POST A COMMENT

76 Comments

Back to Article

  • thesuperject - Thursday, May 30, 2013 - link

    Do we know what boot modifications other than booting to the all apps view will be made? I'm of course really hoping for the option to boot straight to desktop, but I'm a bit skeptical since they didn't specifically say that would be available. Reply
  • B3an - Thursday, May 30, 2013 - link

    It can boot to either the Desktop, Start screen, or All Apps screen. By default it boot to the Start screen. Reply
  • Death666Angel - Thursday, May 30, 2013 - link

    Pretty easy to hack Win8 to go to desktop already:
    http://lmgtfy.com/?q=windows+8+launch+to+desktop
    Reply
  • JDG1980 - Thursday, May 30, 2013 - link

    No real Start menu? Fail.
    Title bar text still centered rather than left-aligned? Fail.
    All searches on your PC piped through Bing? Massive privacy (and antitrust) fail.
    SkyDrive? Fail. I can do without "the cloud".
    Hopefully there will at least be a GPO setting to turn the Bing and SkyDrive nonsense off.
    Reply
  • Lonyo - Thursday, May 30, 2013 - link

    It has a start menu.
    They just called it the Start Screen, and it's a screen menu rather than a menu in the bottom left.
    Reply
  • JDG1980 - Thursday, May 30, 2013 - link

    I don't want it to fill the full screen. Why should it? The old version worked fine without completely blocking out everything else I was working on. Reply
  • B3an - Thursday, May 30, 2013 - link

    Why should it not fill the screen? It makes way more sense. It shows way more stuff and useful information (that also updates) than a tiny list in the Start Menu ever did.

    And you can't do anything else when the Start Menu is open anyway, if you click outside of it, it will close. So why would you even need to see other stuff?? You open it to launch a program or search for something, which the Start screen does better as it shows more information.
    Reply
  • shiznit - Thursday, May 30, 2013 - link

    No it doesn't make sense. 99% of the time I hit the WinKey/Start Button is to type the first few letter of whatever application or file I want to open and the hit Enter.

    Why do I need that taking the whole screen? Another way OS X is now superior to Windows. Yes I said it, flame away.
    Reply
  • elmicker - Thursday, May 30, 2013 - link

    "No it doesn't make sense. 99% of the time I hit the WinKey/Start Button is to type the first few letter of whatever application or file I want to open and the hit Enter."

    So why can't you do that in Win8? That process is identical - the only difference is for that fraction of a second you're typing your screen is purple. You're not actually using the screen when going through that use case, so losing the screen isn't a negative. For all the use cases where the start menu would be used - searching for something unknown, having a rich, full-screen interface makes a LOT of sense.
    Reply
  • Shaocaholica - Friday, May 31, 2013 - link

    Going full screen for anything is jarring. It shouldn't be something that happens often and was a poor choice for a desktop OS.

    Visually, especially with big monitors, having the whole screen(s) change from one color to another can really strain your eyes. Something thats not a big deal on phones and small tablets but annoying on big desktop displays and TVs.
    Reply
  • UltraTech79 - Friday, May 31, 2013 - link

    Rich full screen interface my ass. Its not 'rich' its bloated shit that tries to pawn itself off as minimalist. It is neither. Reply
  • mr_tawan - Thursday, May 30, 2013 - link

    You can do that, regardless of the menu taking the whole screen (Windows 8) or not (Windows 7). Reply
  • JarredWalton - Thursday, May 30, 2013 - link

    No, actually -- there's one key difference. On Win7, type "Firewall" as one example. You get one program at the top "Windows Firewall with Advanced Security", followed by four entries under Control Panel ("Windows Firewall", "Allow a program through Windows Firewall", "Check firewall status", and "Check security status"), and then below that are any documents, pictures, or files that match. Under Windows 8, what you get is "No apps match your search", so you have to go to the "Settings" section where you see four entries, or the "Files" section below that. So instead of "Firewall[Enter]" you end up typing "Firewall" [Down x2][Enter][Enter] and you end up at a slightly different screen.

    This may seem like a minor detail, but there are numerous other things you might type (Resolution, Network, or anything that isn't considered an app) where you have to go to the Control Panel or Files screens to find what you're after -- there's no "all results in one page" option, though perhaps that's part of what's changing with Search on Windows 8.1.

