• Announcements

    • xper

      MSFN Sponsorship and AdBlockers!   07/10/2016

      Dear members, MSFN is made available via subscriptions, donations and advertising revenue. The use of ad-blocking software hurts the site. Please disable ad-blocking software or set an exception for MSFN. Alternatively, become a site sponsor and ads will be disabled automatically and by subscribing you get other sponsor benefits.
jim2029

Windows 7 Classic Start Menu.... is here.

74 posts in this topic

Why? ... Why would you take a modern operating system and want to revert back to an archaic navigation mode?

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Because some people like that fast and slim mode with easy navigation and could give a f*** about eye candy and stupid scrolling menus that make navigating difficult with lots of programs installed.

I like this app (except it's a bit buggy still). I am of the type of user (sysadmin) that wants windows to do, look and act like what I tell it to, and not the other way round. k thx!

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm with you 100% Nexus. I like all the underlying improvements in Win7/Vista but absolutely hate the UI, Explorer and the Search functions in these new versions. Years ago Windows was all about functionality and productivity, now it's trying its best to be a MultiMedia only operation system. The lack of a classic start menu, and the removal of the excellent basic search functionality (that doesn't require an index service) that existed in 98/2000/XP/2003 is inexcusable in my opinion. Productive professional-level file manipulation in the new Explorer is **** near impossible.

Jcarle, no offense - but I seriously cant see what there is to like about the UI. I simply don't understand it. It hides things from you that you need to see and dumbs things down to a preschool level without the option of setting an "advanced" mode. Unfortunately I have to use Win7/Vista for development (and my nVidia 3D glasses on my games) - but when trying to actually do WORK in these new OS's I literally find myself screaming at the OS. Windows 7 is extremely frustrating on a professional level.

1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Reverting to the Classic Start menu means you lose the ability to use instant search. This is one of the features I like most about Vista, and it also doubles up as the Run command. Even XP's start menu is miles better and whenever I use Windows 2000 or something older I cringe at the Start Menu on offer.

jcarle: happen he just prefers the archaic navigation mode? Shock! Horror! Can't have that can we. Best get the troops out to shoot anyone who won't adhere to our new teknolojeez.

Edited by JustinStacey.x
0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Microsoft often "fix" things that aren't broken, under the disguise of "improvement".

Obviously they don't pay any attention to what non-home users want from the OS.

There has been plenty of IT professionals demanding the classic start menu as well as classic search... they just don't listen. It's not much code, why remove it... it's silly.

I also hate the "IE" look of explorer, with cookie crumb navigation, and a preview pane you can't disable (which just wastes window space).

DX11? who cares, no one even cares about DX10 yet.

Well, before I make this into too big of a win7 rant... I'll stop here.

1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I have no problem with people making programs to satisfy some demand :) I just don't understand how the classic cascading menus is a productivity improvement over the modern implementation. I always found the old style frustrating with having the menu collapse when the mouse wasn't over it and also not sorting automatically. I like being able to scroll the list by mouse wheel and integrated search. I also feel it makes more sense productivity wise to search for the file to open and then let associations launch the corresponding program in one user interaction, rather then find the program and then the file thus navigating more menus. Also you can always disable indexing and search works just like before for those who notice the low priority background task or are in a very tight security environment, in fact indexing by default is only on parts of the system volume and has extension filters so it builds/updates/crawls fast and uses little relative space.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I barley use the start menu so im neither Pro nor Con on this one. Winkey + R is the way forward :P

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I like all the underlying improvements in Win7/Vista but absolutely hate the UI, Explorer and the Search functions in these new versions. Years ago Windows was all about functionality and productivity, now it's trying its best to be a MultiMedia only operation system. The lack of a classic start menu, and the removal of the excellent basic search functionality (that doesn't require an index service) that existed in 98/2000/XP/2003 is inexcusable in my opinion. Productive professional-level file manipulation in the new Explorer is **** near impossible.

Me too, I also miss the old explorer and the classic search on Win7/Vista :( It is more productive working with the old search and explorer.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Because some people like that fast and slim mode with easy navigation and could give a f*** about eye candy and stupid scrolling menus that make navigating difficult with lots of programs installed.

