my Windows8 machine & ‘see’/understand immediately what I (& others) are trying to express. The objections & complaints, no offense, don’t hold water.

And, by the way, I am not, have not been defending anything… because one tries to point out a reality, tries to be accurate, tries to clarify, tries to explain or show a scenario that allows people to see things, possibly, in a way that might cause them to re-evaluate what they feel (or are buying into that others have said) it would be helpful.

Sorry, but, it has bothered me & continues to that people say what they do, feel what they feel (or think they should) whilst I’m having fun using a very good OS that according to them makes no sense or should not be possible. We aren’t avoiding Start cus it’s horrid or weird or too much trouble; could use it but, can’t justify it… why jump to it when I can get to everything (easier) w/out going there 1st? Why figure out what tiles I want or how I want them arranged, when I can get everything @ once w/out going to those tiles, @ all. Could use Start but, no good reason. Could use tons of tiles but, no good reason. I can use whatever APPs & still, w/out Start. I think some people think Start & APPs are inseparable; this is 100% false… one can use any APPs w/out involving Start, @ all or any tiles, @ all.

Then there are the people who actually don’t like Start & the Tiles. So, for them, indeed, what I am saying should be something they would love; for them it would/does mean they can avoid what they think stinks. Remember, there are some, maybe many people who find Win8’s Start & Tiles just the coolest thing since sliced bread.

I’ll just leave you w/ this. The lack of the old start button & menu is not, an impediment to Windows8, @ all. And Windows8 can be used & navigated handsomely w/out anything added, @ all.

I am not trying to defend; I trying to bring forth that the negatives, the angles & arguments I’m hearing/reading don’t apply. I know some don’t want to hear or believe this but, seriously, there are not grounds for it. When people get their heels dug in or something it’s better to question someone’s credibility than budge or be willing to look @ or consider some merit to the message or the motivation for it.

Cheers,
Drew

Reply | Quote

@bill,

First, I didn’t express myself correctly, in my first paragraph. I meant to say that even if someone thought the start button was important, really important UI wise, considering the same goals can be achieved through other means, should that prevent Windows 8 from being used?

There are no perfect operating systems. I am of the opinion that a lack of a button is not a reason I would invoke, not to use an operating system. Others may think different, and they are free to think so. I hope you feel that I am also free to think how I think.

Yes, some people think the OS has not huge benefits. That will always happen. I think there are improvements that are measured by metrics that cannot be argued against (boot times, performance, for example), but that may still be perceived as not being a huge benefit. There are other improvements that are less objective and I agree that a benefit will ultimately depend on the eyes of the beholder. If however, I am (me or others) not allowed to express my (their) own opinion of what is a benefit of the new OS, what is really the basis for the discussion? Or should we refrain to participate just because we have a globally positive opinion?

I am sure you will allow me to have an opinion about when a discussion is unfruitful. One of such circumstances is when the same arguments are repeated over and over and that happens in multiple topics. Such is the case of the discussion of the start button.

You should not presume that I was presuming there were “bad intentions” from the participants in the discussion. You seem to have actually presumed that I was addressing your intervention. I was not. If I was, I would have explicitly addressed your post(s).

Whether I think the discussion is fruitful or not, there is one thing I won’t do and that is telling you to which threads you should reply or not. You are free to do as you please, within the Lounge rules. Please allow me to do so, as well. I can be an admin, but I am also a member. I will participate in the discussions I want to, as I hope you do. I can choose to participate in a discussion, even if I think it is not fruitful. This freedom to participate is extensible to all members, so it strikes me as a bit weird that you think some of those members should not post where they please or lead the discussion where they feel makes sense to them.

We should not reclaim to ourselves what we are not willing to recognize to others.

Reply | Quote

@bill,

First, I didn’t express myself correctly, in my first paragraph. I meant to say that even if someone thought the start button was important, really important UI wise, considering the same goals can be achieved through other means, should that prevent Windows 8 from being used?

I’m not sure that really changes much: if someone THINKS that the start button is really important, then its absence WILL cause them to balk at moving to a system without it even if they understand that they could learn new ways of interacting with the system that didn’t require a Start button (because the way they use the Start button is – by your own assumption – important to them). It doesn’t matter whether YOU think that’s reasonable, because you are not the person making that decision.

