locked
Have back Classic Start Menu in Windows 7 with this tool!! RRS feed

All replies

  • Bravo to you for creating that.  Shortsightedness in Windows development creates another market.

    -Noel
    Friday, June 26, 2009 10:55 PM
  • I did not create it :)
    Friday, June 26, 2009 11:16 PM
  • Well, thanks for pointing it out. I've bookmarked it. I'm not against "change", but when software developers (like Microsoft, for instance) realize that if you can navigate and find what you need practically blindfolded, how can they tell you the new Menu/Control Panel is better organized. Did anyone, anywhere, ever complain about how the Classic Start Menu or Control Panel was organized? Tweak, OK, but why scramble the whole thing up? If new versions were actually were "better organized", the only ones who would benefit would be new computer users, while the zillions of users of the past 14 years are left to figure out the new jumble. So who's satisfaction is the priority?    Don't these things drive us crazy!
    Saturday, June 27, 2009 3:13 AM
  • But 19.95 EUR for a feature that was built in Windows Vista is far too expensive.

    Then I prefer to emulate the classic start menu for free of charge.
    Sunday, June 28, 2009 10:37 AM
  • But 19.95 EUR for a feature that was built in Windows Vista is far too expensive.

    Then I prefer to emulate the classic start menu for free of charge.

    that is not the whole start menu. is just the programs toolbar, which can be enabled since windows 98.

    Sunday, June 28, 2009 1:47 PM
  • I really don't understand you people. Grow up!
    The new start menu (especiialy since Vista) is much more comfortable than the the win 95 one.
    Having a list of most commonly used apps at one click is better than having to search each time among the tens of unused applications each one of us has on its own computer. The option to start typing the name of the requested app and having it pop-up is really a time saver.
    I know personally some of those classic menu fans, and I can surely tell that the reason they don't like it is because they never tried it. Since they first used XP, the first thing they did was to change the theme to the win 95 theme without giving a chance to the new UI.

    I am really glad that MS did not surrender to all the whining, I hope they won't surrender until RTM is delivered.
    Move on! Forget the 95 start menu. Once you'll try the new menu, you won't believe you put some much effort in trying to keep alive the poor old classic start menu.
    Monday, June 29, 2009 12:11 AM
  • HA !. What do you mean "you people" ?   :)

    Well yes, the search is certainly nice but what happens if you have 50 programs all with easy-to-forget-names ? Of course everyone remembers Photoshop and stuff but many times it's useful to have a large list of programs open so you can visually scan fast for them if you can't remember the name. 
    Monday, June 29, 2009 9:12 AM
  • but what happens if you have 50 programs all with easy-to-forget-names ?
    Correct.
    And what about additional programs which you even don't know you have installed ?
    For example: Install "Nero" and you get also: Cover Designer, Wave Editor, ImageDrive, SoundTrax
    Monday, June 29, 2009 10:22 AM
  • That's exactly what I'm saying, if you have 50 programs that you don't remember their names, that's because you usually don't use them, the same for the additional applications that get installed with the one you intended to insall - Nero in your example, if you never used them you don't really need them.

    There is absolutely no reason why the user should be overwhelmed with lots of applications he doesn't even know that he installed and he doesn't use them.
    In my opinion the benefit of the new start menu is that with one click you'll get the application you actually use, instead of having to search among those applications that if you don't even know what they are good for.

    Forgive me for really not understanding your point, what's the use benfit of having to visually scan a large list in which most items are of no use, instead of scanning a short list of most commonly used items.
    From the what you are saying, it sounds like you would like to have lots of spam in your inbox, so you'll be able to visually scan fast for your real mail.

    Monday, June 29, 2009 11:15 AM
  • As I said, if you can get to whatever you need "practically blindfolded" (i.e., you know where your stuff is) how can ANYTHING be considered easier? And why would it be easier to take your finger off your mouse and go to your keyboard to type in what you're looking for? This shows that the changes are aimed at beginners (and disorganized clods) with no consideration for experienced folks who excel using what they have. That is why this tool, to use the "classic menu" is appealing.
    Monday, June 29, 2009 12:50 PM
  • That's exactly what I'm saying, if you have 50 programs that you don't remember their names, that's because you usually don't use them, the same for the additional applications that get installed with the one you intended to insall - Nero in your example, if you never used them you don't really need them.
    Who says you don't really need them. With the new way you'll never find them even if you need them - because you may vaguely remember the name or the function but for the search to deliver a useable result you need to have either correct or you won't get the desired feedback. A very frustrating experience - so much so that I will not use Windows 7 until this misery and the printer consolidation issue (printer with the same port and driver are represented in all views by one of the group and there is no way to ungroup them) are resolved. The latter is a showstopper for our customers (well over 1000 installations) as well...
    Monday, June 29, 2009 12:55 PM
  • As I said, if you can get to whatever you need "practically blindfolded" (i.e., you know where your stuff is) how can ANYTHING be considered easier? And why would it be easier to take your finger off your mouse and go to your keyboard to type in what you're looking for? This shows that the changes are aimed at beginners (and disorganized clods) with no consideration for experienced folks who excel using what they have. That is why this tool, to use the "classic menu" is appealing.

    I highly disagree with you that usage of keybord is aimed for beginners. And disorganized clods, aren't we all...? ;-)
    There are many studies showing that working more with the keyboard and less with the mouse will help you speed your work.
    But hey, please feel free to buy and use the "classic menu" tool, do what ever makes you happy, nobody will argue with you. Actually you could stay with win2k, a very stable OS with great performance, and you'll have also the classic menu included "for free".

    Who says you don't really need them.
    If you don't use them you don't need them. That's always true in life. How many time you bought stuff at the grocery near your home and you didn't touch it later? It's the same with software. If you used it, it would have been in the commonly used list, just one click away.
    ...and the printer consolidation issue (printer with the same port and driver are represented in all views by one of the group and there is no way to ungroup them)
    I'm not arguing with that.

    Monday, June 29, 2009 6:13 PM
  • I highly disagree with you that usage of keybord is aimed for beginners. And disorganized clods, aren't we all...? ;-)
    There are many studies showing that working more with the keyboard and less with the mouse will help you speed your work.
    But hey, please feel free to buy and use the "classic menu" tool, do what ever makes you happy, nobody will argue with you. Actually you could stay with win2k, a very stable OS with great performance, and you'll have also the classic menu included "for free".

    Well, beginners can use the new startmenu, there is no problem with that. But where is the problem to give the experienced users the classic startmenu? I like and prefer the old startmenu and i want it back too.

    There is absolutly no disadvantage if the user has the option to choose what he likes more.

    And yes, maybe there are many studies. But if they only take the easy way and hear what they want to hear, then... they don't need to make a study.

    Windows 2k besides is a very good operating system, yes. But if he/we want something more modern we can use a linux with a desktop of our choice. But i don't think that that is the solution that microsoft wants.