    And then there's the whole "swap out everything on your screen for the Start Screen" aspect. On a tablet or a small display, it might not seem like a big deal, but on a 30" monitor let me tell you: I don't need a freaking 2560x1600 screen just to show me a list of four items, one of which I'm going to click. It's a huge visual transition that just doesn't need to happen, and IMO it looks like crap.
    Reply
  • EnzoFX - Thursday, May 30, 2013 - link

    Exactly. This should silence those pro-metro start screen, if you could call it that. The question isn't why not, it's why, as far as a Desktop screen is concerned. Reply
  • MisterAlex - Thursday, May 30, 2013 - link

    It's especially ridiculous when you're typing your search based on something you're looking at on-screen (e.g. a tutorial in a web browser). I reverted to Win7 on my desktop machine. I sold my Windows laptop and bought a MacBook. Reply
  • lmcd - Thursday, May 30, 2013 - link

    what you get is "No apps match your search", so you have to go to the "Settings" section where you see four entries, or the "Files" section below that.

    --Jarred Walton

    This is being fixed according to other sources.
    Reply
  • whatthehey - Friday, May 31, 2013 - link

    I think you might want to check those "sources". What they're doing is unified search, but not in the same way as the Win7/Vista Start Menu -- now along with a search of your local files, apps, settings, you will be getting Internet searches as well. That might not be so bad, but Bing is the power behind the Internet searching, and I'll be damned if I've ever enjoyed Bing search results -- all of MS' advertising notwithstanding! Reply
  • MrSpadge - Friday, May 31, 2013 - link

    "So instead of "Firewall[Enter]" you end up typing "Firewall" [Down x2][Enter][Enter]"

    That's the only issue I have with the Win 8 start emnu, eh screen. Working around it by going straight to the control panel in an explorer window if I know what I'm searching is in the control panel.
    Reply
  • Hubb1e - Thursday, May 30, 2013 - link

    No, you can't just start typing. You have to choose between apps, files, or settings first which is worse than windows 7 which included anything. I believe this was done because of slower tablets. I've tried to like windows 8 but it's terrible and this update doesn't really address any of my concerns. Plus it's ugly... Reply
  • Hubb1e - Thursday, May 30, 2013 - link

    I should also add that the search bar is way up in the top right corner of the screen while the start button is way down on the far bottom left which is a huge movement of a mouse on a large screen. It's just a terrible UI for a mouse. Reply
  • inighthawki - Thursday, May 30, 2013 - link

    You are aware you don't need to click the box to start typing on either OS, right? Reply
  • Death666Angel - Thursday, May 30, 2013 - link

    Of course you can start typing. Though the default is Apps, you can change to the other 2 after you typed. You don't have to know where it is you are looking before you type. Reply
  • sphigel - Friday, May 31, 2013 - link

    You're wrong about that. You can start typing immediately but it will default to searching apps. If you want to search files or settings currently you'd have to click that group. Anyways, it's changing in 8.1 and searching should be just as quick and powerful as it was in 7. Reply
  • lmcd - Thursday, May 30, 2013 - link

    You can do the same thing now. Hit start and begin typing in Windows 8. Try it. Reply
  • shiznit - Thursday, May 30, 2013 - link

    to the people saying "you can still do that", read above. But that is not the point. The point is that W7 and OS X and others do it BETTER. They made the UI worse in the sake of forcing people into their tablet UI and turned an otherwise respectable upgrade into a joke, hoping it would eventually lead people buy tablets that look the same. Could have worked 5 years ago, but now we have better options. Reply
  • UltraTech79 - Friday, May 31, 2013 - link

    It should not fill the screen because it doesn't NEED to fill the screen. Why take up more space for absolutely no advantage? metro is shit. Windows 7 UI was a step forward from XP and most people enjoyed it because it was simply GOOD DESIGN. Metro is done terribly in most places. Its done well in places like the task manager where it looks beautiful though. Reply
  • Sabresiberian - Sunday, June 02, 2013 - link

    Because I don't want to see my 27" monitor covered up by app squares or rectangles and on a background supplied by MS. And even if my only complaint came down to a "pretty picture" one when I'm not running apps full screen, it is still a valid one.

    I'm overall FOR Win 8, it has enough improvements under the hood to justify buying it over Win 7 for my personal use. That being said, MS has decided that forcing me into what should be an entirely optional way to interface with my computer doesn't sit well with me.