It seems at least possible to me that for the average non-technical computer user interfaces may be more important than actual function is. kelliann1 described a specific class of situation where the interface IS the function, to the extent that when the interface is changed the function becomes inaccessible. People with some understanding of the underlying function may be much more tolerant of interface changes than people who simply learn ‘what to do’ to accomplish a specific task – though even such cognoscenti have their limits (for example, I would not voluntarily go back to a purely command-line interface now even though I used nothing else for my first fifteen or so years using computers).

There are no perfect operating systems. I am of the opinion that a lack of a button is not a reason I would invoke, not to use an operating system. Others may think different, and they are free to think so. I hope you feel that I am also free to think how I think.

There is nothing in anything I said that remotely suggests that I don’t believe you are free to think what you think, and to express it here. If English is a second language for you such a misunderstanding is more understandable: you handle English so well that I did not suspect this before.

If however, I am (me or others) not allowed to express my (their) own opinion of what is a benefit of the new OS, what is really the basis for the discussion? Or should we refrain to participate just because we have a globally positive opinion?

You seem really confused about this point. I only suggested that you had the option to ignore the discussion because you were complaining about ‘having to endure’ it ‘again, and again, and again’. You return to this point again a couple more times below, so take this comment to apply to them as well: neither I nor anyone else I’ve noticed here has been suggesting that you (or anyone else) keep your mouth shut when you actually ARE interested in contributing to a topic – just that there’s no need to complain about a discussion in which you’re NOT interested when you have the option simply to ignore it.

I am sure you will allow me to have an opinion about when a discussion is unfruitful.

My criticism was not about your opinion that the discussion has largely been unfruitful (an opinion which I share): it was about your suggestion that it was unfruitful because the people with views opposed to yours were not arguing in good faith (that they were ‘using’ the Start button change in some way rather than expressing their honest opinion about it). My personal opinion is that this is the kind of area in which forum administrators should tread very carefully – even when they aren’t intending their words to be taken in that official capacity – and that’s why I was so blunt about it.

You should not presume that I was presuming there were “bad intentions” from the participants in the discussion.

‘Ulterior motives’ (my phrase characterizing your suggestion above which you seem to be addressing here) are not necessarily ‘bad intentions’: they’re simply motives other than the ones being implied by the participant (which your comment about ‘using’ the Start button certainly seemed to suggest). To put it another way, having ulterior motives reflects not so much active dishonesty as the failure to volunteer all pertinent information about the reasons for one’s position and thus to allow a somewhat misleading impression to exist about its basis.

You seem to have actually presumed that I was addressing your intervention.

I can understand how you might think that, but in fact I was not assuming that at all – in part because others have been so much more active in discussing this topic than I have been, in part because my focus has been more general in terms of the potential effects of unnecessary interface changes than specific to the Start button (though it probably is the easiest specific example to use when discussing that topic).

Reply | Quote

I don’t get why people make Windows8 sound like it needs a six wk training course. It is not long, difficult or complicated to learn, understand or use. Click here, go there, do whatever… it’s, still, basically, just another Windows OS on a computer. And it is so easy to find ‘How To’ answers, anyway (& that’s w/out, even, looking beyond or outside the OS itself. Relax, it does not need to be treated as the trauma being alleged.

Cheers,
Drew

Reply | Quote

Whether I think the discussion is fruitful or not, there is one thing I won’t do and that is telling you to which threads you should reply or not. You are free to do as you please, within the Lounge rules. Please allow me to do so, as well. I can be an admin, but I am also a member. I will participate in the discussions I want to, as I hope you do. I can choose to participate in a discussion, even if I think it is not fruitful.

Just stop whining about having to endure the discussion again, and again, and again then. It may have dragged on for months, but it seems many of us still wish to discuss it.

There are still new points being raised. Had we heard before yesterday that (allegedly) the majority of users don’t use a start button?

If administrators and moderators keep saying “Oh, not again”, forums whither and die.

MS had been ‘tracking’ GLOBAL usage trends for a long time only to discover the start button/menu was not being used, by the majority.

If, necessary, I could try to find something documenting the ‘surveying’ & the exact results

Please do.

Next: What everyone or most everyone is failing to include is that there IS, still, a Start icon that is supposed to lead to ‘All Programs’… that square thing @ the bottom-left corner leading to the Start screen.