    And Leon: There are definitly a lot of users who prefer the classic startmenu and i am one of that.

    Just try to accept an opinion besides yours. Even if it sounds very hard for you. Just try it.
    Monday, June 29, 2009 7:38 PM
  • I want the classic startmenu back too. I like it. I like all the progams and the big list. I like to see what is installed on my computer. I like to have the user interface AS I WANT IT, not as Microsoft or anybody want me to have it. Its MY computer, so I want to be able to have the look i prefer.

    And i wouldn't pay anything for a study that tells me only what i want to hear, because then i don't need that study. ;)

    I can't find any disadvantage if there is the new startmenu setted as default for all (new) users in windows 7, with an option to set the startmenu back to the classic one.


    To leon:
    Windows 2000 is still a nice operating system with a nice startmenu, yes. But also we can use a linux, with a lot of desktops available. Too bad that if we either use an old Windows 2000 again OR linux Microsoft won't earn anything with windows 7.

    And you seem to have very big problems with people who aren't sharing your opinion. You should really try to accept other opinions, even it if sounds very hard now. ;)


    A little example:
    Do you like red cars? Hey, i like blue ones. What now? Are all blue cars silly and stupid and nobody uses them? Do i need to buy a red car now, because you don't want me to have a blue one? Because red is much prettier then blue? Blue cars have always been sold, but they are old. Red is newer and cooler, so every new customer has to prefer red cars. Right?
    Monday, June 29, 2009 9:35 PM
  • I am sorry, maybe I was misunderstood. You certainly have the right to like/dislike anything you wish. I accept your opinion, but I don't agree with you and I believe that I also have the right to think and say that.
    Exactly as you asked me to accept your opinion, which I do, please allow others to say that in their opinion you are wrong, the new menu is better.
    That's the only reason I posted my opinion here.
    I hope that what you asked me to do in your last sentence, is also true for you (truly, I'm not so sure about it).
    Forgive me Joyrider but should look more in the mirror before criticizing others.

    With that, I believe this discussion is closed from my point of view. 

    p.s. I didn't understand or care about your cars business, but I hope that you enjoy your car, and if the car manufacturer changed a button in a new model you are not taking too hard. :-)
    • Edited by Leon Monday, June 29, 2009 9:52 PM
    Monday, June 29, 2009 9:35 PM
  • I just want back the classic menu, because i like it :(
    Tuesday, June 30, 2009 8:46 AM
  • Sure, this is mostly a matter of opinion - and personel preference - and nothing is going to be changed because of our opinions here.  However.... it's not just the Start Menu, it's also the Control Panel. What a confusing mess! For example, if you want to make a minor change to your mouse setting, it now takes 2 additional clicks to get there - after you find where you have to go. I'm sure sombody thinks that's easier. Another big disappointment is trying to figure out how to make my red "X" in the upper right-hand corner bigger, for easier, quicker use. I've searched and searched, and can not find anything to do this. What was wrong with the "Advanced" settings in "Display" that we had?
    Tuesday, June 30, 2009 1:00 PM
  • I just want back the classic menu, because i like it :(

    You are not alone.
    33% of the user want it back. See this poll
    Tuesday, June 30, 2009 1:56 PM
  • Polls like this one are worthless.  It merely means that 33% of those that responded (on that website) want the OLD menu, and that 66% of those that responded were content with or LIKED the NEW menu.

    For a poll to be worth anything, the sample needs to be taken from a reasonable pool of participants, and have each participant answer.  Those that respond to polls such as the above are usually the malcontents.

    Actually, that poll, for not having a reasonable pool of respondents, and having the 2:1 margin that it did in FAVOR of those who want the NEW menu says quite a bit.  I suspect a poll from a reasonable pool, with each participant required to respond, would put the ratio more in the 10:1 in favor of the NEW menu. 

     

    To do a proper poll, find an agency or company that will do an impartial sampling of a pool of users using Vista or Windows 7.  Then, let’s see if you like the ratio as much as you seem to enjoy the 33%.

     

    Doc

    Tuesday, June 30, 2009 2:50 PM
  • However.... it's not just the Start Menu, it's also the Control Panel. What a confusing mess! For example, if you want to make a minor change to your mouse setting, it now takes 2 additional clicks to get there - after you find where you have to go.
    Two additional clicks? No way, not happening.

    XP Style:
    Control Panel > Mouse

    Windows Vista and 7 Styles:
    (All Items)
    Control Panel > Mouse

    (Category)
    Control Panel > Hardware and Sound > Mouse.

    Another big disappointment is trying to figure out how to make my red "X" in the upper right-hand corner bigger, for easier, quicker use. I've searched and searched, and can not find anything to do this. What was wrong with the "Advanced" settings in "Display" that we had?
    Nothing. Control Panel > Personalization > Window Color > Advance appearance settings.

    Wednesday, July 1, 2009 1:51 AM
  • Well, thank you. This is exactly what I mean- trying to merely figure out how to do simple things that used to be second nature. It is NOT easier.
    Wednesday, July 1, 2009 1:11 PM
  • Leon believe it or not there is nothing wrong with having options. Your way is not the only way or even the best way particularly for others.  The hyperbole that you're using to try to make your way sound better or easier is just that hyperbole.  Fine you left your start menu a mess, couldn't find anything and relied on the recently used pane - not everyone leaves their start menu a mess. I for one never have to search among "tens of unused applications" because I take few minutes required to organize my apps the way I like. I realize there are people who don't know how to do that and giving them the same few programs they know how to use is probably a good thing. But what about people who know where their apps are?

    And yes I've tried the constantly shuffling and changing menu in XP and again in Vista - it was and is annoying. And typing out the name of an app is to me as absurd as 7 making you remember dozens of variables to type in just to do a search. I've used command line interfaces - they have their place - but why have a GUI based OS that makes you do the work of command line OS?

    If you notice no one is saying "get rid of your way of doing it" are they? What people are suggesting is options are nice to have. 
    Wednesday, July 1, 2009 8:38 PM
  • Right on, glacia.

    I agree with the OP and those who also want the flexibility.

    But then, I have been saying this all along in countless other threads.
    Wednesday, July 1, 2009 8:52 PM
  • Y'know what burns my rear?  People who act like they're better/smarter than other people.  Do you think we haven't looked at the Windows 7 start menu?  Some of us think it's horrible, and it's not because you're so much smarter than we are that you can see the light and we can't.

    No one here who prefers the Classic start menu is telling anyone that you should do without that brave new superduper Windows 7 menu that you might like.  We're just asking that the option for continuing "classic" mode be continued so that we can do things the way we like.  It's a PERSONAL computer.  That means I can do things differently than you.  If you don't like that, then I suggest you disconnect the Internet.

    So how about this...  Hey Leon, I really don't understand you.  Grow up!

