Jump to content

Welcome to MSFN Forum
Register now to gain access to all of our features. Once registered and logged in, you will be able to create topics, post replies to existing threads, give reputation to your fellow members, get your own private messenger, post status updates, manage your profile and so much more. This message will be removed once you have signed in.
Login to Account Create an Account



Photo

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


  • Please log in to reply
73 replies to this topic

#26
Zxian

Zxian

    Scroll up - see the Google bar?

  • Super Moderator
  • 5,066 posts
  • Joined 30-September 04
  • OS:none specified
  • Country: Country Flag

i can boot windows XP on a pentium MMX (YES A MMX!!!) at 200 Mhz,

Your point? Even a stripped down version of XP will crawl on that old of a processor, so why are you bothering? You can get an upgrade to that old system for free (or very cheap) through local buy-and-sells.

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

Doubtful... people keep claiming that WDS4.0 is slower than the old-style search that was included with WinXP, but I've never found this to be the case.

eye candy? windows blinds. makes it work faster in fact and look even cooler.

I can't tell you how many times WB crashed, and then the system required a reboot to get any sort of functionality back. At least in the rare case that Explorer crashes in Vista/Win7, it does it (relatively) gracefully and you're back to a useable system again within a few seconds.

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.

And then have the menus cascade across half the screen, and then you can't figure out where you are, because they start moving back to the left once you've filled up the right side. Ever used XP on a netbook (1024x600 screen resolution)? Win7's UI changes are a godsend there.

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.

How much hard drive space does that Pentium MMX have, and how much did you pay for it? Think about the $/GB cost of putting the OS on the old computer compared to a new one. 640GB = ~$60CAD where I live. That's 9 cents per GB. It just cost me a whole 72cents worth of hard drive space to install Win7. Am I really going to lose any sleep over that?

what i use my computer for? 3D modelling... so where is the sooo called productivity gain on the OS?

Hang on... what kind of 3D modelling do you do, because any sort of serious work requires more memory than WinXP can handle, let alone Win98 (with whatever crazy hacks the people in the 98 forums have got going on). There is a simple, fundamental limitation of Win98 and WinXP - the fact that they're 32-bit operating systems. XP x64 doesn't count, since many installers incorrectly label it as Server 2003. If you want proper 64-bit support, you have to move to Vista or Win7 - period.

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.

Nobody's forcing you to upgrade OSes. You can keep running Win98 for years on end if that's what makes you happy. But, you will be limited by what hardware you can use with Win98 - something that Microsoft could not have foretold over 10 years ago.


How to remove advertisement from MSFN

#27
awergh

awergh

    MSFN Expert

  • Member
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,059 posts
  • Joined 02-October 05
  • OS:none specified
  • Country: Country Flag

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?

I really hope you dont use 98 as a domain client

i can boot windows XP on a pentium MMX (YES A MMX!!!) at 200 Mhz,

I probably wouldnt run anything newer then NT4, or maybe a cutdown 98se install on that but Vista RC1 runs on a K5
Vista RC1 AMD K5

#28
macgyvr

macgyvr

    Newbie

  • Member
  • 30 posts
  • Joined 25-August 01

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 don't understand what you mean about a move away from a hierarchical menu. The menu is EXACTLY the same as before, except they keep it contained in a box by scrolling it. There is ABSOLUTELY no other difference in the layout of the menu system.

#29
macgyvr

macgyvr

    Newbie

  • Member
  • 30 posts
  • Joined 25-August 01

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?


Where are you seeing menus that don't cascade? They cascade exactly as they did in XP, except they are contained in a box with scrolling.

#30
macgyvr

macgyvr

    Newbie

  • Member
  • 30 posts
  • Joined 25-August 01

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.


Windows 7 is by far the easiest operating system to learn they have ever come out with. I have been showing it to some of my older customers and they just "get it"...when they couldn't with Windows XP. The things people here are calling "eye candy" are far more than that. Sometimes you just have to pull your head outta your a** to see that not everything Microsoft does is bad.

#31
GrandMstrBud

GrandMstrBud
  • Member
  • 5 posts
  • Joined 30-March 07

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.


Windows 7 is by far the easiest operating system to learn they have ever come out with. I have been showing it to some of my older customers and they just "get it"...when they couldn't with Windows XP. The things people here are calling "eye candy" are far more than that. Sometimes you just have to pull your head outta your a** to see that not everything Microsoft does is bad.