I like this app (except it's a bit buggy still). I am of the type of user (sysadmin) that wants windows to do, look and act like what I tell it to, and not the other way round. k thx!

Second your idea on the start menu.

However, i would like to say it's above how some people like their start menus.

Software industrial would never be mature if it can't find the "solid kernel", the absolutely necessary components to build-in for long lasting use.

How about having two more alphabets for the "improvement" of English language?

There are infinite directions in improvement, on almost everything.

What's the solid foundation that lasts, needs not to be changed, can be "reliably" built on by other applications, without frequent change?

Like the collection of Axioms in mathematics, all other theorems, formulas can be derived from, without changing the whole structure all the time.

Microsoft should focus more on the OS itself, and leave GUI to be customizable like X-Window Manager, not monopolize everything.

Simplicity is beauty, many IT workers like their desktop simple.

Personally i feel rather disappointed on no classic start menu, no matter how many features Windows 7 included. Many of those features i can obtain from third party software developer, so i don't really need them.

Microsoft still doesn't understand why many guys won't upgrade. It's more room and liberty to expand your own system through older, less bloated OS, than cut back unnecessary functionaries.

1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I personally find the new StartMenu easier, since recently used apps appear immediately as well as recently used files in jump lists, I dont need to navigate through cascading menus which to me is as annoying as popups.

I think MS is actually listening to customers with these changes. MS is reacting to the perception that the OSX is better from a usability perspective which is evidenced by changes in media and markets.

As for bloat this claim has been debunked. Sure the OS is larger than its predecessor, but it terms of contemporary hardware it is relatively less bloated. Compared to other operating systems the default install of Windows has a smaller footprint also. And the reason it gets larger is to add more features, compartmentize the OS for security and reliability reasons, include more drivers by default, etc. It doesnt affect performance unless the extra sectors are being read by the hard disk all the time.

I don't mean to troll, so I apoligize if I've bothered anyone. Just sharing my opinion. To each his/her own ;)

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Speaking as an old timer, who literally has been supporting Windows since 2.0, Microsoft's move away from hierarchical menu systems is a huge mistake. You see this philosophy in all new Microsoft products except the ones geared towards professionals (Exchange, SQL, Etc). The way Office 2007 has a "ribbon bar" and Windows 7's UI - these are not productive interfaces, they are fluff, they are bloat and they cripple the product. They deter you from experimenting, from looking around and finding out what you can do - from learning.

For instance, the advantage of the "classic" start menu; Say I installed Nero on my PC a few months ago and now I want to make a audio CD from an tape for the first time. I forgot the name of the program that Nero uses for this (Nero SoundTrax). A simple click in Start/Programs/Nero and I can see all the Nero products that were installed. This takes less than 5 seconds to do, and I don't have to type anything. In addition, the classic start menu is great just to view what products you have installed, and helps with cleaning out clutter later. From an IT perspective, a quick support call from someone wanting to know how to start Outlook, "Click Start/Programs/Microsoft Office/Outlook". In less than 15 seconds I have a user starting Outlook - no remote desktop necessary, no confused users - quick, simple, efficient.

I could go on and on about the classic start menu's value in the Windows OS. But it won't make a difference, Microsoft seldom listens to their support professionals when it comes to the desktop. They don't go outside of their comfort zone and mainly use marketing (who cater to fanboys) to make the decisions. It gets worse every year, and seriously p***es me off. If I wanted a Mac I'd buy a Mac, it's a better OS on the whole than Windows anyhow.

The search feature in Vista/7 is another point of contention. I hate the index service with the passion of a thousand suns. Ever wonder why Mac's don't have a Hard Drive Activity LED? It's because their users would be saying WTF is my hard drive doing? Well, I have a Hard Drive LED, and I LIKE knowing when my servers and workstations are accessing my HDD, it's a good indicator of malware and viruses. If I see my HDD LED going crazy I immediately assume the worst - and for good reason. I wouldn't be surprised if Microsoft made a deal to eliminate the HDD LED from all desktop OS's in the future.