    -Noel
    Wednesday, July 1, 2009 9:20 PM
  • Let's pile on- don't forget, the Control Panel is also a big confusing mess!  I still say they are catering to new users, with no consideration to the millions of people who have used MS operating systems for the past 14 years with no problems!  Hasn't 99% of our "constructive criticsms" been about performance, and not how the Start Menu and Control panel were arranged? How many complaints were heard about them?  You know what the new Start Menu and Control Panel makes me think of? AOL could have designed it! Maybe they should add a little "Buddy" to help us out.  Ok, maybe that's a low blow....
    Thursday, July 2, 2009 4:24 PM
  • ...AOL could have designed it!...
    LOL!

    I tried AOL and I hated it.
    Thursday, July 2, 2009 7:11 PM
  • If the numbers in the poll are accurate in spite of the tiny sampling and non-real world phrasing one would think that having an option that 33% of your customer base prefers is well worth the simple effort of putting back already written code.  When I say 'non-real world phrasing" I mean there is no choice in the poll for choosing "I like it my way but not opposed to having the option for the other".  Because that is what the reality has been hasn't it?

    Let me ask this to those who like the new start menu - does it really make that much of a difference to you if the option for a classic menu is there for people who like it? Are you truly this opposed to it being an option?  Because that's what I'm hearing in this. It truly sounds like a demand for fewer options and less user configurability.

    Thursday, July 2, 2009 8:05 PM
  • Just wondering what would happen if an Air Force fighter pilot got strapped into the seat of his jet and discovered that all his flight instruments and controls were re-arranged, combined, re-designed, etc. .... with a note telling him "this is an improved version of your jet".
    Friday, July 3, 2009 1:27 PM
  • The new starmenu is ok, but i just prefer the old one.

    I know it, i like it, i want to use it.

    I don't see any reason why it is taken out completly.

    Anybody who prefers the new one can use it. But for anybody else there could just be the old one as an option.

    I hope Microsoft will give us the old menu back. :)
    Tuesday, July 7, 2009 2:38 PM
  • I don't mean to get involved in a discussion about the relative merits of the old and new start menus, but I found that as a new Windows 7 user, I removed all the junk from my start menu that I would never use (MS games, magnifier, remote access whatever) and by the time I was done, there was nothing in there.  So now I have a big empty white start menu, and all the stuff I do use, (Computer, Control Panel, Documents, etc) are over on the right side in the grey area.  It seems a little backwards to me maybe. 
    Tuesday, July 7, 2009 3:24 PM
  • @ Dr. Strangelove
    "I suspect a poll from a reasonable pool, with each participant required to respond, would put the ratio more in the 10:1 in favor of the NEW menu. "

    Lets assume that 10:1 is the real number although I doubt it. That's 10% of the customer base who like an option that you already have coded. Like others you're pretending it can only be one or the other. You're pretending that providing the user with options is impossible. You're pretending that people who have a different preference are demanding your preference be ripped out and replaced. And yet everything you're pretending to be the case... is not.

    What do you think the poll results would be if the options were more realistic?

    A - Keep the Classic and provide no option for the New.
    B - Keep the New and provide no option for the Classic.
    C - Keep both as an option the user can choose.

    From your post and a few others it sounds like you would choose B. That to me sounds like the answer of a malcontent.

    Tuesday, July 7, 2009 6:45 PM
  • i am personally a fan of the 95 start menu seeing as it has slide out menus insted of menus designed for cell phones and it much less cluttered. however, i rarely ever use the start menu becasue i have everything in quicklanch and on my desktop (taht reminds me, put an option for the dock layout or the quicklaunch layout of the taskbar: the dock idea sucks). why is the start menu even of any importance when MS put many other things that are much more efficient than a stupid menu?

    please people stop arguing. everyone has their own opinion. quite frankly i am tired of hearing the Start Menu vs Program Navigator argument all over again when MS put out Windows 95.

    hope this helps, nitrous_74
    Tuesday, July 7, 2009 8:53 PM
  • i vote C glacia. 

    everyone has their own opinion. quite frankly i am tired of hearing the Start Menu vs Program Navigator argument all over again back when MS put out the start menu for the very first time.

    hope this helps, nitrous_74
    Tuesday, July 7, 2009 9:25 PM
  • @ Dr. Strangelove
    "I suspect a poll from a reasonable pool, with each participant required to respond, would put the ratio more in the 10:1 in favor of the NEW menu. "

    Lets assume that 10:1 is the real number although I doubt it. That's 10% of the customer base who like an option that you already have coded. Like others you're pretending it can only be one or the other. You're pretending that providing the user with options is impossible. You're pretending that people who have a different preference are demanding your preference be ripped out and replaced. And yet everything you're pretending to be the case... is not.

    What do you think the poll results would be if the options were more realistic?

    A - Keep the Classic and provide no option for the New.
    B - Keep the New and provide no option for the Classic.
    C - Keep both as an option the user can choose.

    From your post and a few others it sounds like you would choose B. That to me sounds like the answer of a malcontent.


    No, not a malcontent.  I have read many of the threads where people were crying about the classic menu, and I have really tried to understand their attachment to it.  The result is that I just do not understand why such an attachment exists.  I cannot imagine going back to the classic menu.  This is not to say that I am a fan of the current menu.  I have learned, and updated myself, to use the latest "tools" available, and have dropped as many of the legacy issues as I possibly can, as I do not like carrying excess baggage.

    Now, think of it this way:  Big, bad Microsoft has just opened the door for some company, big or small, to create a product for their platform.  Perhaps more than one company can take advantage of this.  Maybe even the firefox folks, or the google folks, can make a "free" classic menu (that just happens to install with their browser), and provide all that competition that the media, and the EU, seem to want.

    Who knows - maybe Microsoft will cave, maybe the classic menu will show up in an update or service pack, maybe a browser provider will make a classic menu.  I just believe, at this point, to continue to clutter the forum with threads about a subject which has been beat to death no longer serves any purpose.  If Microsoft has not heard the complaints by now, they never will.

    Doc

    edit:  BTW, I posted somewhere long ago that there should be another desktop/windows explorer that is not made by the OS group at Microsoft.  I suggested the Office group, as they have a better handle on usability.  Regardless of the group, with all the discussion about the desktop, the menu, the task bar, gadgets, etc, I believe my suggestion (for another group to do the desktop) is stronger than ever before.

    Doc
    Wednesday, July 8, 2009 5:37 AM
  • Leon,

    Your comments are indicative of the greatest failure of software developers (myself included).  We always assume that if we create something new and shiny, and that we believe is more useful, that our user base will too.  Or if they don't like it or find it useful, we condemn them for being infantile and short-sighted.  The fact is that people like what they like for their own reasons, and those reasons are ALL valid - at least to them.  Most people truly believe in "If it aint broke, don't fix it."  The fact is that many people truly believe that the Classic Menu is not broken and that the newer (it's not actually new) one is inferior.  If that is the users' opinion, developers should respect it and allow people to continue to use what is know and comfortable.