In this case it is, I mean why remove something so simple? I have a couple windows 2008 servers and that OS even has the classic option.

#32
cluberti

cluberti

    Gustatus similis pullus

  • Supervisor
  • 11,252 posts
  • Joined 09-September 01
  • OS:Windows 8.1 x64
  • Country: Country Flag

In this case it is, I mean why remove something so simple? I have a couple windows 2008 servers and that OS even has the classic option.

Because Server 2008 is Vista, and Server 2008 R2 is Win7? It was removed from Win7 because they wanted the interface to die, and for people to use the new start menu / taskbar. Classic is comfortable because we've been using it for ~15 years, but after moving to the new interface I can't say I feel like I'm missing anything.

To each his or her own, of course, but I feel I do less clicking and less searching with the new interface. If you really want the old and still want to use Win7, this project is probably for you then.
MCTS Windows Internals, MCITP Server 2008 EA, MCTS MDT/BDD, MCSE/MCSA Server 2003, Server 2012, Windows 8
--------------------
Please read the rules before posting!
Please consider donating to MSFN to keep it up and running!

#33
TheReasonIFail

TheReasonIFail

    Member

  • Member
  • PipPip
  • 171 posts
  • Joined 08-April 07

Where are you seeing menus that don't cascade? They cascade exactly as they did in XP, except they are contained in a box with scrolling.


Well, what I meant in my first post is that the menu doesn't cascade out into the screen. I'm not sure how people took my post by some of the replies I've seen but I'm actually a BIG fan of the new menu...don't see the big stink about the old one being gone...

#34
D_block

D_block

    The Return of the greatest

  • Member
  • PipPip
  • 273 posts
  • Joined 05-May 07
  • OS:Windows 7 x64
  • Country: Country Flag
2 things, why regress to the old menu when the new one is much better (2) why use winkey + r when u can run all those commands in the search bar in the start menu ?
Activate yuh feelings
Press ah on switch
~ D_block ...

#35
Chimaera

Chimaera
  • Member
  • 3 posts
  • Joined 15-August 09
I personally think the issue here is more about choice than anything.

M/S know thousands of people use classic so it should have been there as a choice with the other choices like aero.

For those of us who prefer classic style , it is our choice....hell i dont even have desktop wallpaper half the time.

I just want it clean and simple with all the b###sh#t turned off so i have a system that works and does what i tell it to...

Not that M/S ever listen but stop trying to panic manouver yourself just becasuse google decide to write an o/s, cheaper editions before release indeed lol and free versions for picture partys, grief M/S get a grip and sit down and get on with the O/s and stop worrying about google, cos no matter what happens people will vote with their feet.

Its their Choice!!
  • j7n likes this

#36
JasonGW

JasonGW

    Member

  • Member
  • PipPip
  • 221 posts
  • Joined 05-August 04

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


For those who want the ancient start menu this seems like a decent option. However, as a 15+ year IT veteran, I agree with you. The old Start Menu was a broken, poorly designed turd of a navigational method and 7's is FAR superior and easier to navigate. I think you'd have to be nuts to go back.

That said...there are a lot of nuts people out there, and I'd rather see them happy than giving me the stinkeye :)

#37
woody.cool

woody.cool

    Newbie

  • Member
  • 38 posts
  • Joined 12-July 09
  • OS:Windows 7 x64
I can't believe how anybody could actually prefer the Vista/7 style star menu?

I'm a big fan of 'Classic Start Menu' and wish it'd make a return for several reasons:

1. It's quicker! It appears quicker, doesn't take so long to generate a list of programs etc. as the Vista/7 Start Menu does

2. For somebody who uses keyboard shortcuts almost 100% of the time, Classic Start Menu enables me to do that (for instance, I can start Mozilla Firefox by going Win Key -> P -> M -> Enter or can log off by going Win Key -> L)

3. Classic Start Menu is far easier to control via Group Policy .... much better suited to professional environments

4. I hate the 'Mickey Mouse' UI of Vista/7 !!!

5. I like the fact that the Classic Start Menu cascades ..... if I see that on another system, I can remember how I found a particular app much easier than I can with the Vista/7 style Start Menu.