I keep my data organized in directories, as any computer user should get used to doing. In previous Windows versions; If I want to find an MP3 file, I right-click my MP3 folder and search for a keyword. If I want to find the INF file my monitor is using, I right-click the Windows/INF folder and search all *inf files that contain the string "viewsonic". It's simple, efficient, and does not require the index service.

These are examples of things Microsoft has previously done "right" and removed from the latest Windows versions. For me, these things were vital, they were what separated Windows from the other OS's. Google Desktop and OSX have caused Microsoft to do stupid things - and the way they nerf the advanced power-user tools from the OS is nothing short of inexcusable.

Edited by Noise
1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Noise, you've said everything I could possibly think of in a clear and concise way.

At least someone understands exactly what a lot of power users/admins mean. :D

Point and click was the most simple basic, and useful idea ever implemented in a graphical UI, why break what it not broken I will never know. It was designed to get away from having to type into the console (or search box if you will)... this is a step backwards and not forwards. What was once 2 steps and and some mouse movement, has now degraded into several steps... to me it's the same as opening the RUN box and typing in what I want to run, this is not productive at all. I may as well go back to using dos shell and setting environment variables for search paths ;)

Who is using archaic mode now? Hmm?

Edited by Nexus_06
0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

They got into this mess themselves, when they started forcing adaptive menus. Users couldn't find many things, so now they're retraining the users...

And 7 is being touted for tablet pcs... :rolleyes:

GL

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Speaking as an old timer, who literally has been supporting Windows since 2.0, Microsoft's move away from hierarchical menu systems is a huge mistake. You see this philosophy in all new Microsoft products except the ones geared towards professionals (Exchange, SQL, Etc). The way Office 2007 has a "ribbon bar" and Windows 7's UI - these are not productive interfaces, they are fluff, they are bloat and they cripple the product. They deter you from experimenting, from looking around and finding out what you can do - from learning.

For instance, the advantage of the "classic" start menu; Say I installed Nero on my PC a few months ago and now I want to make a audio CD from an tape for the first time. I forgot the name of the program that Nero uses for this (Nero SoundTrax). A simple click in Start/Programs/Nero and I can see all the Nero products that were installed. This takes less than 5 seconds to do, and I don't have to type anything. In addition, the classic start menu is great just to view what products you have installed, and helps with cleaning out clutter later. From an IT perspective, a quick support call from someone wanting to know how to start Outlook, "Click Start/Programs/Microsoft Office/Outlook". In less than 15 seconds I have a user starting Outlook - no remote desktop necessary, no confused users - quick, simple, efficient.

I could go on and on about the classic start menu's value in the Windows OS. But it won't make a difference, Microsoft seldom listens to their support professionals when it comes to the desktop. They don't go outside of their comfort zone and mainly use marketing (who cater to fanboys) to make the decisions. It gets worse every year, and seriously p***es me off. If I wanted a Mac I'd buy a Mac, it's a better OS on the whole than Windows anyhow.

The search feature in Vista/7 is another point of contention. I hate the index service with the passion of a thousand suns. Ever wonder why Mac's don't have a Hard Drive Activity LED? It's because their users would be saying WTF is my hard drive doing? Well, I have a Hard Drive LED, and I LIKE knowing when my servers and workstations are accessing my HDD, it's a good indicator of malware and viruses. If I see my HDD LED going crazy I immediately assume the worst - and for good reason. I wouldn't be surprised if Microsoft made a deal to eliminate the HDD LED from all desktop OS's in the future.

I keep my data organized in directories, as any computer user should get used to doing. In previous Windows versions; If I want to find an MP3 file, I right-click my MP3 folder and search for a keyword. If I want to find the INF file my monitor is using, I right-click the Windows/INF folder and search all *inf files that contain the string "viewsonic". It's simple, efficient, and does not require the index service.

These are examples of things Microsoft has previously done "right" and removed from the latest Windows versions. For me, these things were vital, they were what separated Windows from the other OS's. Google Desktop and OSX have caused Microsoft to do stupid things - and the way they nerf the advanced power-user tools from the OS is nothing short of inexcusable.