An icon cannot be invisible.

I am not alone in this… one can work in Windows8 w/out any tiles on Start & w/out ever visiting it

You never visit the start screen, but you’re not avoiding it; makes no sense.

I go back to saying how much I wish someone who is saying all this stuff could sit beside me @ my Windows8 machine & ‘see’/understand immediately what I (& others) are trying to express.

I wish you could sit beside 100 new users on their first day with Windows 8 trying to work out how to start their programs.

We aren’t avoiding Start cus it’s horrid or weird or too much trouble; could use it but, can’t justify it… why jump to it when I can get to everything (easier) w/out going there 1st?

It sounds like Microsoft’s masterplan to replace a start button with the supremely more efficient start screen hasn’t exactly worked out for you then?

Then there are the people who actually don’t like Start & the Tiles. So, for them, indeed, what I am saying should be something they would love; for them it would/does mean they can avoid what they think stinks.

You don’t include yourself in that group though?

Remember, there are some, maybe many people who find Win8’s Start & Tiles just the coolest thing since sliced bread.

Name two!

When people get their heels dug in or something it’s better to question someone’s credibility than budge or be willing to look @ or consider some merit to the message or the motivation for it.

If you use a statistic to strengthen your side of a discussion, you should be prepared to provide some credible evidence for it.

I don’t get why people make Windows8 sound like it needs a six wk training course. It is not long, difficult or complicated to learn, understand or use. Click here, go there, do whatever… it’s, still, basically, just another Windows OS on a computer. And it is so easy to find ‘How To’ answers, anyway (& that’s w/out, even, looking beyond or outside the OS itself. Relax, it does not need to be treated as the trauma being alleged.

Except in enterprises.

Bruce

Reply | Quote

@BruceR

There are still new points being raised. Had we heard before yesterday that (allegedly) the majority of users don’t use a start button?

Yes, we had heard it. Maybe you just missed it. See post #2 here.

@bill,

I could rebut, point by point, your reply. I wouldn’t really be adding anything to the discussion of the issue, though. I would be adding to the discussion about the discussion of issue, which I would rather not do. I will, instead, post a link to a post by Paul Thurrot, that I had posted before, about Microsoft’s reasons for the removal of the Start button.

Personally, I feel that the discussion about the Start button may have a negative effect on some of the users that may be wondering whether they should try Windows 8 or not. Although Windows 8 is certainly challenging in terms of the habits of regular Windows users, it is my opinion that it is an operating system that, in its present incarnation, even considering it has problems that result from being version 1.0 of the implementation of Metro on Windows, deserves to be tested. If anyone fails to give Windows 8 a try because of the noise around the Start button, that would be a loss.

Reply | Quote

Yes, we had heard it. Maybe you just missed it. See post #2 here.

I pointed out in this thread yesterday that the Microsoft quotes there don’t say anything about the majority of Windows users not using a start button. Only that usage of the start menu by Windows 7 users had dropped due to taskbar pinning of applications.

Some people having stopped using a start button some of the time is very different from most people stopping use of it all the time.

Bruce

Reply | Quote

I pointed out in this thread yesterday that the Microsoft quotes there don’t say anything about the majority of Windows users not using a start button. Only that usage of the start menu by Windows 7 users had dropped due to taskbar pinning of applications.

Some people having stopped using a start button some of the time is very different from most people stopping use of it all the time.

Bruce

Do Microsoft numbers say anything about a majority of users having stopped using it all the time? I can’t really interpret the numbers posted in Microsoft’s article like that. The data about user numbers I see is relative to the number of users who have apps pinned to the task bar and the number of users who have apps added to the top of the Start Menu. The other data is just about percentage changes of usage of each of the options available on the Start menu – we still don’t know what percentage of users have stopped using the Start button…

What I think the Microsoft article does, regardless of the numbers, is to show that Microsoft had a reason to remove the Start button and that reason was both based on Windows usage data and the expectation of replacing the Start menu by something they thought it could be better. Whether it actually is or not, that’s something each of Windows 8 users will have to decide.

Reply | Quote

Do Microsoft numbers say anything about a majority of users having stopped using it all the time?

No, only Drew says that.