    Whatever; I'm smart enough and flexible enough to get along without a "Start menu", right-clicking the bottom left corner gives me most of what it provided that I use anyway. And, I get that MS doesn't want to confuse the lowest common denominator with options, and that is possibly a good thing. They are also adding the capability to make the Start screen a portion of the desktop, which I think is an excellent idea, one that I've proposed in several posts, though it doesn't sound like it will be entirely what I want, which is simply a phone-sized area of the desktop that I can make look just like my phone.

    MS has shown it IS listening to the complaints. Win 8.1 may not address them all, but it is a step in the right direction, and I think people should be focused more on what it brings than being so negative about what it doesn't. By all means continue to give MS CONSTRUCTIVE criticism (no one listens to whiners), but also give them credit where it is due.
    Reply
  • Chrysaor - Thursday, May 30, 2013 - link

    You can pin your apps to the taskbar, or create shortcuts. If you don't want to use the start screen, you don't have to. Reply
  • JDG1980 - Thursday, May 30, 2013 - link

    But without third-party add-ons, I can't use the start *menu*, which is what I want.
    And I don't pin anything to the taskbar - I have it set up to look and work like it does in Windows XP (Never combine, use small icons, 'Disable pinning to taskbar' enabled in local Group Policy, Quick Launch toolbar re-added).
    Reply
  • andrewaggb - Thursday, May 30, 2013 - link

    Curious, why would you re-add the quick launch toolbar and disable pinning? The other stuff I get is a personal preference thing.... but I can't think of any reason why the quick launch bar would be preferential to pinning. I guess because pinning groups with running apps?

    Personally I really liked the windows 7 desktop changes but I guess that doesn't mean everybody does.
    Reply
  • JDG1980 - Thursday, May 30, 2013 - link

    Yes, I don't like intermingling app shortcuts with indications of running apps. I prefer being able to tell at a glance at the bottom of the screen which items are running. The combined "superbar" doesn't do that, but fortunately it's easy on Windows 7 to set things back to the way they used to be. Reply
  • sadsteve - Friday, May 31, 2013 - link

    The icons on the quick launch take up a lot less space on the task bar than a pinned app. Reply
  • mircea - Thursday, May 30, 2013 - link

    You know you could have chosen from many OS's to "use the start *menu*, which is what I want."
    Windows 95 / Windows 98 / Windows 98SE / Windows ME / Windows NT/ Windows 2000 / Windows XP / Windows Vista and a bunch of Linux versions.
    So please stop complaining about the missing/hard to configure taskbar or missing options of a start button. You choose to use Windows 8, no one forced you to.
    The ONLY 2 things I really messed by the lack of Start Button is a closer click to shutdown/switch users/restart (if you really want to mouse/touch click a shutdown button instead of a hardware button, or use shortcut keys) and the search that needs first to be told to look in apps, store or files. Everything else I found I can do slightly faster or as fast as in Win7.
    Reply
  • Bull Dog - Thursday, May 30, 2013 - link

    Why should be have to accept regression? Reply
  • oldabelincoln - Thursday, May 30, 2013 - link

    AMEN! Reply
  • AbbyYen - Friday, May 31, 2013 - link

    Please,,,,,,they, AKA microsuck force you to use win 8. for every new laptop with shiny hardware out there now force you can't buy what you suggested.

    I have cash pile up because of the 16:9 screen and now those lcd offering are getting into acceptable range with 1080p ( I still want 16:10).

    I can't buy and use nice laptop without going to the rout of workstation of business laptop with the size and weight bigger then those 90s Compaq EVO lappy.

    even the direction keys in lappy have shrink into baby finger size.
    all these greedy, retard, big head, ignorant buffalo manufacturers should die. who are they to decide what's good and not for us?

    please bring back those care thinking engineer for god shake. stop listening to those clueless so called MBA graduate.

    I'm sorry for all these rant because we have been tying to win Eco and culture. I know we need to move on for next century tablet types of portability productivity devices. But how hard can it be to design something run on OS like xp or win 7 in lappy mode, and when you plug away the screen you get win8 to start with the work you're doing on lappy mode? store those code in the tablet memory and once u unplug the lcd it start up win8 and load the work together eg: words, Excel and etc.

    you have all the time and resource and also market share for you to think and evolve. win8 is a selfish, rush and sub par product from stevy ballmerry.
    Reply
  • Stuka87 - Thursday, May 30, 2013 - link

    So you are saying we have to just sit back and accept MS taking away one of the most used features in Windows 7 just so they can poorly implement a touch interface on millions of machines that don't have touch screens?