    Your comment telling people to "Grow up" and referring to them as whiners is ignorant and offensive.  People like you are the reason that the general public view us in the tech industries as adversaries rather than allies.  Microsoft - please stop assuming that you know better than the general public what they want and what is most effective.  Most people are infuriated by forced UI/Human Factors changes.  Put back the Classic Menu.

    Bravo Seven Classic Start for recognizing the need, but it will anger people further to find that they now have to pay $25 to get what used to be included in the OS.
    Thursday, July 9, 2009 4:46 PM
  • Mate, 
    That's your opinion. I deal with the public every day. The vast majority do not like change. Oh, and I am grown up, thank you very much. So kindly don't patronise me! People buy a product if they like it. They did not buy Vista, they kept buying XP.

    Talk about being self-opinionated!
    Thursday, July 9, 2009 9:06 PM
  • Well said! Agree completely :)
    Thursday, July 9, 2009 9:12 PM
  • Leon,

    Your comments are indicative of the greatest failure of software developers (myself included).  We always assume that if we create something new and shiny, and that we believe is more useful, that our user base will too.  Or if they don't like it or find it useful, we condemn them for being infantile and short-sighted.  The fact is that people like what they like for their own reasons, and those reasons are ALL valid - at least to them.  Most people truly believe in "If it aint broke, don't fix it."  The fact is that many people truly believe that the Classic Menu is not broken and that the newer (it's not actually new) one is inferior.  If that is the users' opinion, developers should respect it and allow people to continue to use what is know and comfortable.

    Your comment telling people to "Grow up" and referring to them as whiners is ignorant and offensive.  People like you are the reason that the general public view us in the tech industries as adversaries rather than allies.  Microsoft - please stop assuming that you know better than the general public what they want and what is most effective.  Most people are infuriated by forced UI/Human Factors changes.  Put back the Classic Menu.

    Bravo Seven Classic Start for recognizing the need, but it will anger people further to find that they now have to pay $25 to get what used to be included in the OS.
    Bmckenna11, you are absolutely right.

    I was on the development team of a for an in-house application suite at a major manufacturer.

    Changes to the software were end user driven.  Problem reports were filtered at a couple of levels, and then discussed in a weekly meeting between the developers and administration.

    The point is that without end user input, developers are working in a vacuum and have no idea how the end users are going to react to changes.
    Friday, July 10, 2009 12:54 AM
  • @ MS (of course I know that no one from MS reads this) The biggest objection to the new menu is the "frequently used programs pane"  It's a crutch for people who don't know where their shortcuts are or don't want to organize their start menu or don't know how.

    The solution to this is obvious.   If you were to make the frequently used programs pane (what I and others call the annoying empty white panel) go away/collapse when the user sets the number of programs stored there to zero that would make a lot of people who like the classic 'happier' and would also work better for the people who like the new one.

    It would also make the new start menu function more logically. Having the empty white panel pop up always feels like a kludge someone threw together quickly and never fixed. "It's empty why is it still there?"   It would still be bigger than the classic but one can trim out the number of links in the 'gray' area to only what the user likes and the menu gets smaller. the only thing the user can't do is make the annoying empty whi.... err "frequently used programs pane" go away.
    Friday, July 10, 2009 8:10 PM
  • While I have not personally seen the need for the classic start menu, I must admit that I am somewhat perplexed by the absence of it in light of all the feedback and multiple threads.

    The discussion of the development team reminded me of the model, which Microsoft was said to embrace for their products.

    A team consisted of Development, Test/QA, Logistics Planning, User Education, Product Management, and Program Management roles. 

    Let's look at the role of Product Management, as it applies to the Microsoft Solutions Framework - Solution Development Discipline:

    Mission:  Establish and sustain the business case for the project.  Assist in identifying and setting priorities across the target audience.

    Role:  Ensure that business expectations are articulated and understood by the project team and that the functional specifications respond to business priorities.  Product Management owns the vision statement.  The vision statement should communicate expectations and assumptions.  It does not need to be elaborate or formal.  Product Management is responsible for the high-level project communications such as business projections, cost of the project, contract negotiation, product demonstrations, packaging characteristics, and product positioning. 
    Product Management also communicates the high-level milestones to the target audience.

    Skills:  Product Management team members do not need to have developer skills, but they should have an in-depth understanding of the technology and its potential for the target audience.  More than anything else, the Product Management team must speak the users' language and have expertise in the business application.  A representative from the target audience who understands business could be a good candidate for the Product Management role on the project team.


    I was/am a certified trainer in the MSF SDD.  Whether the model is MSF SDD, or from the PMBOK, or other development disciplines, that this complaint of the lack of the classic menu has gone on this long, without a reasonable explanation as to why, would seem to indicate that the role of Product Management has failed to adhere to the basic principles of development.

    Again, I do not need a classic menu myself.  But, the code already exists in some form, and it is Microsoft's code.  Why not listen to the users, personal and business, and implement the code?

    Why, on release day, would you want to start the day with a bunch of negative press about something seemingly as simple as the classic menu?

    Doc

    Sunday, July 12, 2009 4:03 AM
  • The "Target Audience" seems to be novices, not the zillions of long-time users who I can't recall ever saying "we need a better start menu design". The same, of course goes for the Control Panel.  Example: It was pointed out to me above, that if I want to enlarge the size of the red "X" in the upper right corner, I go to Personalization > Window Color. Who would have thought "Window Color"?
    Also from above:
    What would be the reaction if an Air Force fighter pilot got strapped into the seat of his jet and noticed that all his flight instruments and controls were re-arranged, combined, re-designed, etc. .... with a note telling him "this is an improved, easier-to-use version of your instrument panel"; 66%  of our trainees say they like this better"
    Sunday, July 12, 2009 5:51 PM
  • I really don't understand you people. Grow up!
    The new start menu (especiialy since Vista) is much more comfortable than the the win 95 one.
    Having a list of most commonly used apps at one click is better than having to search each time among the tens of unused applications each one of us has on its own computer. The option to start typing the name of the requested app and having it pop-up is really a time saver.
    I know personally some of those classic menu fans, and I can surely tell that the reason they don't like it is because they never tried it. Since they first used XP, the first thing they did was to change the theme to the win 95 theme without giving a chance to the new UI.

    I am really glad that MS did not surrender to all the whining, I hope they won't surrender until RTM is delivered.
    Move on! Forget the 95 start menu. Once you'll try the new menu, you won't believe you put some much effort in trying to keep alive the poor old classic start menu.

    Note to Microsoft: I like being able to see exactly where my program shortcuts are instead of searching for them all the time, so make sure to keep the All Programs list!