Bruce

Reply | Quote

ruirib seems unable to wrap his mind around the fact that the subject being addressed here (and in much of the last few pages of what passes for discussion here) is not the Start button per se but rather the very specific question of whether Drew pulled multiple specific assertions directly out of thin air or whether he actually has solid evidence (as in links one could check) to back them up.

The first such assertion was

“Why did MS remove the Start button?”

Here is the short, non-techy answer. Because people had stopped using it.

kelliann1 immediately asked

how do you *know* that? Can you name a percentage of people who had stopped using it? More than 50 percent?

which elicited Drew’s second and far more specific (but still completely unsubstantiated) assertion

I do know the studies & shown it to be a majority, as in well over 50%

(It’s also worth noting in passing that while Drew’s first assertion above has been largely ignored while discussing his second one he himself undermined that first assertion recently and the link ruirib just provided to the Thurrott article does as well: to put the most charitable face one can on this would be to observe that Drew is rather cavalier about presenting what he characterizes as ‘fact’.)

As a result, while I accept ruirib’s stance as honest confusion possibly exacerbated by difficulty with language subtleties I’m a lot less confident about the underlying integrity of Drew’s responses – and not simply because he admitted in his first response to kelliann1 that he has a vested interest in Win8. Debating with someone who uses spin rather than logic tends not to be a very worthwhile endeavor.

Reply | Quote

ruirib seems unable to wrap his mind around the fact that the subject being addressed here (and in much of the last few pages of what passes for discussion here) is not the Start button per se but rather the very specific question of whether Drew pulled multiple specific assertions directly out of thin air or whether he actually has solid evidence (as in links one could check) to back them up.

Just to make it clear, I never realized the issue was the numbers of users not using the Start button. I replied in good faith and not wanting to add other contention points, to what it seemed to me the issue in question – the importance of the presence or absence of the Start button. I may have contributed to add other contention points and for that I am sorry.

I will now withdraw from the discussion. Enough said :).

Reply | Quote

Bruce,

I have tried really hard but, I give up. You can Bing for the info about the old start button/menu not being used. It is clear you are not interested or willing to think about what is being said when you cleverly twist things said to suit yourself & your thinking. Ergo, you are making this just go in circles and be fruitless & frustrating.

“You never visit the start screen, but you’re not avoiding it; makes no sense.”
Yes, it does make sense, if , one doesn’t try to ‘play’ w/ the words. I several times clearly said it was not being avoided & I did not hate the Start screen. I do have a few tiles on it & sometimes grab a couple of APPs I keep active before going on to Desktop. Point was, in the name of simplicity & efficiency, I discovered I can work @ & from Desktop & not need to bounce back n forth to other screens. Far different from you making it sound like the plague is being avoided.

“You don’t include yourself in that group though?”
Nope,I wouldn’t, cus I don’t think it stinks, I have just found ways I, personally, like for me… & that other interested, open-minded people may, also, like. I wouldn’t be in that group since, properly speaking I use a hybrid approach… a few tiles that I sometimes select/activate, before going to Desktop & then don’t need to go back to Start, again. Can get to everything other ways & places that allow me to stay on Desktop.

Bobby, Ted & Cat… oops, sorry, that’s 3

“It sounds like Microsoft’s master plan to replace a start button with the supremely more efficient start screen hasn’t exactly worked out for you then?”
No, it sounds like I have used the flexibility of an OS & one’s freedom to use it & personalize it and have it configured to my individual liking… same as has been the case w/ all Windows, 8 & prior.

I gave a statistic & source. Wouldn’t matter cus, no matter, you’re, still, determined to consider it rubbish. I, also, told you it had come to my attention, even, before mid-September, last year. But, it doesn’t matter me thinks cus whatever we say, you’ll have a clever turn of a phrase to knock it aside, it seems.

“Except in enterprises.”
Actually, from what we hear, Enterprise likes it. Especially, since they can (themselves) design APPs for themselves that are particularly helpful in & to their specific work & needs. They like it because many of the achieved design goals when building Windows8 cater to Enterprise. There are technologies, features & abilities in Win8 that make it very exciting to Enterprise.