    Not to mention even if most of those machines had touch screens, they would go unused because touch interfaces are inherently slower when using a mouse and keyboard. Well unless you have three arms. Then you would not have to lift your hand off the mouse and stretch up to the screen.
    Reply
  • guidryp - Thursday, May 30, 2013 - link

    Does absolutely nothing to address my concerns with Win8. Sticking with Win7 indefinitely. This may be my last Windows PC. Reply
  • p_giguere1 - Thursday, May 30, 2013 - link

    Did you consider third-party utilities that could potentially address your concerns?
    Start8, Classic Shell, Pokki, StartIsBack, Start Menu 8?
    Reply
  • JDG1980 - Thursday, May 30, 2013 - link

    Is there any third-party utility that causes the title bar text to be left-justified like it was in all previous versions of Windows?
    I know it sounds like a small thing, but the centering of that text really screws up my eye-tracking.
    Reply
  • Pirks - Thursday, May 30, 2013 - link

    good luck with becoming macfag Reply
  • Zeratul56 - Thursday, May 30, 2013 - link

    Come to think of it, the launch pad works very similar to the windows 8 start menu. Not that I have a problem with either approach. The hate against windows 8 is unjustified. It is superior to windows 7 in every way. Reply
  • danstek - Thursday, May 30, 2013 - link

    Os X launch pad works more like the android application drawer than anything else and the dock holds frequently used apps across desktop/home screen. Reply
  • inighthawki - Thursday, May 30, 2013 - link

    " The hate against windows 8 is unjustified. It is superior to windows 7 in every way."

    As a Windows 8 fan who is apparently one of few who like the start screen, I cannot agree with this. The start screen has advantages, and works fine for me, but there are disadvantages, and very clearly many areas for improvement that they haven't touched on at all.
    Reply
  • piiman - Saturday, June 01, 2013 - link

    Well thanks for clearing that up. If only someone had told me you that it was Zeratul56 approved it would have made it all better. But if its so much better why is it not selling well and 90% of the comments don't agree with you? I guesss you just know what we all like and need? Reply
  • gannic - Thursday, May 30, 2013 - link

    Yep buy a Mac so that you will have your Start menu back .... oooooh wait Reply
  • warezme - Thursday, May 30, 2013 - link

    Windows 7 FTW Reply
  • Bull Dog - Thursday, May 30, 2013 - link

    I am a desktop user, and none of these changes Microsoft is talking about look to be fixing any of the core problems that haunt Windows 8. Wooooo changes! So what?

    I was attracted to Windows 8 because I wanted the better Task Manager and better Copy dialog. However when I tried Windows 8, I found it to be a nearly unusable, non-stop train of frustration and misery. I would go so far as to posit that stock Windows 8 is an unmitigated disaster for desktop users. Thankfully other brave souls have created solutions that I was able to utilize to restore Windows 8 to a usable state. I use StartIsBack and I found a desktop theme that doesn’t drive me crazy.

    My main monitor is a Dell U2711 (27in, 2560x1440) and for me, the Modern UI Start Screen is a complete farce. There is nothing it does, that the Windows 7 style Start Menu doesn't do better. The Start Menu's search function is vastly better than the Start Screen's. When performing a search, the Start Menu displays results from all applicable categories in an easy to read list. In contrast, the Start Screen's Apps, Settings, and Files categories only display one at a time and require the user to perform additional mousing and extra clicks view all the results from a search.

    This brings me to another point about the absurdity of using the Modern UI Start Screen and Apps on a Desktop PC. Because it is full screen, everything requires ridiculous amounts of mouse movement to reach various UI elements. As an example, shutting down the computer with a mouse in stock Windows 8, requires around 100% more mouse movement and an extra click compared to using the Start Menu.

    I also fought an issue with the Desktop Modern UI theme. I always set my Taskbar Buttons to “Combine when taskbar is full.” Because of the following:
    1. The title bar text on windows, like file explorer, is black.
    2. The text in the taskbar is white.
    3. There is no separate adjustment for window border color and taskbar color.