In response to whoever mentioned about cascading menus on small screeens ..... don't nest so many folders in the Start Menu then ;)
  • j7n likes this

#38
amit_talkin

amit_talkin

    Experienced

  • Member
  • PipPipPip
  • 397 posts
  • Joined 05-October 05
I just want to say, stick to your old OS if you dont like to try out something new! Dont blame on newer OS without upgrading old system hardwares they require, if there is something new, then we have to spend some time to learn and to have habit of it. I never be agree with people who always keep saying "Linux is better than windows" , are they trying to prove that over 80% people ( official figure, except pirated windows users ) using windows are idiots who choose windows over linux, linux which is even free while windows is paid?

so far, I dont have any complains regarding win7 even didnt/dont have with vista! upgrade your PC and everything will run smoothly!

on wikipedia..

As of July 2009, Windows had approximately 93% of the market share of the client operating systems for usage on the Internet


p.s. I should post this msg on some other topic related to win vs linux but I couldnt hold myself.. :puke:
Primary - Q9450@3.6GHz | 8GB G.Skill 1000MHz | Gigabyte GA-X48-DS4 F3b mobo. | 1.5TB Storage | Sappgire HD4890 | HomeMade H2O Kit | Antec NeoPower Blue 650w
Secondary - E8400 3.00@ 4.05GHz | 4 GB Crucial Ballistix | ASUS P5B Deluxe mobo. | 250GB Storage | Sapphire Toxic HD4850 512MB | OCZ Vendetta2 CPU Cooler | Coolermaster 500w

#39
woody.cool

woody.cool

    Newbie

  • Member
  • 38 posts
  • Joined 12-July 09
  • OS:Windows 7 x64

upgrade your PC and everything will run smoothly!

Actually, I have no problems with how Win7 runs .... it runs smoothly, I just don't like the UI and the new style Start Menu ..... simples ;) *squeak*

#40
grmble

grmble
  • Member
  • 3 posts
  • Joined 10-October 09
Hello World!

I had to take part in this discussion.

I was searching through the internet regarding Classic Start menu in W7 and it seems Microsoft did a great marketing job: It seems that whenever someone says: "I want classic start menu back" there are always one ot two answers, just like Copy/pasted "don't live in the past" "you are old school" "it's time for progress"... blablabla.

These look just like ordered texts.

What is the truth?

I also work for a big company as an admin. I really think this new start menu, the way of navigating in Windows Explorer and even the new way of navigating using taskbar will be a serious disaster.

Actually, I think that this whole concept is "invented" just to give the possibility to the IT people to earn more money on providing lectures and assistance to the users.

The way of navigating through folders, "Library way of thinking", colorfull windows, lack of Quick Launch, new way of navigating the windows are more complicated than they were before. Those new techniques are not close to the way how human brain (of the majority of people) thinks.

Usual way of thinking of a regular person is the "tree way of thinking": You have one instance that creates more of them and all of them create new instances. That was all about the old classic menu.

That is one of the reasons why people hated Vista and were stick to XP.

Now when you have to move to W7 because MS will stop XP support, companies are in a deep trouble.

MS, please give us the opportunity to choose, not all the people are clever as your programmers or your marketing managers.

Some (vast majority?) will never understand your "Library concept" of Users folder, or the way Start menu/Taskbar works in Windows 7.


Thank you.
  • j7n likes this

#41
Zxian

Zxian

    Scroll up - see the Google bar?

  • Super Moderator
  • 5,066 posts
  • Joined 30-September 04
  • OS:none specified
  • Country: Country Flag

Usual way of thinking of a regular person is the "tree way of thinking": You have one instance that creates more of them and all of them create new instances. That was all about the old classic menu.

I'd actually argue that the "tree way of thinking" isn't how most people work, but how most people were introduced to computers 15 years ago. My parents have never been very computer saavy, but when I've shown them the new ways of navigating through Vista or Win7, they've always asked "Why didn't they think of that in the first place?" My father takes many pictures. By many, I mean roughly 5000 per year. He's always taken his favorite pictures and made separate copies of them in different folders so that he could select those for printing or editing or whatnot. With the picture rating system and tags, he no longer needs to make duplicates of the pictures. To find them again? It's a simple search (which is very quick because of WDS4).

That is one of the reasons why people hated Vista and were stick to XP.

Most people hated Vista because of driver incompatibilities and OEMs shipping systems with insufficient hardware. Most people are, sadly, too blind to look at the real source of problems, and were quick to point the finger at Microsoft.

Some (vast majority?) will never understand your "Library concept" of Users folder, or the way Start menu/Taskbar works in Windows 7.

Give a man a fish, and he'll eat. Teach a man to fish, and he'll never go hungry.

