3 ms·

The start screen and missing start button are indeed steps forward when implemented properly and I think Microsoft is most of the way there. I would be very di

The start screen and missing start button are indeed steps forward when implemented properly and I think Microsoft is most of the way there. I would be very displeased if they added the start menu or button back. There is still a start button, and they made it larger. The four corners of the screen are the fastest and easiest targets to acquire aside from the pixel directly under the current mouse position. The lower left corner is infinitely larger and easier of a target to hit than the old start button. The only place this breaks down is inside a virtual machine (you can still use the corner to open the menu but it's significantly slower). As for the start screen replacing the start menu on the desktop, I think it's still a net win. How often do you need to see your current desktop while navigating the start menu? I can't think of one occurrence in my ten or so years of using Windows on a daily basis. If the rest of the screen is not actively used for the task, why fill it with noise? The start screen on all of the Windows 8 installs that I've used opens just as fast as the previous start menu. I primarily use search (Windows Key + Start Typing...) and it works better than the previous version by taking advantage of the additional space on the screen. I'm not sure if this is even a story. What's a rational well-reasoned argument for bringing back the start menu or button other than "it's what I'm used to"?

ygra 14y ago
The start button itself never was restricted to just the space of the button. The lower-left corner has always worked the same way (well, not in NT4 and not in XP if you had the language bar in the task bar). Still, for a very long time and at least for US customers the lower-left corner has worked to bring up the start menu.
- barefoot 14y ago
  Fair enough, but I would hazard a guess that most users in versions previous to Windows 8 attempted to click on the center of the button, a slower movement than hitting the bottom left corner of the screen.
- dagw 14y ago
  not in XP if you had the language bar in the task bar So that is the reason. I've never understood why the lower-left corner thing worked on some XP machines and not others. Now I know, Thank you!
  - ygra 14y ago
    Fun fact: The lower-left corner isn't actually the start button. Instead your mouse cursor gets moved a little up and to the right when you click so that the click occurs on the button (the movement is always in the direction of the button, even if you click next to the button instead of the corner(. You can still see this when the language bar is docked in the task bar, except that the pointer movement on click is not enough to overcome the added height due to the language bar. This trickery only works at the very edge of the screen, though. So if you click just a pixel below the start button (when it's moved upwards by the language bar) then nothing will happen. I suspect that was once a rushed usability fix after noticing in testing that people apparently couldn't hit the button if they just moved their mouse right into the corner. And moving the pointer by a bit was perhaps deemed less likely to break anything than simulating a click on the button. Or Microsoft just wasn't that good with testing back then (I think the language bar was introduced in Windows 2000, along with the problem), since most US users won't have multiple keyboard layouts or languages configured. Most users in other countries however do – at least I always got the US keyboard layout installed alongside with the German one (which leads to people being very confused about why their keyboard produces strange symbols because they happened to hit Alt+Shift by accident). Uhm, I guess I got a little side-tracked here.
option_greek 14y ago
Older start menu prevents context switch... it's way simpler to multitask when your screen doesn't constantly switch between full screen windows.
- drharris 14y ago
  You would think that, but it simply doesn't hold true when you actually use it awhile. The start screen is for launching (or viewing quick updates on weather and other junk); you're not in it that much, and when you are, it's a much better tool than the old start menu. I seriously think people here form opinions based on thin air instead of experience.

ygra 14y ago

The start button itself never was restricted to just the space of the button. The lower-left corner has always worked the same way (well, not in NT4 and not in XP if you had the language bar in the task bar). Still, for a very long time and at least for US customers the lower-left corner has worked to bring up the start menu.

barefoot 14y ago
Fair enough, but I would hazard a guess that most users in versions previous to Windows 8 attempted to click on the center of the button, a slower movement than hitting the bottom left corner of the screen.
dagw 14y ago
not in XP if you had the language bar in the task bar So that is the reason. I've never understood why the lower-left corner thing worked on some XP machines and not others. Now I know, Thank you!
- ygra 14y ago
  Fun fact: The lower-left corner isn't actually the start button. Instead your mouse cursor gets moved a little up and to the right when you click so that the click occurs on the button (the movement is always in the direction of the button, even if you click next to the button instead of the corner(. You can still see this when the language bar is docked in the task bar, except that the pointer movement on click is not enough to overcome the added height due to the language bar. This trickery only works at the very edge of the screen, though. So if you click just a pixel below the start button (when it's moved upwards by the language bar) then nothing will happen. I suspect that was once a rushed usability fix after noticing in testing that people apparently couldn't hit the button if they just moved their mouse right into the corner. And moving the pointer by a bit was perhaps deemed less likely to break anything than simulating a click on the button. Or Microsoft just wasn't that good with testing back then (I think the language bar was introduced in Windows 2000, along with the problem), since most US users won't have multiple keyboard layouts or languages configured. Most users in other countries however do – at least I always got the US keyboard layout installed alongside with the German one (which leads to people being very confused about why their keyboard produces strange symbols because they happened to hit Alt+Shift by accident). Uhm, I guess I got a little side-tracked here.

option_greek 14y ago

Older start menu prevents context switch... it's way simpler to multitask when your screen doesn't constantly switch between full screen windows.

drharris 14y ago
You would think that, but it simply doesn't hold true when you actually use it awhile. The start screen is for launching (or viewing quick updates on weather and other junk); you're not in it that much, and when you are, it's a much better tool than the old start menu. I seriously think people here form opinions based on thin air instead of experience.