    It is impossible to have good readability in both the task bar and title bars. One is left with four choices:
    1. Bright colors with good title bar readability
    2. Dark colors with good task bar contrast and unusable title bars
    3. Medium colors with poor contrast and readability in both areas.
    4. Hassling with finding a custom theme that doesn’t do something else equally stupid.

    As a last positive aside, I don’t miss Windows Aero Glass, and I especially like not getting kicked back to Windows Aero Basic when I load a program that won’t run with Aero Glass.
    Reply
  • andrewaggb - Thursday, May 30, 2013 - link

    I agree the searching was way better in windows 7. But they've specifically said they are fixing it with unified search in 8.1 Reply
  • oldabelincoln - Thursday, May 30, 2013 - link

    Bul Dog - Thanks for saving me from having to reiterate those items. I'm getting tired of the focus on the start menu/button, because anyone cen easily fix that with 3rd party solutions that are free and work. The painful issues you list are the REAL "screw the desktop user" issues - MS has hardcoded these things into 8, driving me - and appearently you as well - NUTS! 8 is a great OS with a hideous GUI - but it's the GUI where most of us spend a lot of time. If I have to switch OS's to get a UI as polished as 7's was, then I will do so - and so will a lot of other Windows users.

    MS appears to care only about tablet users at this point.
    Reply
  • jaydee - Thursday, May 30, 2013 - link

    So as a desktop, non-touch screen, Star8 dock, Win8Pro user this pretty much means nothing to me, am I understanding this right? Reply
  • Tuffrabbit - Thursday, May 30, 2013 - link

    Still sounds like a downgrade from Win 7... About all I use windows for anymore now days is just gaming, Mac for everything else... Reply
  • andrewaggb - Thursday, May 30, 2013 - link

    Biggest selling point for windows 8 is the boot time in my books. My wifes laptop is 3 years old with a 128gb intel ssd 320. nothing really special. from power on to start screen is 10 seconds. That includes all the bios time and everything else. I'm sure a good computer, particularly with a fast ssd and a faster bios could do it in much less time. Every computer I've put windows 8 on boots fast. It's nice. Reply
  • xdrol - Thursday, May 30, 2013 - link

    Let's Windows 8 boots 5 seconds on a machine with SSD. So what? Even it Windows 7 boots three times as slow, it's 15 seconds. Show me one person who actually cares.

    If your Win7 boots noticeably slow, buy a freaking SSD, problem solved.
    Reply
  • designerfx - Thursday, May 30, 2013 - link

    with the UEFI windows 8 restrictions, I will never be buying windows 8. Not going to be forced to agree to TOS just to boot the machine, either. Reply
  • inighthawki - Thursday, May 30, 2013 - link

    Are you referring to the secure boot issue? Windows 8 boots just fine with secure boot turned off, leaving you with the same level of security as any previous version of windows, and allows multi OS booting as well. I see no issue here... Reply
  • freedom4556 - Friday, May 31, 2013 - link

    It does, does it? Not my experience. Have you tried mutli-booting an OEM Windows 8 machine? We needed to dual-boot Windows 7 for a training class at work, and as soon as I disabled secure boot, the OE Win8 imaged stopped working with a message to turn secure boot back on. Now, I turned it back on after the class, and it booted just fine, so at least there was no permanent damage, but flipping a bios setting every time I wanna boot something not Windows 8 is ridiculous. Reply
  • Latzara - Thursday, May 30, 2013 - link

    Can't believe the continued colossal whine about the start button like nothing works without it and you can't function if you don't have it. It's really ridiculous. Reply
  • Inteli - Thursday, May 30, 2013 - link

    I can't believe the colossal whine about the start screen being just as good to people who obviously don't care. I don't like the start screen on a desktop, yet it seems perfect for a tablet. The start screen seems like a colossal waste of space on a desktop. Honestly, if you give me an actual start menu Windows 7 style in Windows 8 (without a 3rd party program) and let me never again see metro, I'll happily buy Windows 8. If Microsoft included both the Windows 95 start menu and the Windows XP start menu in Windows XP, how much harder could it be to have the start menu and the start screen, with the ability to enable/disable one or the other? Not saying it wouldn't be harder, but it can't be so difficult that they can't reasonably put it in. It would sure please a lot of people. Reply
  • EnzoFX - Thursday, May 30, 2013 - link

    Of course they can, the problem is they don't want to. They want the start screen to take hold, so grow, forced or not, they're banking on it. Reply
  • Dentons - Friday, May 31, 2013 - link

    It wouldn't be hard for Microsoft to add a start menu, in fact they've done it. As I understand it, pre-release builds of Windows 8 included a fully working start button and start menu that could be activated with a registry edit.