You can Bing for yourself, plus, links have been offered to you addressing why the old start button/menu were retired. (My thanks to my colleagues)

”Personally, I feel that the discussion about the Start button may have a negative effect on some of the users that may be wondering whether they should try Windows 8 or not. Although Windows 8 is certainly challenging in terms of the habits of regular Windows users, it is my opinion that it is an operating system that, in its present incarnation, even considering it has problems that result from being version 1.0 of the implementation of Metro on Windows, deserves to be tested. If anyone fails to give Windows 8 a try because of the noise around the Start button, that would be a loss.”

Three cheers & kudos to someone, in addition to myself, for saying this!

And I can see why Ted tires of discussion on this topic. When you try to be factual, accurate, explain, enlighten, aid people in seeing all angles & have such response… it can be disheartening, frustrating & probably, for some, aggravating. Can come to feel like one is wasting their time, effort, thought & caring.

People are seeming to forget, each new OS gets learned, not just Windows8. This one can be learned very quickly and it has clear instructions right it the OS itself for everything.
For those who don’t care to ‘get’ what is being said or don’t want to, I would, logically, recommend, instead of spending time telling folks what you think are bad things about Windows8, just ignore it & stay, happily, on some previous OS.

Cheers,
Drew

Reply | Quote

Discussion should be kept to subject matter only and not directed at individuals and their knowledge or backgrounds.

Reply | Quote

Discussion should be kept to subject matter only and not directed at individuals and their knowledge or backgrounds.

Hmmm – you mean things like

It is clear you are not interested or willing to think about what is being said

By contrast, you still censored some material in my post which criticized Drew for continuing to dance energetically around the issue raised first by kelliann1 and then by Bruce rather than coming up with an actual, verifiable citation for his assertion. He even suggested that it was Bruce’s responsibility to search the Web to find such substantiation. The phrase ‘put up or shut up’ which I used is directly applicable to this discussion.

As best I can recall the above restores the relevant portions of my original post without including the material which you misconstrued as a slur.

Reply | Quote

Everyone needs to tone down the rhetoric. Everyone please avoid personal attacks. Keep it civil.

--Joe

Reply | Quote

Thank you to Ted & Joe for trying to address this same issue to you.

Cheers,
Drew

Reply | Quote

“I will now withdraw from the discussion. Enough said.”

Ditto

Reply | Quote

OK, getting away from the arguments about who said what, to whom, and why, let’s look at some numbers (I like numbers) :

In this msdn blog entry, Figs 3 and 4 give some illustration about why MS feel they are justified in moving to a Start screen.

In this second msdn blog entry they discuss search as used by the Win7 Start menu.

I don’t have access to the raw data, so I have to rely on the provenance of the data supplied by MS in those discussions.

So, what do the data mean? For me there are some difficult questions that remain even after looking at the data.

In the 1st (Evolving the Start Menu) blog they note that around 77% of users have less than 3 apps pinned to the start menu (top chart, Fig 3). That seems a lot, but from what I recall of a clean installation of Win7, there are no apps pinned unless the user either manually pins them or installs new software and leave the “pin to Start Menu” box ticked. Therefore I question if the data is actually telling us more about the users knowledge of the OS than their use of the Start menu.

Also in the 1st blog entry, MS suggest that a large proportion of users (bottom chart fig 4) have 2,3 or 4 apps pinned to the task bar. Again, I’m drawn to the default settings of Win 7, which I recall has 3 apps (IE, Explorer and media player?) pinned to the task bar. This too leads me to wonder if the data indicates users just leaving default settings rather than a positive preference to install more or less.

In the 2nd blog entry (Design search for the Start Screen), MS suggest that the large proportion of Start Menu searches are used to launch programs, followed by accessing files. That seems fairly close to my own profile I would say.

OK, having looked at those numbers, what do I think? Perhaps MS have interpreted a data set in a way which allows them to justify a move to a different Start Menu structure. Was this a deliberate interpretation, or a disconnect from their users? I don’t know. But for whatever reason, it does allow them to build a Start Screen that works for the data set they have collected. Will it work for users who have just left things as default – well, I guess that depends on why those users have left things as default – by choice or though ignorance(?).

What I do know, from many years of experience, is that less savvy users (often older or less well educated) will struggle with the new system unless 3rd party apps such as Classic Shell are installed. I also expect that perhaps the younger generation, looking for social, internet and media apps could easily adopt the new UI and hardly touch the desktop. To them the OS will not matter, but its functionality as a social hub will. To stereotype: Ask a teenager what is an important feature in a PC and they will answer “Facebook” (with apologies to any teenage readers I may have offended!).