    - JoelbX
    Monday, July 13, 2009 2:56 AM
  • So Joel, I take it that you're opposed to having options in the OS?  Since no one has yet explained why they're opposed to that... why is that? I'm truly curious why some people seem to think it can only be one way or the other. As apparently MS does now with Win7 since this is the first version that eliminated this option.

    Leon is apparently nearly militant in not wanting anyone to have the option to do things the way they prefer. Just curious if you're also in the Leon camp of "do it my way only and don't give others any option"...
    • Edited by glacia Monday, July 13, 2009 4:31 AM
    Monday, July 13, 2009 4:27 AM
  • Hi OrdinarySoft

    You have already posted links to that commercial website in almost a dozen threads here.

    Commercial activities and spamming is a violation of our  Community Code of Conduct and Terms Of Use that all members are required to follow on these forums. Please refrain from this acivity in the future.

    Thank you for understanding.

    Ronnie Vernon MVP
    Forum Moderator

    Wednesday, July 15, 2009 8:36 AM
  • Looks nice, the tool "sevenclassicstart". BUT:

    Unfortunately no one ever seemed to realize, that one of the great advantages of the classic start menu (CSM) is its ability to respond to keyboard input! So do (or do not) the makers of this tool. Though it looks nice, the menu items simply do not react on keys - besides the arrow keys and return of course. The usual CSM responds to the first character of any given entry:

    - If it's unique and adresses a shortcut, the shortcut is launched
    - If it's unique and adresses a submenu, the submenu unfolds

    Thus you can create your own cascaded menu shortcuts, which is very useful - and impossible using the new start menu (NSM). I use this feature as my "personal control center", where my most important shortcuts are on the first level, the less important ones one or several levels deeper - all this clearly arranged, with very quick access, all items in reach, when you need them.

    It's a pity! Because besides this the tool really looks nice and would be an adequate substitution for CSM. If the authors are reading this: please consider of implementing the usual keyboard handling - and I would probably become a customer of yours when switching to 7.

    Considering this - what does not meet my needs is the tool VistaStartMenu (sorry to the authors) - despite some good ideas behind it. But the keyboard handling is not better compared to NSM, though they implement their own idea of keyboard shortcuts. In my view the keyboard handlng of CSM is never reached by any other tool.

    THAT is one of the reasons why CSM is so unique! (and why so many poeple are "whining" - mee too!).

    I also regard it as problematic for many companies, including the one, I am working in. I'm not sure, if Microsoft really has considered this in all its consequences. It might become a bad flop. Also a pity, because besides this I really think, win 7 is a good OS - fast and pretty.

    Best regards
    Dieter Hollmann

    Friday, August 7, 2009 3:22 PM
  • Sorry it has taken me a while to get back, haven't viewed this thread in a couple weeks.
    So Joel, I take it that you're opposed to having options in the OS? 
    Actually, if there were no options in Windows, I would have switched to Linux a long time ago....
    Since no one has yet explained why they're opposed to that... why is that? I'm truly curious why some people seem to think it can only be one way or the other. As apparently MS does now with Win7 since this is the first version that eliminated this option.
    Yes, I would like to know too, I was not taking any sides on my last post, just saying please do not take the option of having "All Programs" in the Start menu out!
    Leon is apparently nearly militant in not wanting anyone to have the option to do things the way they prefer. Just curious if you're also in the Leon camp of "do it my way only and don't give others any option"...
    I would not associate my allegiance with Leon, as I do not like the way he has presented his side of the case.



    Actually I am in a 3rd side to this debate here, I do not like either the classic or the new start menu (but can stand the new start menu), I like XP's default menu.

    The new Start menu has the All Programs feature that I like, but it doesn't open with the classic flyout menus, and it organizes entries alphabetically, which I (sometimes) don't like, I like things where I put it.

    The most annoying feature of the new menu (at least for me) I have found, is that in XP, to use the Start menu to turn off the comp, you press windows key (opens start menu), u (shortcut for Alt+u type thing, which opens the "turn off computer" window), and then u again to press the turn off button in the turn off comp dialog box.
    In the new start menu, all this does is searches for "uu". I found a workaround by making a shortcut to shutdown.exe and naming the shortcut "uu", then when I search for "uu", it will come up with that shortcut listed, and I just press enter to shutdown.

    To positive note:
    I like the option to be able to open your username folder, as I frequently have to access this folder.

    I like the transparency with the documents and control panel button parts, except for if I select one of these buttons and hold the mouse down on it, the button does not go into a selected state, just a highlighted state.

    The search feature is nice, it also can serve as the old "Run" dialog box of old. (try typing diskmgmt.msc in both the search box and the run box to see how identical they are)

    The jumplists is something different, though I never use it, but someone out there probably does.

    Hello! Please try every solution given to your problem...and reply back, promptly if possible with its results...

    Click here for my thread on Win7 min. system requirements
    - JoelbX
    • Edited by JoelbX Friday, August 7, 2009 4:43 PM forgot a positive note
    Friday, August 7, 2009 4:32 PM
  • This whole discussion reminds me of the discussion regarding the Ribbon bar that with the added to office 2007 to make it easier for users.  Has it?  For me it certainly hasn't, I still remember the commands I used to use before the ribbon bar appeared and they still can remember where to look for certain features.  In that case they took a very good system that everyone knew and threw it away and they're doing the same thing here.  Give the user the option of which system is more efficient for them, don't stuff something new down their throat!

    Obviously, any one who thinks it's more efficient to chase icons around the screen and click on them instead of typing a few a couple of keys obviously also likes video games!  I can type commands while reading something else, can you use your mouse to click icons while reading something else?  I certainly don't think so.  Having options as to how you can figure your system is like having different manufacturers of automobiles, not everyone likes the same thing so they have choices.  Give us the option of making a choice here!
    Saturday, August 8, 2009 1:37 PM
  • I agree. Why to create something pretty with lavenders colors, fuzzy lines or many such idiotic features and left possibility even to use clean practical interface of Classical Windows ? What was wrong graphical interface of  Outlook Express? Why to introduce such insane colors and fuzziness in Windows Live Mail? Just to show how pretty can be? What poor soul designed this?
    Sunday, August 9, 2009 2:13 AM
  • Hi,

    You may use alternative start menu, it mush useful with friendly UI and works under windows 7-
    http://www.VistaStartMenu.com/
    and much powerful then usual Classic start menu

    I tried that start menu, but it is way too big for me (took up half the screen! Unacceptable!) so after seeing no option to make it smaller (other than really small fonts) I promptly uninstalled it. Thanks for recommending that, but it didn't work for me.

    Hello! Please reply back, promptly if possible with the results to solutions to your problem!