I agree with this almost wholeheartedly, however, I have to make my view clear that I find the Windows 2000/98/95 style start menu extremely annoying after having used the XP and Vista one. We have an engineer at work who (I think) changes all of the start menus to the classic style for some unknown reason, and it drives me up the wall. To get into My Computer or my Documents you end up having to minimize everything and fish around for it on the desktop. Not only that but to get to things like Control Panel and settings you have to go to a submenu. With XP's there are less clicks, with Vista's some have more clicks, but the search is useful.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Well, I really like the Win7 Start menu, the ability to lock programs to the Task Bar and hit Start and type nero sou to locate the program much easier and faster then running through a old menu system.

I am a sys admin come developer and run/support all flavours of windows, mac os x, unix, and a lot of command line stuff... I have been using Win7 for months now and adore the interface. Its fast and easy.... Join the revolution..

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Well, I really like the Win7 Start menu, the ability to lock programs to the Task Bar and hit Start and type nero sou to locate the program much easier and faster then running through a old menu system.

I am a sys admin come developer and run/support all flavours of windows, mac os x, unix, and a lot of command line stuff... I have been using Win7 for months now and adore the interface. Its fast and easy.... Join the revolution..

I couldn't agree more. Been using Win7 since day one of the RC and have really started liking the start menu, although I use the winkey + R for everything I possibly can. But clicking the start orb and typing in the first few letters of whatever app I need is awsome. I do agree with others as far as the Windows Explorer though. god what a friggin mess.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I do agree with others as far as the Windows Explorer though. god what a friggin mess.

Hmm, I like Explorer. Seems a lot faster and I switch between several different networks al the time and it's much faster adapting to the new network. With Vista and below I was having to release/renew ip and flush/register dns every network switch. Once the indexing is complete, searches are super fast.

Oh, I think I prefere it over Snow Leopard.....

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

At first I hated W7's start menu, now when I use an XP box I curse it's very existence. I am very pleased with the current start menu.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Honestly, I don't get it...

I was a huge fan of the "Classic" start menu but I navigate this new menu the exact same way except that the menu's dont cascade.

What am I missing here?

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Well, I really like the Win7 Start menu, the ability to lock programs to the Task Bar and hit Start and type nero sou to locate the program much easier and faster then running through a old menu system.

I am a sys admin come developer and run/support all flavours of windows, mac os x, unix, and a lot of command line stuff... I have been using Win7 for months now and adore the interface. Its fast and easy.... Join the revolution..

I couldn't agree more. Been using Win7 since day one of the RC and have really started liking the start menu, although I use the winkey + R for everything I possibly can. But clicking the start orb and typing in the first few letters of whatever app I need is awsome. I do agree with others as far as the Windows Explorer though. god what a friggin mess.

its been like that since Vista came out... I don't think it's going to get better any time soon.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Here are some steps to have some sort of classic start menu in windows 7:

1. Right click Start Menu -->Properties--> Customize" button-->scroll down to "Documents"-->select "Display as a menu"-->Apply-->OK

2. click on "Orb" start button--> right click "Documents" --> "Properties"--> click "Include a folder". On the left via "computer" Locate "C:\ProgramData\Microsoft\Windows\Start Menu\" and select "programs" folder --> "Include Folder" button. You will now see it in the list in the "Document Properties>Library locations:"

3.Now you will see the old style of XP/Vista "classic" as far as a real directory tree.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
"Include a folder". On the left via "computer" Locate "C:\ProgramData\Microsoft\Windows\Start Menu\" and select "programs" folder --> "Include Folder" button.

But then you don't have the complete start menu. Because the start menu is merged from two locations:

For "all users":

C:\ProgramData\Microsoft\Windows\Start Menu\Programs

For the "logged in user":

C:\Users\[user name]\AppData\Roaming\Microsoft\Windows\Start Menu\Programs

So the entries "Command Prompt", "Notepad", "Run" and "Windows Explorer" from the logged in user folder don't appear in your menu.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Honestly, I don't get it...

I was a huge fan of the "Classic" start menu but I navigate this new menu the exact same way except that the menu's dont cascade.