    The problem is that Microsoft has strategically positioned Windows 8 to save their stagnant mobile platform. To do that, the desktop has to feature Metro. (or is it 'not-metro')

    Their mobile platform is in a chicken or egg position. Users won't buy it until it has apps, but app builders won't bother until it has users. It's why they're forcing the start screen onto desktop users. It also why they took away Aero Glass, mobile doesn't have the GPU for it. They're praying that if they force Metro down the throats of every user in Windows ecosystem, the app developers will follow.

    Given the recent 14% drop in PC sales, Microsoft's stand on this is only likely to strengthen. They certainly realize that to lose mobile is to lose the war. They know this is a far larger threat to their hegemony than the Internet was in '90s.

    Except this time, much of the cost is being paid by Microsoft's biggest customers. Enterprises who are loathe to retrain their employees and system builders who are seeing terribly diminished sales. These customers are not at all happy to paying the price for Microsoft's mobile plans. They're starting to push back. Android and Chrome seem to be the biggest beneficiaries.

    It's why Android and Chrome notebooks are being released by all the big names.
    Reply
  • haplo602 - Friday, May 31, 2013 - link

    On the contrary, tablets and phones DO have the GPU to fully use Aero. They don't have the battery power for it :-)

    I am quite amused about all the windows 8 discussion. I did not use Windows past XP (I will have to upgrade to 7 on the company laptopt this year however). I ma using XFCE on Linux, a "primitive" desktop by Windows standards. However it has everything I need and more (virtual desktops are a big feature for me). And since Steam on Linux is taking off slowly, my gaming needs will be taken care of in time.

    Don't take this as a Linux rant, I just want to point out that different things work for different people and that's the problem with Windows at the moment. Microsoft is restricting options quite heavily.
    Reply
  • piiman - Saturday, June 01, 2013 - link

    And options is what Windows has always been big on. Now they want to take options away to force us to the metro BS and MS store and services. There should be optoions during install for , Desktop non touch, Desktop touch, Laptop non touch, Laptop Touch and Tablet. Give us back our options MS! Reply
  • EnzoFX - Thursday, May 30, 2013 - link

    Like Inteli says, you clearly don't care. There are people who do, who can just as clearly see the painful differences. Furthermore, of course it's all relative, we're talking about just an OS, so throwing around superlatives isn't much of an argument. As far as one aspect of an OS, it is a failure as far as Desktop screens are concerned. Laptops and tablets are another matter. Reply
  • Dentons - Friday, May 31, 2013 - link

    Why should we spend money on Windows 8 when it will require third-party utilities (that also cost money or time) just to make Win8 function as well as the Windows 7 we already have?

    It's clear that Microsoft is forcing Metro down the throats of desktop users in order to buttress their stagnant mobile platform. They're doing this at the cost of their customers. Change has a cost. Retraining has a cost. Change for no good reason has unrecoverable cost.

    Microsoft is not doing what their users want or need, they're doing the opposite in order to help Microsoft's strategic vision. They clearly feel that to give users what the want would threaten their business strategy. To that I say, too bad.

    My enterprise fully realizes why Microsoft is doing this. That's why we are definitely skipping Windows 8 and are even talking about moving off of Windows entirely. By treating desktop users as fodder for their mobile plans, Microsoft runs a real risk of losing the enterprise desktop, perhaps even the consumer desktop.
    Reply
  • James5mith - Friday, May 31, 2013 - link

    I'm so glad they are bringing back unified search. It was extremely frustrating that they segmented search in Windows 8. Windows 7 unified search was awesome, and segmenting where the system would search by default was a step backwards for me. Hooray for them listening.