    Curious about Win7 min. system requirements?
    Readme for older ATI graphics card and Windows 7 users
    - JoelbX
    Sunday, August 9, 2009 10:03 PM
  • Leon has the right to his opinion, and that is a given. Another given is, a person's opinion can also be wrong, and I think Leon's opinion is absolutely wrong. I too want to see the Windows "classic" or "legacy" start menu arrangement and the "classic" view arrangement of the control panel retained in Windows 7, and this is why. One, I prefer it to the start menu arrangement I saw when I tried out the Windows 7 beta and release candidate versions. That Windows 7 start menu is quite confusing, which is inexcusable. In addition to this, I actually had programs that would not run through that Windows 7 start menu arrangement, yet they ran fine when I clicked a shortcut I put on the desktop for those programs, or when I clicked the executable files that start those programs where they were automatically installed in the folder assigned to them by the installer in the program files folder. Two, removing the "classic" view arrangement of the control panel in Windows 7 actually caused me to lose any ability to find and use the controller software that was installed for the video card I just bought and added to my computer. That video card is a brand-new Nvidia Geforce 8400 512mb video card, not some relic. I was never able to find the controller for that video card anywhere in the control panel in Windows 7, so the graphics throughout Windows 7 were horribly blurry because of this. I had no way to set the gammas, contrast, brightness, or anything to alleviate that problem. Three, there is no "run" command available in Windows 7. That is something I have always used a lot out of necessity, and the search engine in the start menu is nowhere as usable as the Windows 7 team and their user shills preach. Four, I won't even go into the myriads of compatibility problems I had in Windows 7. I thought Windows 7 was supposed to have some kind of special Windows XP emulator. If so, It works no better than the standard compatibility wizards. Finally, Wikipedia and some other web sites are reporting that Microsoft is going to not put these "classic" or "legacy" items in the Windows 7 installation CDs or DVDs, but they will offer these as an update (maybe a service pack, jargon-wise?) for those who have installed Windows 7 but still want these "classic" or "legacy" start menu and control panel arrangement. So, I say, have Windows 7 do as Windows Vista did in this regard, and leave the "classic" or "legacy" start menu and control panel arrangements as an option. This should satisfy people like Leon who don't want to use the "classic" or "legacy" arrangement, as well well as people like me, who want to see these older arrangement retained. If people don't like the "classic" or "legacy" start menu or control panel arrengements, they can simply not use them. I mean, my wife drives a Dodge Caravan minivan; her brother drives a Chevy Astro minivan. My wife prefers the Dodge Caravan; her brother prefers the Chevrolet Astro. But even our government has the sensibility to allow my wife and her brother to drive  whichever vehicle they prefer. Microsoft had better use the the same thinking and sensibility with Windows 7. Windows 7 should have the option(s) to be run with the "classic" or "legacy" start menu and control panel arrangement. Let people like Leon use the start menu and control panel arrangement he prefers. Let the rest of us use the start menu and control panel arrangement we prefer. This would not be "caving in" on Microsoft's part, but a common sense move that would make Windows 7 even more appealing in that it would satisfy everybody. Ergo, more sales for Microsoft.
    Monday, August 24, 2009 3:54 PM
  • Two, removing the "classic" view arrangement of the control panel in Windows 7 actually caused me to lose any ability to find and use the controller software that was installed for the video card I just bought and added to my computer. That video card is a brand-new Nvidia Geforce 8400 512mb video card, not some relic. I was never able to find the controller for that video card anywhere in the control panel in Windows 7, so the graphics throughout Windows 7 were horribly blurry because of this. I had no way to set the gammas, contrast, brightness, or anything to alleviate that problem.
    There is an option in the top of the Control Panel to choose Large or Small icons. This is the icon view, but not quite the XP icon view. Once you enable that view you will find the NVIDIA Control Panel which is where you adjust these settings.
    Three, there is no "run" command available in Windows 7. That is something I have always used a lot out of necessity, and the search engine in the start menu is nowhere as usable as the Windows 7 team and their user shills preach.
    Right click on the Start button and select Properties. Click the button to customize the Start menu, scroll down the list till you find run and then check it, and then click OK on each of the dialog boxes. This adds the run button back to the Start menu.

    Also you can press Windows key + R to bring up the Run dialog box.

    Hello! Please reply back, promptly if possible with the results to solutions to your problem!

    Curious about Win7 min. system requirements?
    Readme for older ATI graphics cards or Intel onboard graphics and Windows 7 users
    Windows 7 tips
    - JoelbX
    • Edited by JoelbX Monday, August 24, 2009 5:39 PM word usage
    Monday, August 24, 2009 5:36 PM
  • In addition to this, I actually had programs that would not run through that Windows 7 start menu arrangement, yet they ran fine when I clicked a shortcut I put on the desktop for those programs, or when I clicked the executable files that start those programs where they were automatically installed in the folder assigned to them by the installer in the program files folder.

    This shouldn't be happening all Start Menu links use the same .lnk files that are used everywhere else in the system. What programs are these?

    Two, removing the "classic" view arrangement of the control panel in Windows 7 actually caused me to lose any ability to find and use the controller software that was installed for the video card I just bought and added to my computer. That video card is a brand-new Nvidia Geforce 8400 512mb video card, not some relic.
    Assuming it installs the Nvidia CPL object as my 7900GS does, which is a relic :-), it is located in CPL\Hardware and Sound\Nvidia Control Panel. This took me all of two seconds to find, and I don't use the new Control Panel layout. You can also type "nvcpl.cpl" into the Start Menu as you would with Run to open it, for some reason it doesn't show up in friendly form.

    The Nvidia CPL object isn't installed by the default Windows 7 drivers I believe, they are rather generic with no CPL object and no OpenGL support.

    Three, there is no "run" command available in Windows 7.
    The Start Menu is Run. Type in regedit or Run and it will open Registry Editor, Run, etc.

    Four, I won't even go into the myriads of compatibility problems I had in Windows 7. I thought Windows 7 was supposed to have some kind of special Windows XP emulator.
    Windows XP Mode, it's only a virtual machine with a few integration features so don't expect to be blown away. You can download the Windows Virtual PC and Windows XP Mode Release Candidates here:
    http://www.microsoft.com/windows/virtual-pc/download.aspx

    But even our government has the sensibility to allow my wife and her brother to drive whichever vehicle they prefer. Microsoft had better use the the same thinking and sensibility with Windows 7.