What I also know is that regardless of why it was done or how the numbers were interpreted, this is a done deal and we need to accept the situation. I remain anxious about how the new OS will be perceived by Joe Public, but if I want to stay in this industry I need to find a way to work with it and I need to find a way to help other people work with it too.

Reply | Quote

So basically data can be presented to justify any side of a discussion no matter the subject.

Reply | Quote

You know the old saying about statistics Ted…… :rolleyes:

MS have done what they have done for their own business reasons. They have presented some data that they say justifies their move. I’m not saying that it does justify it and I’m not saying that it doesn’t: I’ll leave that to the reader to make up their own mind.

Reply | Quote

I’m hoping this discussion will just die away. Thanks for finding the data insisted upon by readers here. As you say, view that data any way you like. I would prefer the discussion you started in First Impressions. That is actually a discussion that means something to me. How does Win 8 work, and if it does not work the way I wish it to work, what or how do I change it to make it work that way. After all, that is the strength of Windows. Customize it to work for you.

Reply | Quote

Here’s a tidbit for the “For what it’s worth” department. A very large company with which I am familiar (the largest of its kind in the world) has several thousands of workstations, desktops, servers, and laptops. Until about 6 weeks ago, all were running XP SP3 Enterprise. They have just started the rollout of Windows 7 Enterprise across the company.

They waited until 2005 to move up from Win2K, ignored Vista completely, and it appears that they indend to pass on Windows 8, as well.

Always create a fresh drive image before making system changes/Windows updates; you may need to start over!

We all have our own reasons for doing the things that we do with our systems; we don't need anyone's approval, and we don't all have to do the same things.

We were all once "Average Users".

Computer Specs

Reply | Quote

Here’s a tidbit…

Do you happen know how much end-user retraining they consider appropriate, if any, for the move from XP to Win7?

Reply | Quote

In a word, none. To put that in perspective, consider a machine shop. There are lathes, milling machines, boring machines, drill presses, key cutters, etc. When one works in a machine shop, there’s not a lot of time spent in painting the walls a different color, or moving the door knobs from one side of the door to the other. One’s time is spent in operating the different machines, depending on the needs of the moment and the day.

Windows is the building that houses the machines and provides power, compressed air, cooling, etc. The machines are still that which is used to do accomplish work required. The building is not going to mill a pump base; the milling machine is.

As I do contract work for this company from time to time, I have had occaision to need a PC to put out a report of the day for a week or so. The only noticable difference since the Windows 7 changeover is at the bottom of the login screen, where it says “Windows 7 Enterprise”. Everything else was right where I expected it to be.

In a large business environment, Windows is the platform; it is not the tools.

Always create a fresh drive image before making system changes/Windows updates; you may need to start over!

We all have our own reasons for doing the things that we do with our systems; we don't need anyone's approval, and we don't all have to do the same things.

We were all once "Average Users".

Computer Specs

Reply | Quote

Windows is the building that houses the machines and provides power, compressed air, cooling, etc. The machines are still that which is used to do accomplish work required. The building is not going to mill a pump base; the milling machine is.

Agreed. However, the workers do need to be able to find their way around the building. Or in operating system terms, how to launch programs, perform file management and housekeeping tasks, etc.

I accept that Win7 is very similar to WinXP. I was just wondering if it was sufficiently similar as to require no end-user training. Thanks for the reply BTW.

Reply | Quote

Agreed. However, the workers do need to be able to find their way around the building. Or in operating system terms, how to launch programs, perform file management and housekeeping tasks, etc.

I accept that Win7 is very similar to WinXP. I was just wondering if it was sufficiently similar as to require no end-user training. Thanks for the reply BTW.

IMO, it depends on your users. Basic usage should not be a problem. How self-sufficient are they? How aggressively do you want them to use the new features in Win7? Is there enough time in their day to experiment?

We did no end user training.

Joe

--Joe

Reply | Quote

IMO, it depends on your users. Basic usage should not be a problem. How self-sufficient are they? How aggressively do you want them to use the new features in Win7? Is there enough time in their day to experiment?