Again, I'll use my parents as examples (they are by any definition, the average 50-60-ish year old users). The "problem" with the various new features in Vista and Win7 is that most people can't figure out how to use them (or try to use them "the old way"). The original thread was in reference to using the classic Start Menu on Win7. Yes... you might know that Solitaire is located under Start->Programs->Accessories->Games, but honestly... why should we be clicking that many times? Start, type "sol", hit enter. Done.

My girlfriend recently got a new laptop, which I installed Win7 onto for her as well. She asked me shortly after things were setup, "Where's the User settings in the Control Panel?" My reply: "Press Start, Type 'User', hit enter". Less clicking, less searching, less work for you the user.

People are resistant to change, it's as simple as that. Vista was given a wash of bad rap, and now that the humor of the Mac vs PC ads has degenerated to "zomg Vista sucks" (and people are getting sick of them), most people I've talked to are growing to list Vista and Win7.

#42
DonDamm

DonDamm

    Member

  • Member
  • PipPip
  • 285 posts
  • Joined 24-May 05
Well said, Zxian.

It seems clear that there are individual preferences and those are driven by different things including habit, experience and need. while I find that overall I need to click about 20-30% more in Vista and W7 than I do in Server 2003 to get the same amount of work done (this includes Office 2007), the average user who doesn't access the Network Center and items in the Contorl Panel is very happy. Every single one of my customers for whom I've set up in Vista over the last couple of years is very happy still with the performance and operation. Of course, I tweaked them and added on various userful utilities to make life easier. W7 goes one better for all that.

The Start Menu for most folks is a mess. Most seem to really hate nested folders and cascading menus preferring a long unwieldy list. I've tried helping folks organize into logical folders, but when I see the machine maybe six months later the Start Menu has grown to unwieldy proportions. Guess it is just human nature. Personally, I hardly ever use the thing! I use the Quick Launch bar on the right near the System tray and put the Taskbar at the top (where all program have their menus and such!). I have 30-40 shortcuts there on the dropdown list which is easier to access. By the way, you can put folder there which will expand just like in the Start Menu (though I don't do that).

My major beef about new OSs is when they remove functionality that they don't have to. In XP they allowed folks to choose between the new look and the old. I may not like the old cascading "classic" menu, but it is not hard to make it available. The P in PC stands for Personal and sometimes I think they forget that. As advanced users we often find ourselves not catered to and that is a shame as we drive a huge amount of the general usage out there and folks rely on us to give good advice. I am annoyed that MS didn't give us more shortcut functionality in 2008 R2.
=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=
"Most people don't pay attention to the calm voice of reason unless it's juxtaposed by screaming idiots on either side of the fence."

#43
cluberti

cluberti

    Gustatus similis pullus

  • Supervisor
  • 11,252 posts
  • Joined 09-September 01
  • OS:Windows 8.1 x64
  • Country: Country Flag
The P for personal computer came at a time when computers were all giant mainframes. It wasn't meant to denote that it was Burger King and you could have everything "your way" ;). But in all seriousness, the more most folks use the new start menu and taskbar, the more they like it almost to a person. However, there will *always* be folks who want the old way, and fortunately (or unfortunately, however you look at it) they will either have to stay on their older OSes that do things the way they want and give up (in increasing amounts as time goes on) hardware, driver, and software compatibility and vendor support, or they'll have to hack something on as this project does. There's nothing wrong with it, and using the best tool for the job is almost always the best way to approach these sorts of things, but it's always wise to give "the new" a try before you simply fall back on the old. It might work for you, it might not, but you won't really know until you force yourself to try for a week or three, and then see how it does or does not work for you. The start menu/taskbar change is no different, and you can bet Microsoft spent millions on this one thing alone in user acceptance testing, considering they spend billions on the project as a whole.
MCTS Windows Internals, MCITP Server 2008 EA, MCTS MDT/BDD, MCSE/MCSA Server 2003, Server 2012, Windows 8
--------------------
Please read the rules before posting!
Please consider donating to MSFN to keep it up and running!

#44
gosh

gosh

    gosh 2.0

  • Patrons
  • 2,347 posts
  • Joined 03-October 03
  • OS:none specified
  • Country: Country Flag
When i launched Windows XP for microsoft in 2001 one of my first calls was how to revert to the previous start menu. I had a coworker who launched windows 95 years earlier, and he said his first call was from someone who wanted the file manager for the shell instead of explorer.exe. Somethings never change...