    Your government is likely to not be providing neither the Caravan nor the Astro, the private sector (like third parties) does this. So, I guess they have the same sense of things, they provide some public transportation (Explorer, Start Menu) but you're welcome to get access to your own car (FreeCommander, VistaStartMenu).
    Monday, August 24, 2009 6:52 PM
  • It all boils down to the simplest thing for microsoft to do to keep new users and loyal old users happy is to simply install the classic start menu and control panel.. The design in vista was one of my biggest hates on that os. I instantly tried to change as much of the styles tro classic as possible as its much faster and easier to navigate then the new vista or win 7 setup. I didnt even like the new xp layout. i want speed and ease and thats what the classic view does. I click start and everything i want is right there. I need control panel bam I want a program bam multiple chopices for the company application they slide right out and click done. In control panel 1 click gets where you want vista and win7 is like an expidition to find what used to be one click away. The new os systems dont really offer much for the home user to get excited about and the forced chnage of long time setups turns buyers away. I personally like 7 better then vista but like xp better then 7 due to ease of access. I say if MS has any sense left and truely want people to use windows 7 then they need to start listening to those who have the money to buy a new product. If you have so much demand for the simple fast classic setup just activate it and offer the new menus for those who dont mind taking for ever to find stuff. I hate keyboard commands and prefer ease of mouse clicks and nav. Keyboard command slow you down and take to long.... Side note Leon is an idiot in every way possible. Basically microsoft need to tweak out xp and would have been good. Cut down its memory use, stabilize it maybe a bit of refining and it would have been good. Vista introduced so much un needed everyday user garbage it wasnt even funny. Things like taking power tools away was stupid. The whole rotating widgets thing is annoying I removed all widget bs immediatly as its not needed and a waste of space. Windows 7 has potential but will fail if MS refuses to listen to its customer base who l;iked the option of classic. I am for options not one or the other but options so just turn it on satisfy your long time users and make some money simple...
    Wednesday, October 14, 2009 4:04 PM
  • Agree with everything you said. Introduction of all those "miki mouse" gadgets is the travesty of logic. Who need this garbage?
    Wednesday, October 14, 2009 4:15 PM
  • zomg whats so bad about classic & keyboards? [was reading the posts near the beginning about the keyboard]

    I love the classic menu, where everything is exactly where I left it. [I organize]
    I literally start programs with the monitor off! I dont have to wait to see the menu.
    I just hit for example, WinKey > P [programs] > N [networking] > V [vnc] > S [start server] & done. There that just started a VNC server without the need for a mouse & monitor.
    Friday, October 23, 2009 9:03 AM
  • I prefer the classic start menu for a very simple reason:  It allowed me to categorize the programs.  I do a lot of software development and and photo editing, so I created folders in the Start menu: "Development Tools" with my compilers, editors, etc.; "Graphics" with Photoshop and the other tools I use to edit and track photographs.

    I have a lot of programs that I do not use frequently.  My Start Menu allowed me to quickly find them.

    I do not see how to do that with the new "improved" Start Menu.  Maybe I could do it with Jump Lists, but these are not well documented.

    Michael Bate
    Friday, October 23, 2009 7:24 PM
  • I prefer the classic start menu because it allowed me to organize my computer the way i like most.
    And please give me back the "up" button for the explorer, too.

    Sunday, October 25, 2009 12:15 PM
  • I hate Windows 7 start menu
    I don't care for the "classic menu" from vista

    I do so love the start menu from XP, from the 1st time I used it I was in love.
    THAT is the one I want back. I like fly-out menus 

    I like most used progs being right there, I like start button u,u to turn off my PC

    I hate not being able to do anything about it.
    I also hate people telling me to "learn to love it" or  "evolve." I hate those jerks.

    Wednesday, October 28, 2009 12:29 AM
  • You know, the "Classic Start Menu" is CERTAINLY NOT one of those things users complained about and "asked for a change", right? So why did they change something we knew how to use so well and didn't have a problem with?   Right.   That's why we get so mad!
    Wednesday, October 28, 2009 1:29 AM
  • The Win 7 start menu isn't that different than the XP or Vista start menu. I believe the sole difference in function is the lack of flyout menus. Which by the way is  an option I think a user should be able to choose. I actually hate and can't stand the frequently used programs pane. But again it should be an option that someone can use or not. I've actually stayed with Vista which I like much more than Win 7. Vista still has many of the useful features that were removed from Win7. Vista has the option of using the clean functional classic start menu, it has a functioning search that doesn't require someone to learn a "search language", it has the drive space in the explorer status bar... In fact it has almost everything that people have been complaining that Win 7 lacks. Vista has all of the good things from Win 7 and few of the bad. Vista got trashed a lot by people but I think what they're going to find is that they never knew how good Vista was until they see Win 7. A friend of mine just leaned this... he waited to buy a new machine with Win 7 and was tearing his hair out over what should be simple things like searching for a file. And when I showed him the obtuse search language you now have to memorize in order to find anything in Win 7 he returned the machine.
    Wednesday, October 28, 2009 6:49 PM
  • Despite my comments about the Start Menu, I can't say it bothers me that much. My pet peeve is the Control Panel. As an XP user, after opening the Control Panel I'm sure I have a baffled look about me. Then I start saying to myself, now where the H--- do I find that?  MS says it's soooo intuitive....  But hey, after several months of everyday use, I'll know just where to go! Then they'll change around it again.
    Wednesday, October 28, 2009 11:11 PM
  • Despite my comments about the Start Menu, I can't say it bothers me that much. My pet peeve is the Control Panel. As an XP user, after opening the Control Panel I'm sure I have a baffled look about me. Then I start saying to myself, now where the H--- do I find that?  MS says it's soooo intuitive....  But hey, after several months of everyday use, I'll know just where to go! Then they'll change around it again.
    The question I find myself repeatedly asking is "why did they change something that worked just fine to begin with". There is never going to be a new arrangement that is as intuitive as what you've been using for years. I've continued using Vista which I find much better than Win7. Vista has the ability to make a lot of it function like XP while Win7 broke entirely with what customers demonstrated in drove that they preferred. It's as though MS is angry at their customer base for liking their own product so they want to punish people who liked XP by making Win7 as different as possible... even if the difference serves no purpose. vista got a lot of bad press and criticism but I think once people see Win7, Vista won't look so bad any longer. Hey maybe that's the secret plan... "Okay you hate Vista.... here's a taste of how bad it could be".
    Friday, October 30, 2009 6:15 PM
  • I am assuming that you are looking at this as "eye candy" instead of accessibility. Part of my job at my current employer is to train and setup accessible accommodations for blind and visually impaired computer users.

     

    The classic start menu was very helpful for setting up minimum keystroke navigation.

     

    Examples:

    To run Internet Explorer, the user can hit the Windows key and the “I” key in sequence.

    To run Microsoft Excel (after renaming the shortcut), the user can hit the windows key and “E” in sequence.

    To run Outlook Express, the user can hit the window key and “O” of key in sequence.

     

    Since Windows 7 does not have access to change the start menu, the user would require striking more keys to run a favorite program. I’ve tried to “pin” a program (or two), but it requires hitting four keys (minimum) in sequence to run a program. My coworker made a suggestion to assign a combination keystroke to run a program, but it is an issue if the user has dexterity issues as well as short term memory.

     

    Myself, as well as other computer accessibility instructors will continue to constantly ask Microsoft to return the Classic Start Menu option in Windows 7.

     

    Eye candy doesn’t matter if you can’t see it.