We did no end user training.

Joe

The folks I’m talking about don’t have time to play with Windows. The only thing they need from Windows is a platform for the programs and applications that they use every day. A desktop shortcut works exactly the same in Windows 7 as it did in XP to launch a program.

Always create a fresh drive image before making system changes/Windows updates; you may need to start over!

We all have our own reasons for doing the things that we do with our systems; we don't need anyone's approval, and we don't all have to do the same things.

We were all once "Average Users".

Computer Specs

Reply | Quote

The folks I’m talking about don’t have time to play with Windows. The only thing they need from Windows is a platform for the programs and applications that they use every day. A desktop shortcut works exactly the same in Windows 7 as it did in XP to launch a program.

I agree. I was trying to find out more about the John529’s user base. It really depends on what the users do on a daily basis. There could be several different “groups” that require different levels of training/hand-holding.

Joe

--Joe

Reply | Quote

I agree. I was trying to find out more about the John529’s user base.

There is no user base, I’m just a domestic user having retired from a computer department some years ago.

Obviously if a corporate IT department supplies a PC with the necessary desktop shortcuts and the user never uses any other programs or facilities then the conversion from XP to Win7 is virtually a non-event, and even to Win8 only requires knowledge of how to get from the Metro home screen to desktop mode, and how to power off.

However, I suspect that for many domestic and small business users having to figure everything out in Win8 is going to be a struggle. We will see.

Reply | Quote

Fortunately, figuring everything out in Win 8 is quick and easy IMO. The switch from Win 7 to Win 8 could not be simpler. The installation is the easiest I have ever encountered.

Reply | Quote

Fortunately, figuring everything out in Win 8 is quick and easy IMO. The switch from Win 7 to Win 8 could not be simpler. The installation is the easiest I have ever encountered.

There is a vast divide between the technically savvy and the beginner to early intermediate user. You are quite right, I am sure, for expert and advanced level users, and maybe even advanced intermediates. For the rest – it may be “sorta easy” down to downright difficult and discouraging. There will be a tremendous variation in the experience, IMO.

Reply | Quote

There is a vast divide between the technically savvy and the beginner to early intermediate user. You are quite right, I am sure, for expert and advanced level users, and maybe even advanced intermediates. For the rest – it may be “sorta easy” down to downright difficult and discouraging. There will be a tremendous variation in the experience, IMO.

There always is a very big difference in the experience. Going from Windows 3.1 to Windows 95 the “yelling and moaning” was at least as intense as it is right now and it was about the additons of the start button. Going from 98 to XP was not quite as bad but still very noticable. Going from XP to Vista or Win7 there was once again “loud groans”.

The less technically savvy users are the ones who are least likely to upgrade Windows on a current PC. They are much more likely to experience Windows 8 on a new PC. There is an introductory video available if a user chooses to watch it.

Those of us who end up being “tech support” for friends and family can easily help someone get oriented. In my experience the less technically savvy of those groups tend to use few applications. Applications can easily be pinned to the start screen. If the application launches the desktop other frequently used applications can be pinned to the taskbar. It is not difficult to customize the start screen so that frequently used apps as grouped together or grouped in a way that makes sense to the user. These people have less interaction with Windows and more with apps. They really don’t care about Windows as much as they do their favorite applications.

IMO, the people who will have the most difficulties are the “power users”. They may have tweaked and customized their systems substantially. They will complain the loudest and resist change the longest often without having seen an installed Win8 in person much less having used it for any length of time.

Joe

--Joe

Reply | Quote

Exactly, just look at the Office Ribbon. Who was complaining the most? The power users!

My mom is a novice user. If I were to put Win 8 on her PC (uses Vista that I set up) all I would have to do is install Classic shell so that the PC automatically boots to the desktop and disables the hotspot corners, then pin a few icons for her to those apps I have set up for her. She would never use anything else. But since she is 80 and her PC works fine for her, she is in the group that will never install a new OS. And she will most likely never acquire a new PC.

I believe resellers should take the initiative to include a short how to tutorial when a new Win 8 PC is sold. Those upgrading to Win 8 from another OS, IMO, are not the novices, at least for the first few months. Eventually you might see novices upgrading, but I think not at a large rate for quite some time.

Reply | Quote