    Now if only they would return "jumplists/recent items" to items on the Start menu like they were in windows 7, I would have no more complaints about windows 8. It's the last major lament I have about the change. I liked being able to right click on notepad and find recent items, without having to have notepad pinned on my taskbar.
    Reply
  • Da W - Friday, May 31, 2013 - link

    If don't have a touchscreen, why don't you just stick with Windows 7 and stop bitching and moaning all over the internet?
    Especially those who bought an Android tablet, it's your fault if Microsoft felt the urge to move that way!
    Metro is here to stay. You can either adopt it, move to linux, move to android, move to mac, but please, just shut the &*?&* up.

    Written from my surface pro while my desktop is collecting dust and spider webs in the basement.
    Reply
  • BMNify - Friday, May 31, 2013 - link

    Why buy a Surface Pro when I can just RDP from my Android tablet? Reply
  • Da W - Friday, May 31, 2013 - link

    Cause a surface pro is 10X more powerful and i'm not a cheap bastard who buy 200$ pieces of plastic crap. Reply
  • BMNify - Friday, May 31, 2013 - link

    My desktop that I RDP into is 10x more powerful than a Surface Pro and stores more than 100x the data. My Android has more than twice the battery life and is powerful enough for what I need. I'm not a fool who wastes a $1000+ on an unnecessary device. Not to mention the apps available for my Android dwarf that of your Surface Pro or that if I were to break or lose it I'm terribly concerned both because it's not expensive and my data is safe and sound on my desktop (with RAID and auto backup to a NAS) not in the "cloud".

    And just for fun, are you aware that the insurance companies in America are working with OSHA to ban non-portable touch devices (aka touch screen desktops) citing liability concerns to due ergonomics? MS can't win a lobbying war against this kind of force. I'm struggling to see a need for Windows touch at all.

    Anyway, enjoy your toy.
    Reply
  • freedom4556 - Friday, May 31, 2013 - link

    Yaaaaay, we got our button back! Now I don't have to shoot for an invisible 4x4 pixel square on my multi-monitor setups and in VMs! Reply
  • gkltoo - Friday, May 31, 2013 - link

    A Windows Start Button without an accompanying application menu system has all the cachet of the heavy spring-loaded start foot button on the floorboards of a 30's - 40's Chevrolet. Reply
  • Fly by - Friday, May 31, 2013 - link

    I concede that I am a computer user, not a technical enthusiast. Notwithstanding some technical improvements, for me Win 8 fails in concept. I loved Win 7, my first impression of Win 8 was that I hated it.

    There is a significant interface functionality problem. This is not about user preferences for older familiar OS that will change in time. Attempting to create a hybrid integration of mobile devices with splashy screen chunks may work on the mobile device but it takes away complexity and useability for traditional PC users. I found it the least intuitive of MS's OS releases. It took me a while to find how to exit a page, ridiculous. The throw away concession to the old interface is less useful than Win 7.

    Then of course, we have the obvious attempt to corner software use by flooding us with MS or approved software. Feels greedy to me and bloaty.

    Solution? 2 OS systems, one for the mobile must haves and the 2nd OS for desktop users extending the functionality of Win 7.

    In nature hybrids either thrive or die. Desktops are here to stay and may ring the death knell for Win 8. For the first time ever for me Apple is starting to look attractive despite the heavy handed proprietary structure and cost.
    Reply
  • rwei - Friday, May 31, 2013 - link

    Never thought I'd see the day when Engadget was more comprehensive than Anandtech. What gives?
    http://www.engadget.com/2013/05/30/microsoft-windo...
    Reply
  • moonflower1952 - Friday, June 21, 2013 - link

    One day long ago an IT boss told me that windows 3.11 could never be beaten by anyone including MS. Also told my ONE DAY they would have a DVD 12 speed spinner. NO MACHINE could ever handle anything more powerful. Any thing higher than 3.11 would be secret military business to do with nuclear weapons.
    Even at the time I thought he as a bit of a dick head. You see I like drawing and photo's and knew in my heart MS would make something better 'cause computers are all about drawing and photos.
    I am 60 now and cannot wait for my 70th birthday... just think what America will be inventing and what China is copying . Life is great if you are happy and believe in a better, faster, small , ball ripping future.
    Reply
  • peter589 - Tuesday, February 18, 2014 - link

    The most upset thing is the serial number will invalid sooner or latter, if you hate that, you can search **online windows key**on google, wish it helps! Reply

Log in

Don't have an account? Sign up now