    Monday, November 9, 2009 6:29 PM
  • DISGUSTING! There is absolutely NO reason to disable the Classic Start Menu. Perhaps Leon wants to grow up but that is not the point with the other 14 million people who prefer having the -option- of the Classic Start Menu. Microsoft owes me $25 for having to purchase a third party Classic Start Menu. Grow up Microsoft, disabling options is childish!

    Sunday, November 15, 2009 2:24 PM
  • Listen to me Microsoft and listen to me good!
    We want our Classic Start Menu in Windows 7
    and we want it NOW!
    Sunday, November 15, 2009 2:29 PM
  • This thread could choke a horse, and I think that proves what I have been saying since Vista, and especially since the release of Office 2007.

    Along with a lot of you in here, I am a firm believer that MS didn’t have to change everything so drastically. Rje49 said something that I’ve been saying for a long time, now. Why would you take something (and not only the start menu) that people have been used to using for the past 14 years, and completely obliterate it?

    Windows 7 could have easily been XP rebuilt with Vista-like features and security. The GUI could have remained basically the same (in Office, as well), maybe with a few minor changes, but nothing as drastic as this. Changes like this should have been done in a progression, not all at once.

    I’m not saying that I hate this setup. I’m saying that I can think of no reason to convince me that any of this was a good idea. I can learn it, and have been learning it out of sheer necessity. After all, what little choice we Windows users have when it comes to things that run on Windows only.

    And don’t tell people like me to “go to Linux” or “buy a Mac”. That’s about as retarded as telling a bus boy to go in the kitchen and cook Duck L'orange. Sure, he could do it, but it’s still a learning process. If I am going to learn, it may as well be with the OS that my software was written for, and the OS that the vast majority works with. So, that whole argument is invalid.

    Just my opinion…

    Tuesday, January 26, 2010 2:24 PM
  • Here's a free classic menu and explorer shell:   http://classicshell.sourceforge.net/   Works good.  I'm one of those who love the classic menu and classic features.  This adds a lot of that to Win7.  I just wish it also included classic folders.  But, for the price, I can't complain. 
    Sunday, February 14, 2010 4:35 AM
  • what a load of s**t.

    when i start type "able" to open ableton live on windows 7.. i get a whole list of search results for files and other programs, none of which are the ableton live program i want. if i finish typing ableton, then among the results i get a directory named ableton, which is the ableton documents folder, also not what i am looking for. so i have to use the programs list which on my system is a mile long. frustratingly slow compared to the past.

    and i can give you 10 other examples of the same problem. sometimes it works sometimes it doesn't. microsoft have drastically underestimated the complexity of some users configurations and drastically overestimated the usefulness of the new start menu.

    i used to be able to organise and index shortcuts to everything i need, in the traditional and most logical natural way there is, same as the files system, a tree. previously i would click start / music / ableton live   or start / dev / notepad++   etc    now i would have to type the whole word notepad and then click down to select notepad++ instead of notepad because if I type ++ into the search it is ignored, obviously.

    the attitude you are displaying here is the same attitude that makes new microsoft developments so irritating to so many users.

    i now almost never use the start menu, instead i use a custom toolbar to navigate shortcuts and keep the same system of organising myself that i have been using for 20 years. 

    so what's next? no more file system directories? will windows 8 eliminate support for fat and ntfs in favour of forcing us to all use an all a new radical search based system? these ideas are stupid. grow up and realise some things work in some situations for some people and not others.

    how hard is it to swap one taskbar or start menu control with another? i'll just have to do it myself.

    all i want is to press the windows key, press M for music and L for live and hit enter. soOooOOO much faster!  

     

     

    Sunday, November 21, 2010 11:20 PM
  • I completely agree with what you are saying here. Using keyboard funtions rather than trying to navigate the Windows 7 menus is way easier and especially more so if you have Office 2010 installed. I guess MS wants users to forget the mouse and get used to a more Linux feel. It makes far more sence for users to give up what they have been doing for over 10 years and learn a whole new interface all over again. Especially when you have a business with thousands of employees calling the help desk regularily asking where to find stuff. Definately a $$ generator/burner for sure. Just like creating an industry for programmers like CSMenu. Good job MS.

     

    FYI, once I figure out how to get rid of the tooltips and create a stable, functional and Customizable OS shell for Wiindows 7, I'll update this thread with the location as to where you can download it for a fee. (no, not free)

    Friday, February 18, 2011 4:50 PM
  • Well, Classic Shell is stable and adds the classic menu and the classic explorer and the last update adds the search box from the windows 7 menu if you want it.  It is highly customizable and supports the aero glass themes if you want that.  It's pretty much everything you could want from the classic windows interface and it is totally free.  Along with the workaround for the quick launch menu and someone nice enough to create a Rainy Day theme (for Vista, but it works for Windows 7) about the only way you can tell I'm running windows 7 is that little discolored speck at the far right of the taskbar that is the new version of show desktop (and if you ask me, it's on the completely wrong side for how most people set up their desktop).  Personally, I couldn't be happier with windows 7 now that I have it looking and behaving like the classic.  Classic Shell also includes the XP style menu and the latest version can attach the pop out menu to the all programs entry in the windows 7 menu.  And, finally, all you have to do is shift click on the start button and you get the new menu.
    Thursday, February 24, 2011 6:55 AM
  • And it (ClassicShell) works GREAT with Windows 7 SP1!

    -Noel

    Friday, February 25, 2011 3:44 AM
  • I'm sure Microsoft plans to keep releasing operating systems for a long time. Microsoft has also been accused of making "bloatware". And now they have people yelling at them, saying that they have to keep every feature of past operating systems as an "option" in newer versions. They really can't win, huh? I'd have to say I agree with their decision, however, to heed the valid bloatware criticisms and ignore the "bring back the old start menu" lobby. 
    Wednesday, May 11, 2011 12:38 AM
  • Change is hard to accept as you age. I think that's a large factor here. You learned one thing in years past, got accustomed to it, and now it's harder to master than if you were younger and relatively new to computers. This is why one year olds can master smartphones with more ease than their parents -- their minds are in a learning mode, with no prejudices to as how it "should be".
    Wednesday, May 11, 2011 12:43 AM
  • Do you know how big Windows would be if they packaged every prior version of the OS along with it?
    Wednesday, May 11, 2011 12:44 AM
  • @ Dr. Strangelove
    If Microsoft has not heard the complaints by now, they never will.
     

    Micro$oft are too big. Their attitude is and always will be "our way or no way". They have no regard for their users since most of us use Windows only because it is the industry standard and as such, we have to, whether it be for games or office. I would sincerely love for the office and games industry to switch to a Unix base and screw them completely. The old adage "the customer is always right" is lost on them.

    I have a new PC with Windows 7 installed. First thing I'm going to do is wipe the hard disk and install XP, at least I knew what I was doing with that and won't have to spend weeks learning how to use it and find everything.

     

    Wednesday, September 21, 2011 12:06 PM