#45
GrofLuigi

GrofLuigi

    GroupPolicy Tattoo Artist

  • Member
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,361 posts
  • Joined 21-April 05
  • OS:none specified
  • Country: Country Flag
Then they should change the name to something like "hide-and-seek orb"?

Menu (as in restaurant) implies displaying everything the "house" has available for you and you choose from the list.

GL

#46
cluberti

cluberti

    Gustatus similis pullus

  • Supervisor
  • 11,252 posts
  • Joined 09-September 01
  • OS:Windows 8.1 x64
  • Country: Country Flag
Actually, the English word menu comes from the old French "menu", which itself comes from the Latin minutus, ultimately meaning "small" or "tiny". Given that the "start" menu in Win7 (it's not a start button anymore, obviously, but I'll call it that as that's it's commonly accepted name) really is a smaller representation of a larger list that you can search for what you want to find, it actually lives up to it's grammatical monicker much more accurately than the "classic" start menu found in previous versions of Windows did. Just nitpicking ;).

Joking aside, if people want to replace the current menu with the old-style start menu, then they should use the tools and do it. However, ultimately Microsoft decided that it was time to give the old start menu/taskbar a little work, and in version 2 of the new menu they've removed access to the old one. Given Microsoft has stated that part of the reason for removal was that they no longer share the same code base, it does make sense from a practical perspective. However, the folks that feel super strongly about this should be voicing their concerns to Microsoft, as screaming on the internet about it won't be much more productive than screaming into a pillow.
MCTS Windows Internals, MCITP Server 2008 EA, MCTS MDT/BDD, MCSE/MCSA Server 2003, Server 2012, Windows 8
--------------------
Please read the rules before posting!
Please consider donating to MSFN to keep it up and running!

#47
unawave

unawave

    Newbie

  • Member
  • 20 posts
  • Joined 13-September 09
Even I have no hope - but I want to ask:

In Windows Vista you have the ability to switch from "new start menu" to "classic start menu" in configuration of the taskbar via GUI. I think there must be a corresponding registry key. I haven't found this registry key. Even when I log the registry changes with "ProcessMonitor" I can not find the registry changes. Do somebody knows this registry key to switch in Vista from "new start menu" to "classic start menu" ?

My thought is: Perhaps Microsoft has only dropped the GUI switch in Windows 7. And perhaps the classic start menu can be switched on by a registry key.

Because: Microsoft has also dropped some GUI switches in Windows 7 Starter (change of desktop picture) and Home Basic.

But see this: Group Policy Settings for Start Menu and Taskbar
"Force Classic Start Menu":
For: Windows Server 2008, Windows Vista, Windows Server 2003, and Windows XP
Remark: This policy setting does not apply to Windows 7 because the Classic Start menu is removed.

Why is it available for "Windows Server 2008" - but not for "Windows 7" ?

#48
awergh

awergh

    MSFN Expert

  • Member
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,059 posts
  • Joined 02-October 05
  • OS:none specified
  • Country: Country Flag
Server 2008 is the NT6.0 Server Edition (Same base as Vista SP1), Server 2008R2 and Windows 7 are the NT6.1 Editions.

#49
Yzöwl

Yzöwl

    Wise Owl

  • Super Moderator
  • 4,557 posts
  • Joined 13-October 04
  • OS:Windows 7 x64
  • Country: Country Flag

Donator

@unawave - Do you think that this multi-page topic about 3rd party software is here because there's a simple registry key to provide that same functionality? Which part of, they no longer share the same code base, suggests to you that a simple registry key change will help you to switch between the new Start Menu and one which no longer exists?

#50
unawave

unawave

    Newbie

  • Member
  • 20 posts
  • Joined 13-September 09

Do you think that this multi-page topic about 3rd party software is here because there's a simple registry key to provide that same functionality?

OK - but this is not the answer to my question. Do somebody know the registry key to switch from "new menu" to "classic menu" in Vista ? I do search in Google and found nothing. So: Have anybody tried this ?

they no longer share the same code base

Says Microsoft. I don't have the ability to check the code. Do you have ?

suggests to you that a simple registry key change will help you to switch between the new Start Menu and one which no longer exists?

You also can not change the desktop background picture in Windows 7 Starter - but some OEMs can ...
And funny: What for is the Group Policy Setting for "Force Classic Start Menu" - when the functionality isn't build in ?




0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users