What am I missing here?

Same here, I know I will not downgrade to Windows 7 if the classic start menu is not there. I hate how microsoft changes everything around just to make it harder for the end user.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I will just say one thing that HAS always annoyed me about OS specially.

when they say they both faster, they should mean they both faster in the same hardware, otherwise you can't really say they aren't bloated or such. sure windows 7 boots faster than windows XP, as long you are running on quad core with some insane video card. but then try this

i can boot windows XP on a pentium MMX (YES A MMX!!!) at 200 Mhz, try to even install windows 7 there and then if you succed (which i doubt) try to boot it. if it was instalable it would take about 1 month to finish booting. for what? the very same functions windows XP does, there IS NOTHING! i can't do in XP i can't do in 7.

search? ever hear of windows search? is on the taskbar and is in fact even easier and faster to access than the menu one of windows 7, eye candy? windows blinds. makes it work faster in fact and look even cooler.

rolling menus? O.o i honestly don't use this crap at all, i use win + r most of time however when i need something from the menu because i don't remember the name i often find myself more confused on the windows 7 than windows XP, sure hierarchical mode is like a diagram but you aren't takking onto the accoutn that in fact windows 7 is using it too, just with a different look.

when you click start menu u could call that, ROOT. then you go into all programs under start menu, then you see a lot of folders and then inside those folders the files or exes just exactly like in windows XP, advantage of windows XP though is that you can see who the parent is easily, as you surf on windows 7 you keep getting more and more lost since you don't know where exactly are you, also to whoever said the menu dosn't has autorganize, maybe u could go back to even windows 98 and try right clicking on the start menu, there is something called AUTOARRANGE.

ok, now, windows 7 measures how much... oh right over 8 gigs on my hard disk, while XP measures 2, and win 2000 and 98 under 1 and half gig.

what i use my computer for? 3D modelling, programmation, accounting, active directory when using server versions.

etc etc etc, fact. i can do ALL of this EXACTLY equally on windows 98 and windows 7? so where is the sooo called productivity gain on the OS?

for what it matters i ONLY upgraded OSes due to hardware support, because MS forced people to change OS and so people stop making drivers for the previous oses.

hell the candy stuff REALLY p***es me off but i have seen a windows vista theme on windows 98 even and the application for it MEASUREd 5 MEGABYTES. not the half gig code windows 7 or vista use for that.

directx 10? i have it on windows XP with just a simple hack, how? simple, microsoft just lied about it being impossible in windows XP, just with a few bytes of code you can add it, alpha blending? they said it was impossible too, yet windows blinds people (stardock) added it on winXp without any issue, (oh did i mention windows blinds only measures about 80 MB installed) and all the eye candy of windows vista and more.

aero peek? the application to do that in windows XP measures barely 1 megabyte, same for image preview. and taskswitch does a far better job than that stupid cool looking thing of windows vista.

security? why the hell corporative users have online access anyway, they are supposed to be WORKING!! NOT surfing on internet. and even if they do, safety can be handled by ANY third party program. not like it matters, hackers always find a way to bypass AVs and etc, i myself have seen a PC with avira, kaspersky, nod, ese all full 100% updated, totally dead from a virus, how it got there, no one knows.

is due to all this that i have been working trying to make a stripped version of XP that can do ANything the user wants without problems but that has no stupid useless stuff on it. so far i have stripped like 200 MB of stuff and optimized the file system for multiple partitions (coz yes yo ucan mode system folders to other places like in windows vista, just use folder redirector or the register)

sooo ugh... stop praising people for making s***ty stuff, BOTH! windows, mac and linux all suck EXACTLY equally.

YOU KNOW WHAT!? i m going back to paper if the current trend of idioticing Oses continue.

well... now that i ranted a little ill go finish fighting with some OCS 2007 server at my side.... interesting enought i just found an app of 6 MB that has ALL the features and a setup that takes 4 mins that does ALL this 600 MB server s*** does, and oh right it only needs 1 PC not 4 servers like this OCS... ugh ... not a good day..

1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!


Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.


Sign In Now

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.